Active galaxy jets may be due to blackholes spinning backwards fromtheir accretion disks

bert wrote:
On Feb 11, 3:18 am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Unraveling black hole spinhttp://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/black-hole-jets.html

Khan The giant elliptical galaxy M82(known as Virgo) gives reality to
your post. Trebert

In what way? Does it have a jet?

Yousuf Khan

On Feb 12, 6:30*am, dlzc wrote:
Dear john:

On Feb 11, 8:07*pm, john wrote:

On Feb 11, 2:11*pm, dlzc wrote:
...
If we have charged particle separation then we'd
require a charged central hole as well, it would
seem. *Our own central black hole is spawning
antiparticles from one pole too. *Wonder how that
works? *How do you polarize antiparticle creation...

How many antiparticles?

My assumption was one charge out one pole,
the other out the other.

This says no antimatter:http://www.physorg.com/news79361214.html

These say antimatter:http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002co...lky-way-galaxy

The signature of matter / antimatter annihilations is seen on only one
jet.

Looks to me like a serious WTF? moment for astrophysics, particle
physics, and physics in general. Kinda surprised I haven't seen it
mentioned before. Thanks!


Mark L. Fergerson

On Feb 13, 12:31*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
bert wrote:
On Feb 11, 3:18 am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Unraveling black hole spinhttp://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/black-hole-jets.html

Khan *The giant elliptical galaxy M82(known as Virgo) gives reality to
your post. Trebert

In what way? Does it have a jet?

I think he means NGC 3034, variously called the cigar or starburst
galaxy.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=e...-8&sa=N&tab=wi

It's an elliptical with remnants of another galaxy it collided with
spread out roughly perpendicular to its long axis. I see no jets, but
that's Bert for you.


Mark L. Fergerson

wrote:

On Feb 12, 6:30 am, dlzc wrote:
Dear john:

On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, john wrote:

On Feb 11, 2:11 pm, dlzc wrote:
...
If we have charged particle separation then we'd
require a charged central hole as well, it would
seem. Our own central black hole is spawning
antiparticles from one pole too. Wonder how that
works? How do you polarize antiparticle creation...

How many antiparticles?

My assumption was one charge out one pole,
the other out the other.

This says no antimatter:http://www.physorg.com/news79361214.html

These say

antimatter:http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002co...224/dvp-8.224-
paper.pdfhttp://www.nustar.caltech.edu/about-nustar/science/milky-way-galaxy

The signature of matter / antimatter annihilations is seen on only one
jet.

Looks to me like a serious WTF? moment for astrophysics, particle
physics, and physics in general. Kinda surprised I haven't seen it
mentioned before. Thanks!

No.

First link...actual observations of a jet. Two of the following three are
theory, and the other is a generic 'this is what we are going to observe'
page.




Mark L. Fergerson

dlzc wrote:

Dear john:

On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, john wrote:
On Feb 11, 2:11 pm, dlzc wrote:
...
If we have charged particle separation then we'd
require a charged central hole as well, it would
seem. Our own central black hole is spawning
antiparticles from one pole too. Wonder how that
works? How do you polarize antiparticle creation...

How many antiparticles?

My assumption was one charge out one pole,
the other out the other.

This says no antimatter:
http://www.physorg.com/news79361214.html

These say antimatter:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002cosp...34E3251T
http://web.mit.edu/dvp/www/Work/8.22....224-paper.pdf
http://www.nustar.caltech.edu/about-...lky-way-galaxy

The signature of matter / antimatter annihilations is seen on only one
jet.

Notice that the first link is based on actual observations of jets while the
following three are not. That is also, of course, putting aside the sheer
physical absurdity that antimatter jets represent.

By the way, john is a blithering moron. I don't know why him and bert are
continually listened to as if they had a valid opinion on the subject.


David A. Smith

On Feb 12, 8:30 am, dlzc wrote:
Dear john:

On Feb 11, 8:07 pm, john wrote:

On Feb 11, 2:11 pm, dlzc wrote:
...
If we have charged particle separation then we'd
require a charged central hole as well, it would
seem. Our own central black hole is spawning
antiparticles from one pole too. Wonder how that
works? How do you polarize antiparticle creation...

How many antiparticles?

My assumption was one charge out one pole,
the other out the other.

This says noantimatter:http://www.physorg.com/news79361214.html

These sayantimatter:http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002co...lky-way-galaxy

The signature of matter /antimatterannihilations is seen on only onejet.

David A. Smith


Got it!!

It *isn't* negative out one jet and positive out
the other. The electrons just boil off and zap away.
What remains is precessed one way at one pole (jet)
and forms matter, and given the opposite precession
at the other pole (jet) and forms antimatter.

Matter is a spinning ring precessing one way.
Antimatter is the same spinning ring but precessing
the opposite way.

galaxy model for the atom

Thanks,David

On 2/19/10 6:17 PM, john wrote:
It*isn't* negative out one jet and positive out
the other. The electrons just boil off and zap away.
What remains is precessed one way at one pole (jet)
and forms matter, and given the opposite precession
at the other pole (jet) and forms antimatter.

Matter is a spinning ring precessing one way.
Antimatter is the same spinning ring but precessing
the opposite way.

What?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc

"If matter is to fall inwards it must lose not only gravitational energy
but also lose angular momentum. Since the total angular momentum of the
disc is conserved, the angular momentum loss of the mass falling into
the center has to be compensated by an angular momentum gain of the mass
far from the center. In other words, angular momentum should be
transported outwards for matter to accrete".

"The most spectacular accretion discs found in nature are those of
active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are believed to be massive
black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter spirals into a black
hole, the intense gravitational gradient gives rise to intense
frictional heating; the accretion disc of a black hole is hot enough to
emit X-rays just outside of the event horizon. The large luminosity of
quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive
black holes. This process can convert about 10 percent of the mass of an
object into energy as compared to around 0.5 percent for nuclear fusion
processes".