What activates a supermassive black hole?
This very deep image shows the COSMOS field imaged by the Canada France Hawaii Telescope (CFHT). Huge numbers of very faint galaxies are visible. A new study of this field, combining data from ESO's Very Large Telescope and ESA's XMM-Newton X-ray space observatory has turned up a big surprise. Most of the huge black holes in the centres of active galaxies in the past 11 billion years were not turned on by mergers between galaxies, as had been previously thought. Some of the active galaxies with supermassive black holes at their centers that were used in the new study are marked with red crosses on this picture. Credit: CFHT/IAP/Terapix/CNRS/ESO
A new study combining data from ESO's Very Large Telescope and ESA's XMM-Newton X-ray space observatory has turned up a surprise. Most of the huge black holes in the centres of galaxies in the past 11 billion years were not turned on by mergers between galaxies, as had been previously thought.
At the heart of most, if not all, large galaxies lurks a supermassive black hole with a mass millions, or sometimes billions, times greater than that of the Sun. In many galaxies, including our own Milky Way, the central black hole is quiet. But in some galaxies, particularly early on in the history of the Universe, the central monster feasts on material that gives off intense radiation as it falls into the black hole.
One unsolved mystery is where the material comes from to activate a sleeping black hole and trigger violent outbursts at a galaxy's centre, so that it then becomes an active galactic nucleus. Up to now, many astronomers thought that most of these active nuclei were turned on when two galaxies merge or when they pass close to each other and the disrupted material becomes fuel for the central black hole. However, new results indicate that this idea may be wrong for many active galaxies.
Viola Allevato (Max-Planck-Institut fur Plasmaphysik; Excellence Cluster Universe, Garching, Germany) and an international team of scientists from the COSMOS collaboration have now looked in detail at more than 600 of these active galaxies in an extensively studied patch of the sky called the COSMOS field. As expected, the astronomers found that extremely brilliant active nuclei were rare, while the bulk of the active galaxies in the past 11 billion years were only moderately bright. But there was a surprise; the new data showed that the majority of these more common, less bright active galaxies, even looking back far into the past, were not triggered by mergers between galaxies. The results will appear in The Astrophysical Journal.
The presence of active galactic nuclei is revealed by the X-rays emitted from around the black hole, which were picked up by ESA's XMM-Newton space observatory. These galaxies were subsequently observed using ESO's Very Large Telescope, which was able to measure the distances to the galaxies. When combined, the observations allowed the team to make a three-dimensional map showing where the active galaxies lie.
"It took more than five years, but we were able to provide one of the largest and most complete inventories of active galaxies in the X-ray sky," said Marcella Brusa, one of the authors of the study.
The astronomers could use this new map to find out how the active galaxies were distributed and compare this with predictions from theory. They could also see how the distribution changed as the Universe aged — all the way from about 11 billion years ago to almost the present day.
The team found that active nuclei are mostly found in large massive galaxies with lots of dark matter. This was a surprise and not consistent with the prediction from theory — if most active nuclei were a consequence of mergers and collisions between galaxies it had been expected that they would be found in galaxies with moderate mass (about a trillion times the mass of the Sun). The team found that most active nuclei reside in galaxies with masses about 20 times larger than the value predicted by merger theory.
"These new results give us a new insight into how supermassive black holes start their meals," said Viola Allevato, who is lead author on the new paper. "They indicate that black holes are usually fed by processes within the galaxy itself, such as disc instabilities and starbursts, as opposed to galaxy collisions."
Alexis Finoguenov, who supervised the work, concludes: "Even in the distant past, up to almost 11 billion years ago, galaxy collisions can only account for a small percentage of the moderately bright active galaxies. At that time galaxies were closer together so mergers were expected to be more frequent than in the more recent past, so the new results are all the more surprising."
More information: Research paper http://www.eso.org … /eso1124.pdf
Provided by
ESO
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update),
2 comments
-
revamping general concept and cosmological principle
May 25, 2012
-
Transiting Exoplanet Light Curve
May 25, 2012
-
Math behind Theoretical Physics
May 24, 2012
-
Do we know whats at the center of galaxies yet?
May 23, 2012
-
Structure of the Milky Way?
May 20, 2012
-
What would it take to terraform Pluto and Charon?
May 19, 2012
- More from Physics Forums - General Astronomy
More news stories
Yale study concludes public apathy over climate change unrelated to science literacy
Are members of the public divided about climate change because they don't understand the science behind it? If Americans knew more basic science and were more proficient in technical reasoning, would public consensus match ...
32 minutes ago |
not rated yet |
2
|
10 million years needed to recover from mass extinction
It took some 10 million years for Earth to recover from the greatest mass extinction of all time, latest research has revealed.
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
33 minutes ago |
not rated yet |
0
|
Sophisticated simulations predict future warming
The chances of our planet being hit by a global warming of 3 degrees Celsius by 2050 is as likely as it being hit by an increase of 1.4 degrees, new research shows. Presented in the journal Nature Geoscience, the British study ...
Space & Earth / Earth Sciences
May 22, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (9) |
51
Aliens don't want to eat us, says former SETI director
Alien life probably isn’t interested in having us for dinner, enslaving us or laying eggs in our bellies, according to a recent statement by former SETI director Jill Tarter.
Space & Earth / Space Exploration
May 25, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (13) |
39
Kyoto Protocol architect 'frustrated' by climate dialogue
UN climate talks are going nowhere, as politicians dither or bicker while the pace of warming dangerously speeds up, one of the architects of the Kyoto Protocol told AFP.
May 23, 2012 |
3.7 / 5 (7) |
39
Change in developmental timing was crucial in the evolutionary shift from dinosaurs to birds: study
At first glance, it's hard to see how a common house sparrow and a Tyrannosaurus Rex might have anything in common. After all, one is a bird that weighs less than an ounce, and the other is a dinosaur that ...
Computer model used to pinpoint prime materials for efficient carbon capture
When power plants begin capturing their carbon emissions to reduce greenhouse gases – and to most in the electric power industry, it's a question of when, not if – it will be an expensive undertaking.
'Unzipped' carbon nanotubes could help energize fuel cells, batteries
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes riddled with defects and impurities on the outside could replace some of the expensive platinum catalysts used in fuel cells and metal-air batteries, according to scientists at ...
T cells 'hunt' parasites like animal predators seek prey, study shows
By pairing an intimate knowledge of immune-system function with a deep understanding of statistical physics, a cross-disciplinary team at the University of Pennsylvania has arrived at a surprising finding: T cells use a movement ...
Manufacturing genes to attack flu virus
An international research team has manufactured a new protein that can combat deadly flu epidemics.
Same gene that stunts infants' growth also makes them grow too big: research
UCLA geneticists have identified the mutation responsible for IMAGe* syndrome, a rare disorder that stunts infants' growth. The twist? The mutation occurs on the same gene that causes Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, which makes ...
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.9 / 5 (22)
Since dark matter cannot be detected directly, perhaps the sentence should be rephrased to show the inference rather than state it as if such things as dark matter exists.
What this means is that the Big Bang is once again falsified because once again galaxies do not want to play ball with the expectation of being younger or having more frequent mergers, or having younger stars and galaxies. They appear altogether more mature and of more homogeneous distribution[comparable to those closer to us] than the BB theory would have us believe. But will someone stand up and say it's time to get another theory? No. BB is all there is.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (18)
You are 100% right. Whereas many people have assumed that the next step is to create the new theory which can compete with the BB, this has not worked particularly well so far at generating students who have a comprehensive understanding of the subject which spans both the conventional gravitational and the newer plasma-based frameworks.
The solution is to create a new curriculum which teaches both frameworks to students, for "free", online. Conventional ideologues think they are sitting pretty right now, but there are people already working on this new synthesis-based interdisciplinary approach to science education. It is, to be clear, a massive undertaking. But, the timing is perfect now, for not only are the resources finally there to do this, but Shelley Carson's new book, "Your Creative Brain" now provides a model for innovation in science which can be formalized into a new scientific curriculum.
We are on the very cusp right now of a new era in science.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (19)
The feeling of empowerment and social inclusion are intoxicating feelings. However, they can also act as lures away from a more balanced search for truth. And there is a price to pay for prioritizing the former over the latter: The people of the future will simply relegate you and these simplistic notions to the scrap heap of scientific history and ideas.
The future of science is critical thinking, and research into innovation now establishes, without any doubt, that there is no place for ideology in innovation. To innovate, one must possess an open mind.
We now know that, given the proper methodology, anybody can become "an Einstein" in 10 years. So, add in five years for the creation of this new website, and we have a timeline of 15 years until we start seeing an army of experts circumventing the antiquated physics PhD program unleashed upon this world.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (16)
But, in the future, historians will look back on this transformation similar to the effect of the printing press: In the same way that the printing press brought education and information to the masses, from the protected fortress of the castle, the circumvention of the university system for higher education in science will bring complex cosmological thought to the masses. Where many concepts were previously cloaked in mathematical formulae, safe from understanding (and hence argumentation) by the masses, this new system of education will be fundamentally concepts-based. And very similar to Socrates' obsession with definitions, the concepts will carefully build upon one another.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.2 / 5 (19)
There are no black holes.
Neutron repulsion prevents there formation and activates
a.) Massive neutron stars at centers of galaxies, and
b.) Smaller neutron stars at cores of ordinary stars.
1. "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press, 19 pages (2011):
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
2. "Is the Universe Expanding?", The Journal of Cosmology 13, 4187-4190 (2011):
http://journalofc...102.html
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (18)
Gradually, we will see a split emerge. On one side, people will use terms like "anti-science", "crank" and your "pet theory" and "pseudo-scientists."
On the other side, we'll see responses involving terms like "pseudo-skeptics", "anti-innovation", "critical thinking" and "creative problem-solving."
Where professional scientists refused to elaborate new models, students will gladly take up this challenge en masse. All that is required is to create the proper website to facilitate it. It is truly that easy.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (11)
Sarcasm
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.1 / 5 (17)
by NASA's own science reporter, Dr. Tony Phillips:
www.physorg.com/n...sun.html
These stories all point to flaws in "consensus" science
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (10)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (14)
Save yourselves! Learn Electrical Engineering! Then decide.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (17)
Central starburst nucleuses of the young spiral galaxies and globular clusters are the supermassive neutron star systems, due to permanent and violent star-forming events.
http://www.youtub...vk2wDYwc
The wrong understanding epoch false epoch of the BBT is over!
K. Margiani
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (15)
Perhaps the obvious is correct afterall? This news is still further support for LaViolette's model, that galaxies grow from within, mostly from ejections of newly nucleated matter entering our universe deep within the cores of these supermassive gray-holes. The article has no answer for this. There is no need to remain confused, unless we continue to try to fit recent observations into our 'accepted' models. This has led to all kinds of contorted explanations....like Big Bang nonsense.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (13)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 4.9 / 5 (15)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (15)
So we shouldn't bother with theories, which are apparently fringe logically. yet still producing predictions and equations, like the epicycle model of Ptolemy. The physics should work by the same principles, like the formal math does. You can call such approach "words", I'd call it the logic.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (8)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (10)
We can now ask as well: "How the universe would appear if it had looked like being eternal and infinite and the red shift would be a consequence of the dispersion of light at vacuum fluctuations"?
Apparently, many people today aren't willing to even think about it at all, thus effectively behaving like the opponents of Galileo in his era.
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (7)
Jul 13, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (10)
What I find of great mirth is that the anti-science cranks always latch on to some recent SCIENTIFIC finding in order to (falsely) deny other SCIENTIFIC knowledge (like the BB).
It's like the Adam Savage quote: "I reject your reality and substitute it for my own".
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1.3 / 5 (56)
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
We can now ask as well: "How the universe would appear if it had looked like being eternal and infinite and the red shift would be a consequence of the dispersion of light at vacuum fluctuations"?
Apparently, many people today aren't willing to even think about it at all, thus effectively behaving like the opponents of Galileo in his era.
Yes! Come to think of it, it makes sense! Clearly, virtual particles are responsible for shifting electromagnetic radiation from one side of the spectrum to the other! And, OH!!! These same particles also seem to suggest that the universe is static! We must tell other humans!!
...sigh
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2.6 / 5 (5)
"What this means is that the Big Bang is once again falsified because" - KevenTard
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (6)
"Nowhere else has there been a greater concentration of nuts and cranks!" - Desky
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (2)
Now it's all Location, location, location.
"Go back to Mach's Principle and work your way forward using modern data." - YawningDog
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
I feel your pain Rawa. Now stop worrying your little head and be a good little boy, go put on your jammies, and go to bed.
"But the "BB" is salary and grant generator at the first place." - Rawa
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2.2 / 5 (6)
You don't seem to mind violating the law of energy conservation.
Do you have any grand evidence for such a grand violation of a well observed principle?
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2.4 / 5 (5)
As things get farther away they appear smaller and dimmer.
The kind of scattering you are referring to does not produce such a relationship.
You poor, sad, child.
"We can now ask as well: "How the universe would appear if it had looked like being eternal and infinite and the red shift would be a consequence of the dispersion of light at vacuum fluctuations"?" - CalliTard
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
You should talk to the Garden Gnome on your front lawn about your Neutron Star theory. He just might be a brilliant astronomer, or a cunning cosmetologist.
"So called Black holes are the cooled supermassive neutron stars i.e. naked cores of the super massive precursor (parent) stars" - Kio
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
You are mentally Ill OmaTard. Get yourself to a psychologist before you do yourself or someone else harm.
"There are no black holes." - OmaTard
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
"The team found that active nuclei are mostly found in large massive galaxies with lots of dark matter. This was a surprise and not consistent with the prediction from theory".
I submit that isn't it possible that the galactic black hole in question was large enough maybe to have torn a hole in our reality to become a portal into another reality where maybe matter is dimensionally shifted, appearing dark to us in as much as it does not really interact with our matter except weakly through gravity......brane theory of gravity forces being felt across adjacent branes. Say this matter takes one of the OTHER 8 or so theorized spatial dimensions, maybe even two or three who knows, and creates the reality in the connected universe through which the large black hole has torn into; and say even its time dimension is one of the other two of the three available. If this matter is pulled through the portal fast...
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
Because every galaxy ends its life evaporated into radiation, it's evident from time symmetric model, it must be formed from radiation too. I.e. from very lightweight particles: photons, axions and neutrinos. When these particles condense mutually, they create a huge dense cloud, at the center of which the nucleosynthesis will ignite spontaneously. It's sorta small Big Bang - it just occurs at the many places of observable Universe at the same moment (just because of statistics, the more distant places of Universe are preferred).
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
"Vendicar Decarian", aka: Scott Nudds, has escaped from the asylum again
From: Eric Swanson (swanson_at_notspam.net)
Date: 01/31/05
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
We can observe an analogy between formation of theories and galaxies in this model: a new theory is formed spontaneously, when sufficient number of indicia is cumulated. But until such ignition occurs, these indicia are handled like invisible dark matter. They're simply ignored with mainstream, because mainstream physics can handle only deterministic phenomena with its math. The formation of new quality from quantity is an emergent multiparticle process, which is difficult to describe/predict with formal math. So it's simply ignored, because physicists are living from writing of equations.
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
This causal bias makes many time symmetric phenomena asymmetric and explosive for us. Because we cannot follow the condensation of dark matter into galaxies or ideas into theories well, both processes appear like sudden explosion for us. But from very general perspective such evolution doesn't differ from random condensation and dissolution of fluctuations of gas.
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 4.3 / 5 (6)
Big Cranks keep on churning
They never lose a moment of sleep
Thinking about how thing really work
Big Cranks keep on churning
Oliver keeps on parolling
Lets see
kevinrtrs
HannesAlfven
omatumr
rjhuntington
Kio
Tuxford
rawa1 - who may be tuxford as well. I have lost track of all the fake names Zephyr posts under.
Callippo - that is another Zephyr
YawningDog - can't tell yet if this is another Crank. He did tell one fairy story about
Which is false since M-theory gets published.
What happened? Where are the others? Yep and TabulaMensa are missing.
Ethelred
Jul 14, 2011
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (5)
Ethelred
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
No offense but your post doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me. Care to try again?
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
An amazing NASA agent Ethelred came in the best scientific forum, to defend falsifiers' degrees and calls other agents to help, including Yep and TabulaMensa
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 4.4 / 5 (7)
Yep is a Electric Universe Crank and has posted under different names. TabulaMensa would like your post. To the point that it looks like one of his.
To the best of my knowledge NASA doen't give a rats ass what idiotic ideas that Cranks have. Oh yes, Oliver is the only person here that definitely worked for NASA.
If I worked for NASA I wouldn't be so damn short on money.
Ethelred
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
The false feeding has destroyed the important scientific fields of the Physics, Astronomy, Cosmology and historical sciences.
You have to know that the publication of the powerful injections without the spectral data in the NASA sites are the additional falsifications to hide solar wind of the planetary elements, that can explode whole old view on main heat source. Thus Sun is not the glowing ball of waste products (91% H and 9% He) that emits photons and hides the violently unstable neutron star at the solar core! http://www.cosmog...r-29.htm
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
The situation at the Sun core doesn't differ from surface of neutron stars so much even in mainstream models - I presume rather homogeneous transition there. The neutron repulsion is Oliver K Manuel hypothesis and I don't see anywhere his reference on your web. This doesn't change the fact, the neutron repulsion cannot serve as a source of heating: such force will simply expand the Sun in similar way, like the pressure of radiation - instead of heating it.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
So everyone who disagrees with you or omatumor is an agent for a neutered, bureaucratically inept organization whom lost sight of its original mission statement?
Did someone forget to take their Klonopin?
Though, after a quick google search of K. Margiani I find many quackish forum comments leading back to cosmogeology and theories of Atlantis and Baal and ancients and.... someone watches too much Stargate. I guess from that perspective it makes sense that you buy into NR.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.6 / 5 (7)
http://www.physor...sun.html
Neutron cores - i.e. neutron stars in the stellar cores are interrelated to neutron repulsion forces. Huge concentration of the neutrons without neutron repulsion forces contradicts the truth. Each old star after explosion shows naked neutron core - fiery noutron star. Thus a neutron star in the stellar core has an amazing conclusive evidence.
http://www.cosmog...r-29.htm
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Are you a Turing test?
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (6)
For example, internal stochastic processes such as bar instabilities should be able to trigger the moderate and lower luminosity AGN, but it's hard to get them to feed enough material to the central regions of galaxies to power the high luminosity beasts. That at the moment still seems to require mergers. Certainly though, evidence is mounting that in most circumstances, AGN can be triggered through mechanisms other than mergers.
Another interesting possibility are minor mergers (mergers between galaxies and small gas rich companions). These are hard to detect and even harder to study, but both computer simulations and observations seem to suggest they are a viable triggering mechanism.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (6)
You think rawa1 is an adherent of Ethelred?
Your deductive abilities explain your stance.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 2 / 5 (4)
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (3)
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
No. Its an interesting bit of information that tells us something. We don't know everything.
You must be TabulaMensa since that was a remarkably paranoid statement. I don't know anyone at NASA. I used to know two guys that used to work at JPL but they are retired and I haven't seen them in years.
Now that is batshit insane. Rawa is a sockpuppet for Zephyr and I really don't think he likes me. You can see him attacking me on this very thread.
As is all science. Oliver Manual used to get paid for the silly stuff he writes.>>
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
That is incomprehensible.
Oliver has actually studied that stuff. And he is still a Crank.
Excuse me. Were you trying to say that Sun has a neutron star in it or not? That was garbled even by my standards of leaving out words. The Sun does not have a neutron star in it. There is no evidence for that and even Oliver has been unable to do more than prove that a supernova was involved in the beginning of the Solar system but he has no evidence that the Sun was the supernova.>>
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 3.5 / 5 (8)
Not even close.
I do hope you never meet him if you are under 18. It doesn't matter which sex you are as he doesn't care which sex he molests.
No I don't. If you need the data you will have to dig it yourself.
I understand that English is not your native tongue but you really should stop using Eliza based programs for translation. Gibberish to English is tricky enough with modern translation programs.
Ethelred
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Of course that isn't the answer you wanted. There is very strong evidence for them. Has been for a long time but since we can't actually see them we aren't going to have Absolute Proof of their existence any time soon. There are objects of great enough mass and since they aren't glowing hot they don't have the means to avoid collapse. Thus it is reasonable to go on the assumption that they really do exist.
Ethelred
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 0.7 / 5 (48)
We know they exist because of gravitational lensing. Our telescopes have observed strong gravitational lensing from seemingly invisible objects. What else could do this (other than dark matter)?
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (10)
-selective observations,
-selective investigations,
-selective publications - (disappearance of the ground-breaking data)
You don't want to provide the spectral data? Your wrong understanding and rubbish text proves that you are a natural falsifier from NASA.
You have cart blanche to back up falsifiers and the ostriches like the Galileo's opponents but Truth is victorious.
False epoch is over for the BBT, CERN, dust origin, circum-stellar disc, the glowing ball - [Sun] ... etc !
After at least four decades of hiding, manipulating and distorting experimental observations, by government scientists we are indeed due a scientific revolution.
Now go to bed!
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (8)
I don't think you know what "proves" means.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.2 / 5 (9)
That is one of the many magic ways that consensus science works.
Personal attacks, economic and social unrest are another.
Today I set aside work on a summary of my research, "A Journey to the Core of the Sun," to post a comment (#10) on the link between consensus and the current social and economic unrest:
http://noconsensu...ls-zeke/
A 2.5 page pdf file of a very brief, concise easier-to-read history of consensus science from 1945 to 2011 and its role in the current economic collapse and social unrest is available on request.
My interpretation may be wrong, but it fits a surprising array of observations and events.
Yes, there are advantages to being as old as dirt!
Please feel free to share this with others.
Comments would be appreciated.
With kind regards,
Oliver
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (8)
As opposed to when everyone disagrees with everyone else? Yeah, that's a good way forward. Consensus is achieved through verification of observations by independent researchers. No magic needed. It's what makes science work. Your non-consensus bleat is indicative of your crank status.
Jul 15, 2011
Rank: 1.2 / 5 (10)
No. I do not think NASA pays you to use the same techniques here that the Red Brigade used to support Lysenkoism - the old USSR version of consensus science.
If you didn't use such obvious names as EthelRed & Red Comet, those who have not lived under a tyrannical government might not recognize your techniques.
In view of the budget impass in Washington and the arrest of the Climategate Spin Doctor hired by UEA's Climatic Research Unit:
www.thegwpf.org/u...cru.html
http://climateaud...ias-cru/
You better grab your money and run, no matter who pays you, before the whole government scam comes down about your ears.
Congress will not approve more funds for Lysenkoism.
Oliver
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
All observations are selective. If you look in one direction you are not looking in others. They cost money.
Redundant.
Nonsense. Groundbreaking data gets published. For instance the data on supernova being involved in the beginning of the Solar system was published. Both Oliver's in Crank journals and other people's work in mainstream journals. The other people understood that signs of supernova in no way requires the Sun to have been the Supernova.>>
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
Translation from Crank = you don't agree with me so you are evil incarnate.
Lets see, I don't agree with you so I must be from NASA. So everyone but you and Oliver work for NASA. Ooops, Oliver worked for NASA. So that leaves you as the only person on Earth that is not in on the conspiracy.
I agree. Which is why Oliver and you are such utter Cranks. You lost to the truth.
It isn't going to come from a 70 year old child molester or his toady.
No, I don't have to. I was told I could stay up and watch the fireworks from Disneyland.
Ethelred
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1.3 / 5 (10)
The Climategate Spin Doctor, hired by Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, has been arrested!
www.thegwpf.org/u...cru.html
Congress will NOT approve more funds for manipulation or distortion of the scientific process by the likes of you, Red Comet, or James Hansen.
If you don't understand, read Bob Carter's paper on "Lysenkoism and James Hansen" and the forward by Vaclav Klaus:
"Todays debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.
www.quadrant.org....alarmism
Congress will cut all funds for your Lysenkoism nonsense.
Oliver
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
So glad they you understand that forcing people to believe your nonsense would be counterproductive. Hard the budget I would guess.
I only post under one name, barring one joke post as I A M Right. And its Ethelred you ignoramus. Red is from REDE or advice and it was the name of one of the last Saxon kings of England. And in case you haven't noticed the USA has RED as part of its colors. The USA track teams switch between blue and RED. Clearly by your standards, and those of Tail Gunner Joe and his odious toady Roy Cohn, the USA Olympic teams must be Commies.>>
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
I work retail. They don't pay enough to run and you had better not run yourself since you are still on parole.
It never did. It did pay for witch hunts by Red Scare fraud artists.
I just love this. Disagree with those two Cranks and one says you're an Evil NASA villain and the other calls you a vile Commie. Sorry I am neither but YOU Oliver, you plead guilty. You are a bully. And this not the only time you have tried to bully me. I am not one of your children. I no more be bullied by you than the reporter was.
Ethelred
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (7)
Gallileo began the new scientific epoch and became famous. Names of the governmental ignorants have been forgotten.
nobody knows names of the modern governmental ignorants: Ethelred, SCVGoodToGo... etc. The best scientist in the world Prof. Oliver found the wrong understanding on universe. He can explain the truth but his truth had been attacked by unknown governmental ignorants.
Prof. Oliver began the new scientific epoch and became famous. he is founder new field of science - neutron repulsion science. Names of the governmental ignorants (that are fighting violently against the truth) are unknown still and will be forgotten easily in the history.
!
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (5)
That is in England you idiot. Congress is in the US. England has a Parliment. You are the worst source of disinformation I seen outside of the Creationists.
Ethelred
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 4.2 / 5 (5)
Known RELIGIOUS persons that weren't ignorant. They knew he was right. They were worried about the sheep. And he pissed of the Pope by sneering at him. Not smart for a man living in Italy. He should have moved to the Netherlands.
You know them so thats cool. However I don't work for any government. No matter how matter times you make that shit up it won't become true.>>
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
For which he has no evidence. He has evidence of the Pauli Exclusion principle and is completely unable to give a single bit of evidence that it not the PEP. He just rants when asked.
Get a dictionary. Oliver is the one that engages in violence and force. I just use the truth.
Ethelred
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
You are nothing! An ignorant man and unknown agent working for the top falsifiers. You know on wrong understanding but are playing nervous game against Prof. Oliver. Don't worry! There are lots of rats in the mainstream forums to back up falsifiers, especially for the top falsifiers.
... !
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
He is on parole. He isn't famous. He is an embarrassment to the institutions he worked for.
Except the guy you are telling fairy stories to and the guy that Oliver gets mad at for showing his many errors.
No. Not by any reasonable person's standards.
Known to you. Not know to me. I work retail. And falsification is the norm in science. Most ideas don't hold up under scrutiny. I leave lies to Oliver and you.
I read his papers. I understood them. There is smidgen of good observational work hidden in a vast wasteland of bad theory. He is a LOUSY theorist.>>
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
I've had enough of your complaining for one day - leave it out, will you?
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
I am curious. Where did you study ranting? You have it down pat. Inarticulate, insane, nonsensical, self-contradictory, you got it all. What do you use to clean the foam off your keyboard?
Ethelred
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1.3 / 5 (8)
Thank you for the opportunity to publicly respond to hypocrites who:
a.) Conceal their own identity
b.) Find flaws in personal lives of others
c.) Use this physics forum for malicious gossip
By the grace of God, I am able today to use my own name and accept full responsibility for my past - good and bad.
I pray that you will one day be able to do the same.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Jul 16, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (3)
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (6)
I pray that one day you will be able to do the same.
Oliver
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
Publications in the mainstream forums and mass media are prohibited for the best scientist. This is an amazing proof on totalitarianism and authoritarianism in the important scientific fields. Oliver cannot answer you from the mainstream forum and you came here to play provocation game?
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
Old M - stars spectrums indicate on fuel problem by neutron emissions, down to disappearance of the hydrogen lines, while the young star Sun triggers huge amount of protons and neutrinos. Clue is that the from the young stellar core, violent neutron emission from the inner neutron core (star) and violent P/N interactions produce star of the recycled neutrons without the positrons and electrons in the old stars
http://www.cosmog...r-29.htm
This is almost mainstream nuclear mechanism on thermonuclear fuel with Neutron star inside - source for the thermonuclear fuel.
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
"Although most Class M stars are red dwarfs, the class also hosts most giants and some supergiants such as Antares and Betelgeuse, as well as Mira variables. The late-M group holds hotter brown dwarfs that are above the L spectrum. This is usually in the range of M6.5 to M9.5. The spectrum of an M star shows lines belonging to molecules and all neutral metals but hydrogen lines are usually absent. Titanium oxide can be strong in M stars, usually dominating by about M5. Vanadium oxide bands become present by late M." the text is from wikipedia
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (8)
What is unacceptable in the recycled neurons?
is it out of the nuclear laws?
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 0.8 / 5 (51)
lmao
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
In the dwarf neutron stars violent N/N interaction prevents compression to the nuclear density. Huge collective gravitation prevents powerful explosion due to absolutely colossal neutron repulsion forces.
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.3 / 5 (7)
This great tool allows for rapid, usually correct, decisions.
But binary thinking has limitations that led us to paradoxes.
For example,
a.) Electrons repel other electrons, yet electrons pair in atomic orbitals.
b.) Protons repel other protons, yet protons pair in the nucleus.
c.) Neutrons repel other neutrons, yet neutrons pair in the nucleus.
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 2.3 / 5 (6)
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
I just had to propose a crazy theory this session, if the wacko's can do it why not me? And I coined 2 new names for celestial objects, can't get wackier than that.
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
1. Neutron-rich centers of atoms, stars and nuclei are observed to fragment.
2. Neutron repulsion is stored as rest mass in every nucleus with two or more neutrons ["Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy" Journal of Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2001); . . . . ; "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press, 19 pages (2011)]
http://www.omatum...tnuc.pdf
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
Or, see video on "Neutron Repulsion"
www.youtube.com/w...yLYSiPO0
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Which testable predictions such hypothesis would bring for us?
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (4)
Question "What activates a supermassive black hole?"
Answer: "The collapsing(ed) star that created it."
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Well, aren't supermassive black hole's the result of LOTS and LOTS of stars? I don't think anyone has said yet what the origin of them is, just that they seem to be in the center of almost every galaxy we check them for, or not?
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 3.7 / 5 (6)
You never checked your theories with hard numbers, right?
Jul 17, 2011
Rank: 3.4 / 5 (5)
And I'm not discussing the ways, in which the energy of neutrons should release later. It would require the emanation of protons, instead of consuming them with fusion reaction. In this way, the stars would produce lighter elements during their burning, instead of their fusion into heavier ones...
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 1.2 / 5 (9)
Here are the hard numbers, plotted so you can see neutron repulsion:
www.omatumr.com/D...Data.htm
Neutron repulsion is explain in detail here:
1. "Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy"
Journal of Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2001)
www.omatumr.com/a...tnuc.pdf
2. Neutron repulsion confirmed as energy source,
Journal of Fusion Energy 20, 197-201 (2001)
www.omatumr.com/a...nrep.pdf
.
.
.
13. "Neutron Repulsion", The
APEIRON Journal, in press, 19 pages (2011)
http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 1.4 / 5 (9)
No.
There are no protons at the cores of stars or galaxies.
Even in atoms, the neutron/proton ratio increases as the mass increases.
Please take the time to read one or two of the above papers.
With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 4.5 / 5 (6)
I can understand that Oliver may not have much to do with his time, but what possesses people to get off on having long involved "arguments" with themselves under different handles just to provide some illusory groundswell of popular support for theories that, in all my reading, they cannot and will not answer direct questions on?
I'm not sure "nothing better to do" covers this sort of situation. Compulsive/obsessive? Seriously deranged?
What's the pay off here?
The satisfaction that nameless people on a physics forum have been converted?
Where is KevinRTS when you need him.... :O
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 3.8 / 5 (4)
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Jul 18, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (5)
Jul 21, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Well, you didnt intend it but you did say something partially right.