A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Gravitational Instability Theory on the Formation of the Universe



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 6th 04, 03:44 PM
Br Dan Izzo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Gravitational Instability Theory on the Formation of the Universe

Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004

When did motion first start ?

Science knows the formation of matter in our universe was caused by
the forces of the

universe.

These forces a

(1) The Force of Gravity

(2) The Force of Electro Magnetism

(3) The Strong Nuclear Force

(4) The Weak Nuclear Force

At some point in time, motion within the universe, had to begin.

The paradox would be, what force could cause motion to begin, without
moving in its

present space-time ?

The Gravitational Cosmological Theory of the formation of the
Universe is a theory I

developed that is rooted in theEinstein and the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle
Steady State theories ,

wherein the Steady State theory the universe contains more protons
than electrons that

create dust particles and galaxies formed in their current locations
and the cosmic

matter is recycled therein at the center of the galaxy furnace.

When the Universe started to fall:

The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of
the Universe.

The Theory:

(1) The expansion of the universe is a result of the " heat '
contained therein;

(2) The source of the " heat " is the cosmic microwave radiation
backround at 3 kelvin,

wherein;

(3) The microwave electro magnetic-nuclear energy was formed as a
result of the

interaction of two different static gravitational vacuum fields,
causing gravitational

instability and the motion, void of matter, at this time, wherein;
static gravitational

field (1) began to go into "motion".

Therefore; only (2) static gravitational vacuum fields alone,
being void of E=MC^2

could create E=MC^2; and the matter of the Universe.

Q: When did this motion start?

A: If a neutral particle is able to resist the universal motion, in
theory, that particle

would go back in time. Going back in time the neutral particle would
then enter into (1)

of the (2) motionless-static gravity vacuum fields void of motion, and
cause an unbalance

and gravitational instability and this interaction would create motion
and energy

particles.

Q: What causes a gravitational static vacuum field in the first place
?

A: Pressure force is used to create a vacuum on Earth, perhaps an
exotic something

100,000 weaker than the force of gravity decays causing a static
gravity vacuum field.



Theory by Br Dan Izzo
Cryonic Life Insurance Company
512 Onondaga Ave
Syracuse, New York 13207

Cosmic magnetic force & God Bless us.

PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?


Below is a great paper on the Steady State Theory:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RUFUS'S GALAXY WEB PAGE





The Steady State Galaxy Theory

An Alternative To



The Big Bang Theory


Go to Text only version. INDEX


Introduction
Basic Operation of Galaxies
Mass and Energy
Shape of Galaxies
Red Shift
Microwave Background Radiation
Entropy
Hydrogen-Helium Ratio
Quasars
Summary Introduction

The purpose of this Web Page is to show that the Steady State Galaxy
Theory can provide an alternative to the Big Bang Theory in explaining
the universe around us. It covers the operation of Galaxies and shows
that they recycle both Matter and Energy and are able to carry on
indefinitely. It also explains the Shape of Galaxies, Red Shift,
Microwave Background Radiation, Entropy and the Hydrogen-Helium Ratio.

If the reader takes an open-minded approach and looks at all aspects
of the material presented here before reaching any conclusions, it
will, at least, provide them with some food for thought.

Basic Operation of Galaxies

At the center of each galaxy is a neutroid which acts to constantly
recycle all the matter and energy in the galaxy. This neutroid is
similar to a neutron star but is very much larger and has reached a
size where the pressure and temperature at its surface are great
enough to generate a nuclear fusion process. In the areas of the
neutroid's magnetic poles, the products of fusion are trapped by the
magnetic field and are pushed out along the magnetic field by the
pressure of the nuclear fusion process going on below. This results in
a column of material composed of hydrogen, helium and other light
elements being ejected at each of the neutroid's two magnetic poles.
This material moves out from the neutroid at essentially constant
velocity until it reaches a point where the magnetic field is no
longer strong enough to control it. Once free of the magnetic field
the material then continues under it's own momentum to travel to the
outer edge of the galaxy before starting to fall back toward the
neutroid.

This process enables the neutroid to eject matter from itself and
results in jets of hydrogen and helium ions being produced at each of
the neutroid's two magnetic poles. The larger the neutroid becomes,
the greater the size and velocity of its jets. This becomes a stable
and self-limiting process where the amount of material attracted to
the neutroid will be equal to the amount of material expelled at its
magnetic poles. Eventually if too much material is added to the
system, the velocity of the material being ejected from the magnetic
poles will be sufficient for it to escape from the system altogether,
thus limiting the total mass the system can accumulate. This process
forms the basis of operation of all galaxies. The size and shape of
galaxies are determined by the size of the neutroid at their center
and its rate and plane of rotation. In the case of our own galaxy (The
Milky Way) these jets have sufficient momentum to carry the material
out to 100,000 light years distance from the center.

As the jets of gas stream out from the Neutroid, large clouds of it
condense and form the stars which are predominately located in the
spiral arms of the Galaxies. These stars eventually burn up their
Hydrogen fuel and in the process create the other heavier elements we
find in the universe, all the while continuing to travel to the outer
edge of the galaxy. It has probably been at least 10 Billion years
since the material of which our solar system is composed was initially
ejected from the neutroid. It is now located about 2/3rds the distance
to the edge of the galaxy, but since it is constantly decelerating it
will take it another 20 billion years to reach its maximun distance
from the neutroid. The total transit time from when material is
ejected from the neutroid at the center of the Milky Way to when it
returns to the neutroid will be about 60 Billion years.

Although the material ejected by the neutroid appears to travel in a
spiral arc, in actual fact it is travelling in a straight radial line
out from the neutroid and will eventually travel back along the same
radial path to the neutroid. To help visualize this process, imagine
setting up two super cannons, each on opposite sides of the earth at
the equator and each pointing straight up and each capable of firing a
projectile with sufficient velocity that it will take 12 hours to
reach the top of its projectory. Now, fire a projectile from each
cannon every hour for 12 hours and plot the position of each
projectile at the end of the 12 hours. The result, as shown in figure
1, will be two spiral arms much like the Galactic arms are shaped.









IF we continue the experiment for another 3 hours and draw a new plot,
figure 2, we find that the first projectiles that were fired have now
passed the peak of their altitude and have started to fall back to
earth and the whole spiral pattern appears to have rotated
counterclockwise 45 degrees. However, the only changes in the
positions of projectiles No.1 have been to move slightly closer to the
earth along a radial line and they will continue falling back to earth
along the same radial path and will impact the earth 24 hours after
being fired. They do not themselves travel in a spiral path around the
earth although the loci of their instantaneous positions forms a
spiral which appears to be rotating.









Figure 3 represents a typical small galaxy which is composed of 3
parts, (a) a Central Core (Area 1), (b) 2 Jets of material being
ejected from the core (Areas 1 to 2), and (c) Spiral Arms (Areas 2 to
3). The Central Core consists of a neutroid at the center and an
obscuring mass of material trapped in the Neutroid's magnetic field.
The areas from 1 to 2 are gigantic jets of gas which are being ejected
by the Neutroid and are contained within its magnetic field. Star
formation occurs in these areas. At point 2 the magnetic field of the
Neutroid weakens to the extent that it no longer constrains the
material within it and as the material continues to move outward it
will now trace a spiral arc as per the previous illustrations in Figs.
1 & 2. At point 3 the hydrogen fuel has been consumed and although the
remains of the burned out stars are still there they become invisible
dark matter as they continue to travel to the top of their projectory
and then fall back to the Neutroid.









Thus, the galaxies form huge recycling systems which will carry on
indefinitely.


Hydrogen, helium and other light elements are ejected ejected from the
Neutroid.
Clouds of this material condense to forms stars which emit energy and
in the process form heavier elements.
These stars eventually exhaust their fuel and die. In the process many
of these stars will explode as supernovas. The heavier elements which
we find in our solar system are the remnants from these dead stars.
All this material will travel to the outer edge of the galaxy and will
then start falling back in toward the neutroid.
Upon hitting the neutroid, the force of the impact will be great
enough that the atoms of heavier elements will be split apart and the
temperature and pressure will be great enough that this incoming
matter will be converted to neutrons.
In the areas of the neutroid's magnetic poles, a nuclear fusion
reaction will take place that forces a streams of material to be
expelled thus completing the cycle.

(return to index)

Mass and Energy

Einstein showed that mass and energy are related by the formula
E=MC^2. What this famous formula says is that what we call the mass of
a particle is really nothing more than a measure of the sum total of
all forms of energy associated with that particle. The various forms
of energy include potential energy, kinetic energy, chemical energy,
nuclear binding energy, etc. Of these various forms of energy,
potential energy is the most important and accounts for the largest
part of the mass of particles which constitute our immediate
enviroment.

When a particle is in a deep gravational well, such as in the case of
particles that make up the neutroid at the center of galaxies, they
have very little potential energy,and hence, very little rest mass. As
they are pushed out from the neutroid their potential energy and hence
their rest mass is increased dramatically. When these particles
eventually fall back into the neutroid, this potential energy is
converted to kinetic energy and results in the particles making up the
neutroid having very little rest mass but a tremendous amount of
kinetic energy.

This combination of low rest mass and high kinetic energy prevent the
neutroid from collapsing into a black hole as has been speculated by
many scientists. This combination also makes it relatively easy for a
nuclear fussion process to push material out from the neutroid in the
area of the neutroid's magnetic poles.

(return to index)

Shape of Galaxies

The Concept of the Steady State Galaxy as put forth above can account
for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe. As explained
above, the spiral is the basic shape of galaxies. The exact shape will
be determined by the size of the neutroid, the tilt of its magnetic
axis with respect to its axis of rotation and its rate of rotation .

Our Milky-Way is typical of large mature galaxies in which it takes
many billions of years for the magnetic poles to make one revolution.
As well, the hydrogen ejected at the magnetic poles has sufficient
velocity to reach a distance of 100,000 light-years from the Neutroid
and it takes it tens of billions of years to reach that distance. If
the rate of rotation of the magnetic poles of the Neutroid were much
greater in relation to the velocity of the hydrogen jets, the spiral
arms would overlap and become nondistinct thus forming an ELIPICAL
Galaxy. If the magnetic axis were slightly less than 90 degrees with
respect to the axis of rotation, a thicker galaxy would result.

BAR Galaxies are small galaxies in which the hydrogen fueling the
Stars is all consumed before the Stars can escape the magnetic field
of the Neutroid's magnetic poles.

Many galaxies such as M104(NGC4594) exhibit a very prominent dust lane
about their edge. This is a feature that is difficult to explain using
presently accepted theories but is to be expected in some types of
galaxies under the steady state galaxy theory.

(return to index)

Red Shift

The Big Bang Theory was originally proposed in order to explain the
'RED Shift' of light received by us from distant galaxies. Light
received from distant stars can be broken down and analyzed as to its
spectral content. It has been found that stars of a similar size and
age produce identical spectral patterns which are related to their
atomic composition. However, it was also found that the wavelength of
the light from distant galaxies was increased in proportion to their
distance from us. Scientists have interpreted the cause of this effect
to be due to a doppler shift, meaning that it is caused by the distant
galaxies moving away from us,-i.e. the expanding universe. This
doppler shift is the same as one gets standing near a railway track
when a train passes blowing its whistle, as the train passes by, the
sound of its whistle appears to drop in frequency.

In reality the universe we live in is not expanding and is in a steady
state where its matter and energy are being constantly recycled. The
so called Red Shift is caused by other factors. We know from a branch
of Physics known as Quantum Mechanics that the Energy of a photon of
light is defined by the equation E=hv where E is the energy of the
photon, h is plancks' constant and v is its frequency. If for any
reason energy is lost from a photon, its frequency will decrease in
accordance with this equation.

Scientists do not as yet have a good understanding of the nature of a
photon as to whether it is a particle or a wave, or some combination
of both. Although experiments done by Michhelson and Morley and others
have been interpreted to rule out the existence of an universal
aether, this is by no means certain. Scientists can't measure what
happens to a photon over a period of a minute, let alone what happens
to to it over a period of a billion years. Based on current knowledge,
there is no way scientists can state with absolute certainty that
photons do not lose energy over time.

The mechanism for the lose of energy by photons over time is still
unclear. It could be by interaction of the photon with the stray atoms
of hydrogen which are dispersed throughout intergalactic space. It is
well known that photons do exert 'radiation pressure' on particles
they encounter and if pressure is exerted, then energy must be
transferred. Another possibility is that there is indeed an aether
which absorbs some energy over time and reradiates it as a black body
radiator having a temperature of 2.8 degrees K. One thing that is
clear is that the radiation density of the starlight photons which
leave own galaxy is equal to the radiation density of the Microwave
Background radiation which is received by our galaxy. This fact is
probably more than a coincidence and is an indication that the
starlight radiation is being converted by some unknown process to the
Microwave Background radiation. It is every bit as reasonable to
assume that the Red Shift is caused by loss of energy of the photon
over time as it is to assume that it is caused by a doppler effect.

Because of the downshifting in the frequency of light for whatever
reason, there is a limit to how far it is possible to image distant
galaxies. The actual universe will be far larger than we can imagine
or detect and will probably be infinite in size.

(return to index)

MicroWave Background Radiation

A second argument which has been made to support the Big Bang Theory
is the microwave background radiation. COBE has shown that the
spectrum of the Microwave Background Radiation (MBR) is that of an
ideal Black Body Radiator having a temperature of about 2.8 degrees K.
It has also shown that this radiation has a Redshift/Blueshift to it,
indicating that the earth is moving about 300Km/s relative to the
shell of matter that emitted the radiation. Since this speed is too
great for the earth's movement within the milky-way galaxy, it
indicates that the source is outside our galaxy and that our galaxy is
moving in relation to that source.

As indicated in the previous section dealing with redshift, the
starlight photons radiated by galaxies gradually lose energy through
some unknown process which then reradiates this energy as the
Microwave Background Radiation. The wavelength of the photons of the
MBR, at the peak of the spectrum radiation curve, will be about 1mm.
Since the rate of loss of energy by photons will be inversely
proportional to the wavelength of those photons, and since the MBR
photons have a wavelength of more than a thousand times that of
visible light, the percentage loss of energy by the MBR photons will
be at a rate of over one thousand times less than that of a visible
photon. (If it takes a visible photon 15 billion years to lose 3/4's
of it's energy, then it would take a MBR photon 15,000 billion years
to lose 3/4's of it's energy). It follows that since MBR photons have
a range of travel of more than one thousand times that of visible
light photons, they are also a thousand times more likely to encounter
a galaxy and be absorbed by the matter of that galaxy then a visible
light photon would.

Thus, energy is radiated by galaxies in the form of starlight photons.
Energy from these photons is gradually converted to MBR photons. These
MBR photons are eventually absorbed by some other galaxy.

Since the intensity of the microwave background radiation will be
relatively constant throughout the universe (assuming an infinite
steady state universe), the amount of energy a galaxy will absorb from
it will be proportional to the size of that galaxy. The amount of
energy a galaxy radiates is also proportional to it's size, thus an
equilibrium will be reached where a galaxy will receive as much energy
in the form of MBR photons as it itself radiates in the form of
starlight photons.

(return to index)

Entropy

A third argument that has been put forward in support of the Big Bang
Theory is entropy, in that, it is argued that the universe must
eventually run down into a state of thermal equilibrium. Energy exists
in various forms such as atomic binding energies, thermal energy,
potential and kinetic energy, etc., all of which are associated with
matter, or it exists in photons which have been radiated by matter and
will eventually be reabsorbed by matter. Under the Steady State Galaxy
Theory as put forth above, since all matter in a Galaxy is recycled
through the Neutroid on a regular basis, all energy contained by that
matter is also recycled at the same time and, thus, the universe does
not run down into a state of thermal equilibrium.

There is a perception that energy only flows from hot bodies to cooler
ones. This is not true for radiant energy. The MBR photons which
exhibit the characteristics of a 2.8 degree black body radiator do get
absorbed by the much hotter material which makes up the galaxies. The
critical factor which determines the direction of net flow of radiant
energy is not the relative temperatures of the bodies but the energy
densities they produce. In the case of our universe, the MBR radiation
has an energy density equal to the starlight radiation energy density
emitted by the galaxies. Thus, there is an equilibrium condition where
galaxies receive as much energy in the form of MBR Radiation as they
radiate in the form of Starlight Radiation and there will be no net
flow of energy from the galaxies to the material in intergalactic
space.

(return to index)

Hydrogen-Helium

A fourth arguement which has been used to support the Big Bang theory
is that it would account for the abundance of helium we find in the
universe. The amount of helium present (24%) cannot be accounted for
by star production and according to Gamow it was generated by the Big
Bang.

Under the Steady State Galaxy theory, the nuclear fusion process which
is expelling the material from the neutroid would generate large
amounts of helium as well as other light elements and is the source of
the excess helium found in the universe.

(return to index)

Quasars

The latest Hubble pictures of quasars show that they are associated
with galaxies and in most cases there is evidence that these galaxies
have recently collided with other galaxies.

In normal galaxies, the neutroid at their center is obscured by a halo
of material trapped in the neutroid's magnetic field. In the case of
quasars, this halo of material has been temporarily destroyed by the
collision with another galaxy and we are seeing the bare neutroid
which is, as expected, extremely energetic.

(return to index)

Summary

The Steady State Galaxy Theory as put forth above can provide the
basis for the operation of the Universe as it is seen to exist. It can
not only account for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe
which is something no other theory as proposed so far can accomplish
but it can also explain the existence of quasars.

As more data is gathered by the Hubble Space Telescope and other
sources, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Big Bang theory
cannot account for the universe around us. I believe the the Steady
State Galaxy Theory as presented here can provide the basis of an
alternative to the Big Bang Theory.

(return to index) (return to top of page) Other Interesting Papers

For a historical perspective of the Big Bang Theory see Keith Stein's
Essay "The Big Bang Myth"

"Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe" by Grote Reber -a pioneer in the
field of Radio Astronomy.

"Dark Matter" and "Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect"
by John Kierein



Please E-mail me your comments and suggestions.


Last revised Dec 30,1996.
Copyright R.Rufus Young 1996 all rights reserved.




You are Visitor Number


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004

When did motion first start ?

Science knows the formation of matter in our universe was caused by
the forces of the

universe.

These forces a

(1) The Force of Gravity

(2) The Force of Electro Magnetism

(3) The Strong Nuclear Force

(4) The Weak Nuclear Force

At some point in time, motion within the universe, had to begin.

The paradox would be, what force could cause motion to begin, without
moving in its

present space-time ?

The Gravitational Cosmological Theory of the formation of the
Universe is a theory I

developed that is rooted in theEinstein and the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle
Steady State theories ,

wherein the Steady State theory the universe contains more protons
than electrons that

create dust particles and galaxies formed in their current locations
and the cosmic

matter is recycled therein at the center of the galaxy furnace.

When the Universe started to fall:

The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of
the Universe.

The Theory:

(1) The expansion of the universe is a result of the " heat '
contained therein;

(2) The source of the " heat " is the cosmic microwave radiation
backround at 3 kelvin,

wherein;

(3) The microwave electro magnetic-nuclear energy was formed as a
result of the

interaction of two different static gravitational vacuum fields,
causing gravitational

instability and the motion, void of matter, at this time, wherein;
static gravitational

field (1) began to go into "motion".

Therefore; only (2) static gravitational vacuum fields alone,
being void of E=MC^2

could create E=MC^2; and the matter of the Universe.

Q: When did this motion start?

A: If a neutral particle is able to resist the universal motion, in
theory, that particle

would go back in time. Going back in time the neutral particle would
then enter into (1)

of the (2) motionless-static gravity vacuum fields void of motion, and
cause an unbalance

and gravitational instability and this interaction would create motion
and energy

particles.

Q: What causes a gravitational static vacuum field in the first place
?

A: Pressure force is used to create a vacuum on Earth, perhaps an
exotic something

100,000 weaker than the force of gravity decays causing a static
gravity vacuum field.



Theory by Br Dan Izzo

Cosmic magnetic force & God Bless us.

PS I think God a thinking creative force like man is real and
therefore can be measured, is it cosmic magnetism ?
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 2 in thread
From: Bjoern Feuerbacher )
Subject: The Steady State Theory vs The Big Bang Theory


View this article only
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Date: 2004-09-01 09:45:03 PST


Br Dan Izzo wrote:
RUFUS'S GALAXY WEB PAGE





The Steady State Galaxy Theory

An Alternative To



The Big Bang Theory


Go to Text only version. INDEX


Introduction
Basic Operation of Galaxies
Mass and Energy
Shape of Galaxies
Red Shift
Microwave Background Radiation
Entropy
Hydrogen-Helium Ratio
Quasars
Summary Introduction

The purpose of this Web Page is to show that the Steady State Galaxy
Theory can provide an alternative to the Big Bang Theory in explaining
the universe around us. It covers the operation of Galaxies and shows
that they recycle both Matter and Energy and are able to carry on
indefinitely. It also explains the Shape of Galaxies, Red Shift,
Microwave Background Radiation, Entropy and the Hydrogen-Helium Ratio.


Can it explain the power spectrum of the CMBR (e.g. the acoustic peak),
the change of its temperature with time, the fact that the oldest stars
we see are about 13 billion years old in our galaxy, although (small)
stars can live much longer, that we see only stars which are about 2
billion years old in galaxies whose light needed to travel for about 11
billion years in order to reach us, the fact that galaxies which are far
away from us look totally different from galaxies nearby (see the Hubble
Ultra Deep Field), the fact that starburst activity and the amount of
quasars was much higher in the past, the change in the redshift law at
large distances, the time dilation in supernova light curves, the large
scale structure of the universe, etc.?


If the reader takes an open-minded approach and looks at all aspects
of the material presented here before reaching any conclusions, it
will, at least, provide them with some food for thought.

Basic Operation of Galaxies

At the center of each galaxy is a neutroid which acts to constantly
recycle all the matter and energy in the galaxy. This neutroid is
similar to a neutron star but is very much larger


A neutron star which would be "very much larger" can not exist,
according to General Relativity - it would collapse to a Black Hole
immediately. Your argument below against does not work.

Do you dispute General Relativity? Apparently yes, since it also makes a
static universe essentially impossible. Well, already Newtonian physics
made a static universe essentially impossible...


and has reached a
size where the pressure and temperature at its surface are great
enough to generate a nuclear fusion process.


Err, the pressure at the *surface* is always zero. Do you mean somewhere
close to the surface, but still inside the star?


In the areas of the
neutroid's magnetic poles, the products of fusion are trapped by the
magnetic field and are pushed out along the magnetic field by the
pressure of the nuclear fusion process going on below.


I am not sure if this is possible, but I'll grant you this.


This results in
a column of material composed of hydrogen, helium and other light
elements


Other light elements? So the pressure and temperature is not only high
enough for hydrogen fusion, but even for other reactions?


being ejected at each of the neutroid's two magnetic poles.
This material moves out from the neutroid at essentially constant
velocity until it reaches a point where the magnetic field is no
longer strong enough to control it. Once free of the magnetic field
the material then continues under it's own momentum to travel to the
outer edge of the galaxy before starting to fall back toward the
neutroid.


Err, then most of the material should travel in two jets away from
the neutroid, as you yourself admit below. Then how is the stuff able to
reach all of the galaxy?



This process enables the neutroid to eject matter from itself and
results in jets of hydrogen and helium ions being produced at each of
the neutroid's two magnetic poles. The larger the neutroid becomes,
the greater the size and velocity of its jets. This becomes a stable
and self-limiting process where the amount of material attracted to
the neutroid will be equal to the amount of material expelled at its
magnetic poles.


Can you prove this by a calculation? I.e. can you prove that an
equilibrium will be reached, instead of other possible outcomes like a
violent explosion of the neutroid when it attracts too much material?


Eventually if too much material is added to the
system, the velocity of the material being ejected from the magnetic
poles will be sufficient for it to escape from the system altogether,
thus limiting the total mass the system can accumulate. This process
forms the basis of operation of all galaxies.


Any evidence for all of that? For starters, we have examined the center
of our own galaxy closely in the last decade. I don't remember that two
jets were seen there...


The size and shape of
galaxies are determined by the size of the neutroid at their center
and its rate and plane of rotation.


Where did the neutroid come from?


In the case of our own galaxy (The
Milky Way) these jets have sufficient momentum to carry the material
out to 100,000 light years distance from the center.


Then why do we not see them?


As the jets of gas stream out from the Neutroid, large clouds of it
condense and form the stars which are predominately located in the
spiral arms of the Galaxies. These stars eventually burn up their
Hydrogen fuel and in the process create the other heavier elements we
find in the universe, all the while continuing to travel to the outer
edge of the galaxy.


Huh? You claim that stars are continuously travelling to the outer edge
of the galaxies? That *strongly* contradicts the actual observations!
Or did you only mean that the heavy elements which are produced in the
stars travel to the outer edge?


It has probably been at least 10 Billion years
since the material of which our solar system is composed was initially
ejected from the neutroid.


Where did you get this number from?


It is now located about 2/3rds the distance
to the edge of the galaxy, but since it is constantly decelerating it
will take it another 20 billion years to reach its maximun distance
from the neutroid.


And this?


The total transit time from when material is
ejected from the neutroid at the center of the Milky Way to when it
returns to the neutroid will be about 60 Billion years.


And this?



Although the material ejected by the neutroid appears to travel in a
spiral arc, in actual fact it is travelling in a straight radial line
out from the neutroid and will eventually travel back along the same
radial path to the neutroid. To help visualize this process, imagine
setting up two super cannons, each on opposite sides of the earth at
the equator and each pointing straight up and each capable of firing a
projectile with sufficient velocity that it will take 12 hours to
reach the top of its projectory. Now, fire a projectile from each
cannon every hour for 12 hours and plot the position of each
projectile at the end of the 12 hours. The result, as shown in figure
1, will be two spiral arms much like the Galactic arms are shaped.

IF we continue the experiment for another 3 hours and draw a new plot,
figure 2, we find that the first projectiles that were fired have now
passed the peak of their altitude and have started to fall back to
earth and the whole spiral pattern appears to have rotated
counterclockwise 45 degrees. However, the only changes in the
positions of projectiles No.1 have been to move slightly closer to the
earth along a radial line and they will continue falling back to earth
along the same radial path and will impact the earth 24 hours after
being fired. They do not themselves travel in a spiral path around the
earth although the loci of their instantaneous positions forms a
spiral which appears to be rotating.

Figure 3 represents a typical small galaxy which is composed of 3
parts, (a) a Central Core (Area 1), (b) 2 Jets of material being
ejected from the core (Areas 1 to 2), and (c) Spiral Arms (Areas 2 to
3). The Central Core consists of a neutroid at the center and an
obscuring mass of material trapped in the Neutroid's magnetic field.
The areas from 1 to 2 are gigantic jets of gas which are being ejected
by the Neutroid and are contained within its magnetic field. Star
formation occurs in these areas. At point 2 the magnetic field of the
Neutroid weakens to the extent that it no longer constrains the
material within it and as the material continues to move outward it
will now trace a spiral arc as per the previous illustrations in Figs.
1 & 2. At point 3 the hydrogen fuel has been consumed and although the
remains of the burned out stars are still there they become invisible
dark matter as they continue to travel to the top of their projectory
and then fall back to the Neutroid.


Nice. But is this idea *quantitatively* consistent with the observations?

And where can we find these figures?



Thus, the galaxies form huge recycling systems which will carry on
indefinitely.
Hydrogen, helium and other light elements are ejected ejected from the
Neutroid.
Clouds of this material condense to forms stars which emit energy and
in the process form heavier elements.
These stars eventually exhaust their fuel and die. In the process many
of these stars will explode as supernovas. The heavier elements which
we find in our solar system are the remnants from these dead stars.
All this material will travel to the outer edge of the galaxy and will
then start falling back in toward the neutroid.
Upon hitting the neutroid, the force of the impact will be great
enough that the atoms of heavier elements will be split apart


Oh my goodness. Do you have any clue what energies are needed for
splitting apart nuclei? How on earth should the kinetic energy obtained
from falling on the nuclei be sufficient to achieve that? Have you ever
done an actual calculation on this?


and the
temperature and pressure will be great enough that this incoming
matter will be converted to neutrons.


Again, the pressure on the surface is zero.


In the areas of the neutroid's magnetic poles, a nuclear fusion
reaction will take place that forces a streams of material to be
expelled thus completing the cycle.

(return to index)

Mass and Energy

Einstein showed that mass and energy are related by the formula
E=MC^2. What this famous formula says is that what we call the mass of
a particle is really nothing more than a measure of the sum total of
all forms of energy associated with that particle. The various forms
of energy include potential energy, kinetic energy, chemical energy,
nuclear binding energy, etc.


You *do* know that this formula is valid only for particles at rest,
or if you mean the *relativistic* mass of a particle, whereas the common
usage in physics today is that one means the *rest* mass of a particle
when one says "mass", don't you?


Of these various forms of energy,
potential energy is the most important and accounts for the largest
part of the mass of particles which constitute our immediate
enviroment. When a particle is in a deep gravational well, such as in the case of
particles that make up the neutroid at the center of galaxies, they
have very little potential energy,and hence, very little rest mass.


Actually, in a deep gravitational well, the *magnitude* of the potential
energy is *large*, not small - but *negative*. If the well is deep
enough, the masses of the particles should be *negative*. Looks like a
problem for your idea, don't you think?

The error that you make here is that *gravitational* potential energy
is a concept from Newtonians physics and has no place in General
Relativity. I.e. gravitational potential energy has *nothing* to do with
the rest mass of a particle!


As
they are pushed out from the neutroid their potential energy and hence
their rest mass is increased dramatically. When these particles
eventually fall back into the neutroid, this potential energy is
converted to kinetic energy and results in the particles making up the
neutroid having very little rest mass but a tremendous amount of
kinetic energy.


Err, when the particles hit the neutroid, their kinetic energy is dispersed.


This combination of low rest mass and high kinetic energy prevent the
neutroid from collapsing into a black hole as has been speculated by
many scientists.


This simply is not possible. A neutron star exceeding a certain size
will inevitable collapse to a black hole, no matter how much kinetic
energy the particles in it have. After all, there is a speed limit for
the particles in the neutron star!

If you think that this *can* prevent a collapse, show your calculation,
please.



This combination also makes it relatively easy for a
nuclear fussion process to push material out from the neutroid in the
area of the neutroid's magnetic poles.

(return to index)

Shape of Galaxies

The Concept of the Steady State Galaxy as put forth above can account
for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe. As explained
above, the spiral is the basic shape of galaxies.


Err, have you ever heard of irregular galaxies?


The exact shape will
be determined by the size of the neutroid, the tilt of its magnetic
axis with respect to its axis of rotation and its rate of rotation .

Our Milky-Way is typical of large mature galaxies in which it takes
many billions of years for the magnetic poles to make one revolution.


What has that to do with the Milky Way being mature?


As well, the hydrogen ejected at the magnetic poles has sufficient
velocity to reach a distance of 100,000 light-years from the Neutroid
and it takes it tens of billions of years to reach that distance.


Please present an actual calculation showing that for a mass of the
neutroid which would enable it to produce fusion on its surface, the
motion of matter ejected from it would indeed be on such timescales.


If the rate of rotation of the magnetic poles of the Neutroid were much
greater in relation to the velocity of the hydrogen jets, the spiral
arms would overlap and become nondistinct thus forming an ELIPICAL
Galaxy.


An elliptical galaxy looks in no way like a spiral galaxy with
overlapping arms!!!

If the magnetic axis were slightly less than 90 degrees with
respect to the axis of rotation, a thicker galaxy would result.


A thicker galaxy, right, but not a spherical one!


BAR Galaxies are small galaxies in which the hydrogen fueling the
Stars is all consumed before the Stars can escape the magnetic field
of the Neutroid's magnetic poles.


How on earth does that explain the bar?


Many galaxies such as M104(NGC4594) exhibit a very prominent dust lane
about their edge. This is a feature that is difficult to explain using
presently accepted theories


How do you know? Have you read all the relevant articles?


but is to be expected in some types of
galaxies under the steady state galaxy theory.


Why?



(return to index)

Red Shift

The Big Bang Theory was originally proposed in order to explain the
'RED Shift' of light received by us from distant galaxies.


Only partly right. Theories about a dynamic universe were developed
already before the redshift relationship was known.


Light
received from distant stars can be broken down and analyzed as to its
spectral content. It has been found that stars of a similar size and
age produce identical spectral patterns which are related to their
atomic composition. However, it was also found that the wavelength of
the light from distant galaxies was increased in proportion to their
distance from us. Scientists have interpreted the cause of this effect
to be due to a doppler shift,


Again, only partly right. One *could* interpret this as a Doppler shift.
But the modern interpretation in cosmology is more along the lines that
the wavelength increased because the universe expanded since the light
was emitted.


meaning that it is caused by the distant
galaxies moving away from us,-i.e. the expanding universe. This
doppler shift is the same as one gets standing near a railway track
when a train passes blowing its whistle, as the train passes by, the
sound of its whistle appears to drop in frequency.

In reality the universe we live in is not expanding and is in a steady
state where its matter and energy are being constantly recycled. The
so called Red Shift is caused by other factors. We know from a branch
of Physics known as Quantum Mechanics that the Energy of a photon of
light is defined by the equation E=hv where E is the energy of the
photon, h is plancks' constant and v is its frequency. If for any
reason energy is lost from a photon, its frequency will decrease in
accordance with this equation.

Scientists do not as yet have a good understanding of the nature of a
photon as to whether it is a particle or a wave,


Totally wrong. We have known how to describe a photon accurately for
about 60 years now. The relevant theory is called "Quantum
Electrodynamics". Ever heard of it?


or some combination
of both. Although experiments done by Michhelson and Morley and others
have been interpreted to rule out the existence of an universal
aether, this is by no means certain.


Why not?


Scientists can't measure what
happens to a photon over a period of a minute, let alone what happens
to to it over a period of a billion years. Based on current knowledge,
there is no way scientists can state with absolute certainty that
photons do not lose energy over time.


Where should the energy go to? Ever heard of conservation of energy?


The mechanism for the lose of energy by photons over time is still
unclear.


But you simply postulate that this happens, because otherwise your
"theory" does not work, right?

BTW, this is called "tired light". Hint: it can neither explain the time
dilation in supernova light curves, nor the dependence of surface
brightness of galaxies on redshift. See e.g. Peeble's book on cosmology.



It could be by interaction of the photon with the stray atoms
of hydrogen which are dispersed throughout intergalactic space. It is
well known that photons do exert 'radiation pressure' on particles
they encounter and if pressure is exerted, then energy must be
transferred.


If the photons were scattered, they would not only change their energy,
but also their direction of travel. Care to present a calculation by how
much this would spread the images of stars to disks?

Also, why should this effect be the same for all wavelengths? Scattering
in general *depends* on the wavelength!


Another possibility is that there is indeed an aether
which absorbs some energy over time and reradiates it as a black body
radiator having a temperature of 2.8 degrees K.


Why on earth should the aether keep this temperature if it constantly
absorbs light? Also, again, why should this be the same for all wavelengths?


One thing that is
clear is that the radiation density of the starlight photons which
leave own galaxy is equal to the radiation density of the Microwave
Background radiation which is received by our galaxy.


One thing that is also clear is that the spectra are totally different.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/Eddington-T0.html


This fact is
probably more than a coincidence and is an indication that the
starlight radiation is being converted by some unknown process to the
Microwave Background radiation.


Nice. So your "explanation" for the CMBR is that there is an undetected
aether and an unknown process which converts the photons from star light
to blackbody radiation to that aether.

And *that* you consider to be a satisfactory explanation?


It is every bit as reasonable to
assume that the Red Shift is caused by loss of energy of the photon
over time as it is to assume that it is caused by a doppler effect.


Hint for you: actually, cosmology *does* assume exactly such an energy
loss. It is caused by the expansion of the universe. See the section
"Expansion of the universe leading to cosmological redshift" he
http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/GR/energy_gr.html


Because of the downshifting in the frequency of light for whatever
reason, there is a limit to how far it is possible to image distant
galaxies. The actual universe will be far larger than we can imagine
or detect


Finally something I can agree on!


and will probably be infinite in size.


Probably?



(return to index)

MicroWave Background Radiation

A second argument which has been made to support the Big Bang Theory
is the microwave background radiation. COBE has shown that the
spectrum of the Microwave Background Radiation (MBR) is that of an
ideal Black Body Radiator having a temperature of about 2.8 degrees K.


2.73 K, to be more precise. You are not up to date. Ever heard of the
WMAP satellite?


It has also shown that this radiation has a Redshift/Blueshift to it,
indicating that the earth is moving about 300Km/s relative to the
shell of matter that emitted the radiation. Since this speed is too
great for the earth's movement within the milky-way galaxy, it
indicates that the source is outside our galaxy and that our galaxy is
moving in relation to that source.

As indicated in the previous section dealing with redshift, the
starlight photons radiated by galaxies gradually lose energy through
some unknown process which then reradiates this energy as the
Microwave Background Radiation. The wavelength of the photons of the
MBR, at the peak of the spectrum radiation curve, will be about 1mm.
Since the rate of loss of energy by photons will be inversely
proportional to the wavelength of those photons,


Why should it be?


and since the MBR
photons have a wavelength of more than a thousand times that of
visible light, the percentage loss of energy by the MBR photons will
be at a rate of over one thousand times less than that of a visible
photon. (If it takes a visible photon 15 billion years to lose 3/4's
of it's energy, then it would take a MBR photon 15,000 billion years
to lose 3/4's of it's energy). It follows that since MBR photons have
a range of travel of more than one thousand times that of visible
light photons, they are also a thousand times more likely to encounter
a galaxy and be absorbed by the matter of that galaxy then a visible
light photon would.

Thus, energy is radiated by galaxies in the form of starlight photons.
Energy from these photons is gradually converted to MBR photons. These
MBR photons are eventually absorbed by some other galaxy.


Nice. Now you only have to present evidence for the existence of the
aether which makes this possible, and explain how exactly it makes this
possible.

Oh, BTW, you could also explain why, if one takes the fluctuations in
the CMBR as being due to density fluctuations, and studies how these
grow with time due to gravity, one gets the observed large scale
structure of the universe (voids, galaxy clusters, filaments etc.)


Since the intensity of the microwave background radiation will be
relatively constant throughout the universe (assuming an infinite
steady state universe), the amount of energy a galaxy will absorb from
it will be proportional to the size of that galaxy. The amount of
energy a galaxy radiates is also proportional to it's size, thus an
equilibrium will be reached where a galaxy will receive as much energy
in the form of MBR photons as it itself radiates in the form of
starlight photons.

(return to index)

Entropy

A third argument that has been put forward in support of the Big Bang
Theory is entropy, in that, it is argued that the universe must
eventually run down into a state of thermal equilibrium. Energy exists
in various forms such as atomic binding energies, thermal energy,
potential and kinetic energy, etc., all of which are associated with
matter, or it exists in photons which have been radiated by matter and
will eventually be reabsorbed by matter. Under the Steady State Galaxy
Theory as put forth above, since all matter in a Galaxy is recycled
through the Neutroid on a regular basis, all energy contained by that
matter is also recycled at the same time and, thus, the universe does
not run down into a state of thermal equilibrium.


So your recycling process contradicts the second law of thermodynamics?
Oh uh - bad for your "theory"...


There is a perception that energy only flows from hot bodies to cooler
ones. This is not true for radiant energy. The MBR photons which
exhibit the characteristics of a 2.8 degree black body radiator do get
absorbed by the much hotter material which makes up the galaxies.


Err, in turn, the photons of the CMBR get quite a lot of energy from the
hot matter in the galaxies, e.g. by inverse Compton scattering. In the
mean, the energy *still* flows from the hot to the cold "bodies". You
*do* know that the formulation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics about
energy flowing from hot to cold bodies is only true in the mean, don't you?


The
critical factor which determines the direction of net flow of radiant
energy is not the relative temperatures of the bodies but the energy
densities they produce.


So you indeed think that the second law of thermodynamics is wrong.
*Really* bad for you...


In the case of our universe, the MBR radiation
has an energy density equal to the starlight radiation energy density
emitted by the galaxies. Thus, there is an equilibrium condition where
galaxies receive as much energy in the form of MBR Radiation as they
radiate in the form of Starlight Radiation and there will be no net
flow of energy from the galaxies to the material in intergalactic
space.

(return to index)

Hydrogen-Helium

A fourth arguement which has been used to support the Big Bang theory
is that it would account for the abundance of helium we find in the
universe. The amount of helium present (24%) cannot be accounted for
by star production and according to Gamow it was generated by the Big
Bang.

Under the Steady State Galaxy theory, the nuclear fusion process which
is expelling the material from the neutroid would generate large
amounts of helium as well as other light elements and is the source of
the excess helium found in the universe.


Err, then why don't we see an excess of the other elements, too? But
only an excess of helium?


(return to index)

Quasars

The latest Hubble pictures of quasars show that they are associated
with galaxies and in most cases there is evidence that these galaxies
have recently collided with other galaxies.


That about the collisions is news to me. Reference, please.


In normal galaxies, the neutroid at their center is obscured by a halo
of material trapped in the neutroid's magnetic field. In the case of
quasars, this halo of material has been temporarily destroyed by the
collision with another galaxy and we are seeing the bare neutroid
which is, as expected, extremely energetic.


You are making no sense. Even if the neutroid is obscured by such a halo,
the energy emitted by it must nevertheless go somewhere (i.e. in heating
that halo), and thus despite the halo, we nevertheless should see that
something very energetic is there in the center of galaxies. We don't,
in general.

Also, please explain how exactly the collision is able to destroy the
halo. Why should such a collision produce forces which are so great that
they can overcome the forces of the neutroid on the halo?



(return to index)

Summary

The Steady State Galaxy Theory as put forth above can provide the
basis for the operation of the Universe as it is seen to exist.


Well, if one ignores most of the evidence and is satisfied by handwavy
argumentations instead of actual quantitative calculations...


It can
not only account for the shape of all galaxies we see in the universe
which is something no other theory as proposed so far can accomplish


Wrong. The shapes of galaxies are rather well understood nowadays.



but it can also explain the existence of quasars.


And standard physics can do that also. Standard physics can also explain
the wide range of other types of active galaxy nuclei, which you
conveniently ignored.



As more data is gathered by the Hubble Space Telescope and other
sources, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Big Bang theory
cannot account for the universe around us.


Utterly wrong. As more data is gathered, it becomes increasingly clear
that the BBT fits the evidence quite well, and accounts for much more of
the evidence than your stuff above - and does do so *quantitatively*.


I believe the the Steady
State Galaxy Theory as presented here can provide the basis of an
alternative to the Big Bang Theory.


Your belief is based on ignorace. Please go to the literature and look
up the heap of evidence for the BBT. You could start with the things I
mentioned above, at the beginning of this post.


(return to index) (return to top of page) Other Interesting Papers

For a historical perspective of the Big Bang Theory see Keith Stein's
Essay "The Big Bang Myth"


Keith Stein? The one who posts to sci.physics, and demonstrates time and
time again that he does not understand a bit of Relativity?


"Endless, Boundless, Stable Universe" by Grote Reber -a pioneer in the
field of Radio Astronomy.


And that makes him qualified for discussing cosmology how?


"Dark Matter" and "Hubble's Constant in Terms of the Compton Effect"
by John Kierein


And who is that?



Please E-mail me your comments and suggestions.


Why don't you look at the posts in sci.astro?



Last revised Dec 30,1996.
Copyright R.Rufus Young 1996 all rights reserved.


Time to revise your ideas again in light of the new evidence of the last
eight years, don't you think?



You are Visitor Number


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004

When did motion first start ?

Science knows the formation of matter in our universe was caused by
the forces of the universe.


Huh? Rather strange wording.


These forces a

(1) The Force of Gravity

(2) The Force of Electro Magnetism

(3) The Strong Nuclear Force


Wrong. This force is only a residual effect of the strong (colour) force
between the quarks, not a fundamental force on its own.


(4) The Weak Nuclear Force


Please notice that (2) and (4) had been unified in the 70ties.


At some point in time, motion within the universe, had to begin.

The paradox would be, what force could cause motion to begin, without
moving in its present space-time ?


Huh? Sorry, I do not understand the problem.


The Gravitational Cosmological Theory of the formation of the
Universe is a theory I
developed that is rooted in the Einstein and the Bondi-Gold-Hoyle
Steady State theories ,


Hoyle's theory had been soundly disproven. Even he himself admitted that
and developed a new "Quasi-steady state" theory.


wherein the Steady State theory the universe contains more protons
than electrons that
create dust particles and galaxies formed in their current locations
and the cosmic
matter is recycled therein at the center of the galaxy furnace.

When the Universe started to fall:

The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of
the Universe.

The Theory:

(1) The expansion of the universe is a result of the " heat '
contained therein;

(2) The source of the " heat " is the cosmic microwave radiation
backround at 3 kelvin,


Please present an actual calculation demonstrating that that "heat" can
explain the observed expansion.

Also, didn't you say above that you assume a static universe???


wherein;

(3) The microwave electro magnetic-nuclear energy was formed as a
result of the
interaction of two different static gravitational vacuum fields,
causing gravitational
instability and the motion, void of matter, at this time, wherein;
static gravitational
field (1) began to go into "motion".


Microwave energy has nothing to do with nuclear energy. And how,
precisely, was the interaction of thise two gravitational fields able
to produce this microwave energy?



Therefore; only (2) static gravitational vacuum fields alone,
being void of E=MC^2
could create E=MC^2; and the matter of the Universe.


Huh???


Q: When did this motion start?

A: If a neutral particle is able to resist the universal motion,


What universal motion, and why should a neutral particle be able to
resist it?


By Br Dan Izzo July 2002
  #2  
Old September 6th 04, 03:59 PM
Alan Erskine
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Br Dan Izzo" wrote in message
m...
Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004


Yo, Izz... This aint Science Mag. When it's published, some will read it.
60kb on this group is a no-no.


--
Alan Erskine
We can get people to the Moon in five years,
not the fifteen GWB proposes.
Give NASA a real challenge



  #3  
Old September 7th 04, 01:53 AM
http://149.137.107.8/home/homeJ.html user id: Gue
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message ...
"Br Dan Izzo" wrote in message
m...
Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004


Yo, Izz... This aint Science Mag. When it's published, some will read it.
60kb on this group is a no-no.


http://149.137.107.8/home/homeJ.html user id: Guest password: Guest
  #4  
Old September 7th 04, 02:46 AM
Br Dan Izzo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message ...
"Br Dan Izzo" wrote in message
m...
Below is a theory I developed

To Science Mag Aug 2 2004


Yo, Izz... This aint Science Mag. When it's published, some will read it.
60kb on this group is a no-no.


Hey Read that post before they delete it....we've over turned Big bang
for steady state, the NAS and NAP National Science Academy in
Washington DC is trying to explain in a paper Sept 4th 2004 the
Microwave backround and Big Bang


What if the MBR is what is causing the heat, and expansion of the
universe ?

But number 1 issue is point in the direction of the universe where the
big bang took place ?

If it happened junk should still be around

also When did MOTION First Start ?

Big Bang theory needs particles and particles are always in motion


notice gravity talk recently ?

read the title of the theory developed in july 2002

I really don't know if the Gravitational Instability Theory did occur
but it makes logical sense, only one thing might screw it up...a
neutral particle is needed that resists universal motion alleged to go
back in time...sounds too sci-fi but it only has to happen a little
  #5  
Old September 7th 04, 09:29 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message news:gX__c.21600

plonk
  #6  
Old September 7th 04, 09:29 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message news:gX__c.21600

plonk
  #7  
Old September 7th 04, 09:29 PM
Shane Stanley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message news:gX__c.21600

plonk
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory Br Dan Izzo Astronomy Misc 0 August 31st 04 02:35 AM
Breakthrough in Cosmology Kazmer Ujvarosy Space Shuttle 3 May 22nd 04 09:07 AM
Breakthrough in Cosmology Kazmer Ujvarosy Amateur Astronomy 4 May 21st 04 11:44 PM
Breakthrough in Cosmology Kazmer Ujvarosy Space Station 0 May 21st 04 08:02 AM
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory on the Formation of the Universe rev dan izzo History 8 October 9th 03 05:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.