|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
On Aug 15, 3:10*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Red galaxies fire up galaxy evolution theoryhttp://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1108/15galaxy/ "Galaxy cluster formation occurred some ten billion years ago, with the galaxies congregating under their own gravity. During their assembly, galactic properties changed in relation to their environments – elliptical and lenticular galaxies are typically found in clusters, while spirals prefer their own company, underlining the fact that the formation and evolution of galaxies is still full of mysteries. " Spirals are like charged atoms while elliptical and lenticular are like neutral atoms- sharing the wealth. john galaxy model for the atom |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
On 8/15/2011 7:35 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Aug 15, 2:10 pm, Yousuf wrote: Red galaxies fire up galaxy evolution theoryhttp://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1108/15galaxy/ Yes indeed, the older the galaxy the more massive and more likely to be recycling mass, not to mention whatever galactic mergers or large molecular cloud encounters may have taken place, creating lots of those newer (4th and 5th generation) plus greater metallicity stars seems like the right physics kind of thing for all that recycled mass to be doing. Perhaps the average galactic generation may only be 15~20 some odd billion years. In another 5 billion years, many of the Milky Way stars are going to become white dwarfs and/or something other than main sequence stars. I must congratulate you Brad, sometimes you do come up with some cogent ideas, when you're not expressing wild crackpot ideas. I completely agree with you here, it's likely that these red galaxies are just waiting for their mid-sized Sun-mass stars to die and give up their gas to the interstellar medium before more star formation occurs. Since it takes between 2 billion and 20 billion years for the yellow and orange stars to live and die, therefore the gas is locked up in these stars until that time is up. There may be several cycles of these phases where a galaxy's mass gets locked up by mid-sized stars and the galaxy goes red, before new star formation starts up again. The used gas from the stars would likely mix with pre-existing gas clouds circulating throughout these galaxies and create new stars. Of course humanity as we know it is unlikely to survive the next thousand years, so that living large and fighting to the very end may be our only option, as then Earth will revert back to its rightful owners (ants, other insects and the likes of rad-hard cockroaches and even crocodiles that can eat almost anything and survive almost anywhere its warm like Earth is going to be (not to mention their growing new body parts). The one species of complex life on Earth that our global environment can do a whole lot better without, is us humans. And welcome back to crackpot Brad. Yousuf Khan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
On Aug 15, 10:32*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 8/15/2011 7:35 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On Aug 15, 2:10 pm, Yousuf *wrote: Red galaxies fire up galaxy evolution theoryhttp://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1108/15galaxy/ Yes indeed, the older the galaxy the more massive and more likely to be recycling mass, not to mention whatever galactic mergers or large molecular cloud encounters may have taken place, creating lots of those newer (4th and 5th generation) plus greater metallicity stars seems like the right physics kind of thing for all that recycled mass to be doing. Perhaps the average galactic generation may only be 15~20 some odd billion years. In another 5 billion years, many of the Milky Way stars are going to become white dwarfs and/or something other than main sequence stars. I must congratulate you Brad, sometimes you do come up with some cogent ideas, when you're not expressing wild crackpot ideas. I completely agree with you here, it's likely that these red galaxies are just waiting for their mid-sized Sun-mass stars to die and give up their gas to the interstellar medium before more star formation occurs. Since it takes between 2 billion and 20 billion years for the yellow and orange stars to live and die, therefore the gas is locked up in these stars until that time is up. There may be several cycles of these phases where a galaxy's mass gets locked up by mid-sized stars and the galaxy goes red, before new star formation starts up again. The used gas from the stars would likely mix with pre-existing gas clouds circulating throughout these galaxies and create new stars. Of course humanity as we know it is unlikely to survive the next thousand years, so that living large and fighting to the very end may be our only option, as then Earth will revert back to its rightful owners (ants, other insects and the likes of rad-hard cockroaches and even crocodiles that can eat almost anything and survive almost anywhere its warm like Earth is going to be (not to mention their growing new body parts). *The one species of complex life on Earth that our global environment can do a whole lot better without, is us humans. And welcome back to crackpot Brad. * * * * Yousuf Khan Stars are continually reformed from what comes out of the jets. The neutron material must pass bacck through the galactic nucleus and be spun back up into HEPs which are ejected out the jets and coalesce back into suns. Galaxies get old like atoms get old. They don't. They are continually renewed. Which atoms are older than the others in H2O? john |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
On 8/16/11 8:42 AM, john wrote:
Galaxies get old like atoms get old Atoms don't get "old". Hydrogen created in the big bang doesn't "age". |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Old red galaxies supposedly dead, creating stars at furious pace
On Aug 16, 7:48*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 8/16/11 8:42 AM, john wrote: Galaxies get old like atoms get old * *Atoms don't get "old". Hydrogen created in the big bang * *doesn't "age". Exactly, Sam. Atoms don't get 'old'. Neither do galaxies, Sam. The Big Bang is a really stupid concept that presupposes a beginning to Time, among other impossibilities. Believe in it if you want. It would appear, according to atoms are galaxies theory, that we are in a reaction of some kind where there are lots of ions being mixed into a fluid and rapidly disseminating. john |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What if (on creating stars) | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 12 | July 7th 09 02:10 PM |
What if (on creating stars) | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 4 | July 5th 09 07:02 PM |
What if (on creating stars) | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 19 | September 6th 08 12:49 PM |
Could All Galaxies Be Dead? | Von Fourche | Misc | 11 | May 7th 06 05:31 PM |
Creating Galaxies | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 38 | July 17th 03 06:34 AM |