Radio halo discovered in a massive merging galaxy cluster

February 25, 2016 by Tomasz Nowakowski, Phys.org report

Colourscale image of diffuse emission in MACS J2243.3-0935 with black contours overlaid showing the tapered image. Contours are at -3, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 × σrms where σrms = 200 µJy/beam. Galaxy density contours overlaid in white. These contours are range from 20 to 90 percent of the peak value in steps of 10. Credit: Therese Cantwell et al., 2016.
(Phys.org)—Radio halos are enormous regions of diffuse radio emission, usually found at the centers of galaxy clusters. Recently, an international team of astronomers has discovered such a large area of diffuse emission, estimated to be about three million light years wide. The newly detected halo is located in a distant massive merging galaxy cluster designated MACSJ2243.3-0935. The findings are presented in a research paper published online on Feb. 18 in the arXiv journal.

The researchers, led by Therese Cantwell of the Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics at the University of Manchester, U.K., have used two radio telescopes to make the detection. Located in South Africa, the KAT-7 telescope was employed to observe MACSJ2243.3-0935 on Sept. 7, 2012. Nearly two years later, on June 20, 2014, the team used the Giant Meterwave Radio Telescope (GMRT) in India to conduct follow-up observations of this galaxy cluster. KAT-7 is an array of seven antennas with diameters of 12 meters, while GMRT consists of 30 antennas with diameters of 45 meters.

It was quite challenging to detect the radio halo as these diffuse emissions generally have very low surface brightness, particularly at GHz frequencies, making them hard to detect. Therefore, as the scientists scan lower frequencies, their brightness increases, unveiling the presence of these radio-emitting regions.

"The GMRT is a very useful telescope for detecting radio halos as it is capable of observing at these lower frequencies. The GMRT is also capable of producing images at both high and low resolutions. This is very important, as there can be compact radio emission from other astronomical objects coincident with the radio halo that can make determining the halo properties difficult. Having high resolution images allows us to remove the contributions of the point sources, while the low resolution images are most sensitive to the halo emission," Cantwell told Phys.org.

The astronomers found out that the radio halo in MACSJ2243.3-0935 has flux and dimensions typical of other radio halos. However, they noted that very little is known about these peculiar regions of diffuse emission, including the most important question about their formation.

The formation of radio halos is believed to be linked to the merger of , which are hugely energetic events—roughly equivalent to a trillion super novae explosions. One formation scenario suggests that turbulence in the gas of the galaxy cluster accelerates particles to radio-emitting energies leading to the production of radio halos. However, not all merging galaxy clusters host radio halos.

"The reason for this is not yet clear, although it is potentially related to how much energy is released in a particular merger event, where a weaker merger does not generate enough turbulence to form a radio halo," Cantwell said.

According to the team, more observations are needed at both lower and higher frequencies in order to investigate different formation scenarios.

In addition to finding the radio cluster, Cantwell and her colleagues also detected a potential radio relic candidate to the west of the cluster. Radio relics, similar to halos, are normally elongated structures found at the periphery of clusters and can be highly polarized. If the existence of this feature is confirmed, it will make MACS J2243.3-0935 one of only a handful of clusters that host both a halo and a relic.

Explore further: GMRT discovers a dying, giant radio galaxy 9 billion light years away

More information: A Newly-Discovered Radio Halo in Merging Cluster MACS J2243.3-0935. arxiv.org/abs/1602.05923

Abstract
We report the discovery of a radio halo in the massive merging cluster MACSJ2243.3-0935, as well as a new radio relic candidate, using the Giant Meterwave Radio Telescope and the KAT-7 telescope. The radio halo is coincident with the cluster X-ray emission and has a largest linear scale of approximately 0.9 Mpc. We measure a flux density of 10.0±2.0 mJy at 610 MHz for the radio halo. We discuss equipartition estimates of the cluster magnetic field and constrain the value to be of the order of 1 μG. The relic candidate is detected at the cluster virial radius where a filament meets the cluster. The relic candidate has a flux density of 5.2±0.8 mJy at 610 MHz. We discuss possible origins of the relic candidate emission and conclude that the candidate is consistent with an infall relic.

Related Stories

Cluster collisions switch on radio halos

August 30, 2010

(PhysOrg.com) -- This is a composite image of the northern part of the galaxy cluster Abell 1758, located about 3.2 billion light years from Earth, showing the effects of a collision between two smaller galaxy clusters.

Birth of a radio phoenix

April 28, 2015

Abell 1033 is a cluster of over 350 galaxies located about 1.7 billion light-years away. Collisions between galaxies in clusters are common events, and each merger heats and shocks the nearby gas. The rapidly moving, ionized ...

Mysterious phenomena in a gigantic galaxy-cluster collision

March 10, 2015

Researchers using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) have produced the most detailed image yet of a fascinating region where clusters of hundreds of galaxies are colliding, creating a rich variety of mysterious phenomena ...

A violent, complex scene of colliding galaxy clusters

June 3, 2014

Astronomers using the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) and the Chandra X-Ray Observatory have produced a spectacular image revealing new details of violent collisions involving at least four clusters of galaxies. Combined ...

Recommended for you

Birth of massive black holes in the early universe revealed

January 23, 2019

The light released from around the first massive black holes in the universe is so intense that it is able to reach telescopes across the entire expanse of the universe. Incredibly, the light from the most distant black holes ...

Astronomers discover an unusual nuclear transient

January 23, 2019

An international group of astronomers has detected an unusual nuclear transient in the nucleus of a weakly active galaxy. The new transient was identified by the OGLE-IV Transient Detection System and received designation ...

Scientist sheds light on Titan's mysterious atmosphere

January 23, 2019

A new Southwest Research Institute study tackles one of the greatest mysteries about Titan, one of Saturn's moons: the origin of its thick, nitrogen-rich atmosphere. The study posits that one key to Titan's mysterious atmosphere ...

44 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

HannesAlfven
2.2 / 5 (11) Feb 25, 2016
Re: "The formation of radio halos is believed to be linked to the merger of galaxy clusters"

Most cosmic radio emissions are in fact synchrotron -- produced by electrons spiraling in magnetic fields. Something to keep in mind.
looking4sophia
3 / 5 (4) Feb 25, 2016
"electrons spiraling in magnetic fields "

The recent detection of Gravity Waves via LIGO
was accompanied by a Gamma Ray Burst about .4 Seconds later.

Seems like detectable Radio Waves would also be emmitted from the rapidly spinning
double stars as they merged into a black hole, a theorized source of the GW & GRB ?

Would the Radio Waves arrive later
or possibly Not be detected due to distance, not in view of any radio telescopes or other reasons?
HannesAlfven
2.4 / 5 (9) Feb 25, 2016
Is it not at least a little bit ironic that astrophysicists are now coopting radio waves into their theories? Let's not forget that cosmic radio waves were discovered by radio ENGINEERS, and astronomers for decades considered them a hoax or a mistake BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT NECESSARY FOR THEIR THEORY. See radio astronomer, Gerrit Verschuur's book The Invisible Universe, for the full recounting of the history.

So far, what I have learned about the astrophysicists is that they will gladly ignore any inconsistencies in their attempts to prove their most cherished ideas. Yet, what nobody seems to talk about is the critique offered by Tom van Flandern, who helped design the GPS system, who remarked that at Yale, the most amazing thing he was taught was that gravitational attraction was NECESSARILY calculated as instantaneous because the solar system would in short order fly apart if G was at the speed of light.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (15) Feb 25, 2016
So far, what I have learned about the astrophysicists is that they will gladly ignore any inconsistencies in their attempts to prove their most cherished ideas
@hannesTROLL
sigh... (thanks Runrig for the links shared below)

EITHER:
1- research scientists are all incompetent

2- research scientists are all in a conspiracy to deceive you

3- research scientists know something you don't
-potholer54

https://www.youtu...dYvz0VwQ

so, you gave NO evidence for #1... and none for #2... therefore the only conclusion that can be made is #3

the problem with your argument is actually simple:
astrophysicists have evidence
YOU DON'T

HannesAlfven
2 / 5 (8) Feb 25, 2016
Here's the quote from The Invisible Universe ...

"Radio engineers didn't care where the radio waves came from, and the astronomers '... could not dream up any rational way by which the radio waves could be generated, and since they didn't know of a process, the whole affair was (considered by them) at best a mistake and at worst a hoax.'"

Van Flandern's remarks are well known ...

"The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous. This seemed unacceptable on two counts. In the first place, it seemed to be a form of 'action at a distance' ..."

[...]
HannesAlfven
2 / 5 (9) Feb 25, 2016
"Perhaps no one has so elegantly expressed the objection to such a concept better than Sir Isaac Newton: "That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum, without the mediation of any thing else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to the other, is to me so great an absurdity, that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it." (See Hoffman, 1983.) But mediation requires propagation, and finite bodies should be incapable of propagation at infinite speeds since that would require infinite energy. So instantaneous gravity seemed to have an element of magic to it.

The second objection was that we had all been taught that Einstein's special relativity (SR), an experimentally well-established theory, proved that nothing could propagate in forward time at a speed greater than that of light in a vacuum"

[...]
HannesAlfven
2 / 5 (8) Feb 25, 2016
"Indeed, as astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here. It seemed incongruous to allow for the finite speed of light from the body to the Earth, but to take the effect of Earth's gravity on that same body as propagating from here to there instantaneously. Yet that was the required procedure to get the correct answers.

These objections were certainly not new when I raised them. They have been raised and answered thousands of times in dozens of different ways over the years since general relativity (GR) was set forth in 1916."

That's from http://www.metare...vity.asp

Nobody is a "troll" for quoting these famous scientists, or asking this common question.
Vietvet
4 / 5 (12) Feb 25, 2016
"We've shown conclusively that at least some of the artifacts on the surface of Mars were artificially produced, and the evidence indicates they were produced approximately 3.2 million years ago---"

"we speculate that the Builders created the artificial structures as theme parks and advertisements to catch the attention of space tourists from Planet V."

"The Builder's civilization ended 3.2 million years ago. The evidence suggests that the explosion was anticipated, so the Builders may have departed their world, and it produced a massive flood, because Planet V was a water world. It is a coincidence that the face on Mars is hominid, like ours, and the earliest fossil record on Earth of hominids is the "Lucy" fossil from 3.2 million years ago."

https://en.wikipe..._beliefs

It's not surprising Hannes would cite a crank.

Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (10) Feb 25, 2016
Nobody is a "troll" for quoting these famous scientists
@hannes
actually, we call that intentional misinterpretation of facts, especially since you are suggesting that nothing has changed...
so, we can see your intent is to undermine scientific evidence by suggesting (using outdated quotes) that the modern scientists "will gladly ignore any inconsistencies in their attempts to prove their most cherished ideas" [sic]

HOWEVER, your quotes (evidence) is not only NOT from the above scientists, but outdated

but ignoring that part, you still haven't actually proven that any scientist above actually ignored ANY legitimate evidence that will directly refute the claims!

so it brings us full circle: EITHER:
1- research scientists are all incompetent

2- research scientists are all in a conspiracy to deceive you

3- research scientists know something you don't
-potholer54

the evidence is clear to anyone using critical thinking skills (logic)
it's #3
HannesAlfven
2.1 / 5 (7) Feb 25, 2016
Tom van Flandern helped create the GPS system, incidentally.

From a Department of Energy paper, "Aberration and the Speed of Gravity" at http://arxiv.org/...087.pdf, "It is certainly true, although perhaps not widely enough appreciated, that observations are incompatible with Newtonian gravity with a light-speed propagation delay added in."

In the paper I've pointed to, Relativity's fix for this is termed a "miracle" and the author is unable to justify the miracle without a few pages of incomprehensible mathematics.
vidyunmaya
1 / 5 (4) Feb 25, 2016
Sub: Cosmos Quest- origins- Vedas Interlinks-radio-data-clusters
Alfven's Cosmos Quest- looking forward to : Cosmology-myth or science- 1984.
present day Radio-halo data needs a helping hand in time- promote East West Interaction to connect invisible-visible matrix of the Universe to the Super-imposition.
evidently, there lies a Solution- Knowledge base culture - cosmological index- for the problems
currently under Process of Filtration of the minds -through Several modes by nature.
the Scientific essence of philosophy include; Yat-Anne- Na-Tirogatih -
search incomplete isllusion of gravity-that do not answer this quesry? cosmic vision in right perspective desirable for interaction. Low frequencies help Enlightened Interaction
http://www.lulu.c...jnani108
HannesAlfven
2.7 / 5 (7) Feb 25, 2016
Captain Stumpy is so quick to attack Van Flandern's character that he never makes it to the point of realizing that this claim is not actually controversial.
Vietvet
3.8 / 5 (10) Feb 25, 2016
"Van Flandern supported Le Sage's discredited theory of gravitation, according to which gravity is the result of a flux of invisible "ultra-mundane corpuscles" impinging on all objects from all directions at superluminal speeds. He gave public lectures in which he claimed that these particles could be used as a limitless source of free energy, and to provide superluminal propulsion for spacecraft.[34][35] He also speculated that the ultra-mundane flux caused the explosion of a major planet once located between Mars and Jupiter.
In 1998 Van Flandern wrote a paper[36] asserting that astronomical observations imply that gravity propagates at least twenty billion times faster than light, or even infinitely fast. These claims were dismissed by mainstream physicists."
https://en.wikipe...Flandern

Give it up Hannes. Citing Van Flandern is a losing proposition.
vidyunmaya
1.7 / 5 (6) Feb 25, 2016
Sub; Cosmological Index-Reference Frame-necessity-Demand-Interaction
need search beyond anarchy-cosmic confusion- black-hole -Gravity psychology to drive Science with comprehension- cosmic Pot energy of the universe and cosmology Structures-new modelling-my papers 2003- help clear direction and conscious search for cosmology Revision-paradigm shift.
Books at LULU-www [dot]lulu [dot]com-spotlight-jnani108
parts of Research at
https://www.scrib...-NANDURI
http://www.scribd...Dec-1999
http://www.scribd...del-2003
http://www.scribd...rse-2003
Captain Stumpy
3.2 / 5 (11) Feb 25, 2016
Tom van Flandern helped create the GPS system, incidentally
@hannes
So? he also believed that certain geological features seen on Mars, especially the "face at Cydonia", are not of natural origin, but were produced by intelligent extra-terrestrial life
and hannes alfven helped develop the MHD you routinely criticize...
and Einstein believed in a higher power

being right once doesn't mean said person will always be right
this is a cognitive bias that simply demonstrates your need to find justification for your conspiracist ideation (and unfounded beliefs)
Captain Stumpy is so quick to attack Van Flandern's character
actually, i was intentionally attacking YOUR character and lack of rational critical thinking skills
That is why i re-posted the 3 questions...

was that a bit too subtle for you?
Captain Stumpy
2.9 / 5 (10) Feb 25, 2016
Captain Stumpy is so quick to attack Van Flandern's character ...
@hannes
yes... i can see where you got tripped up now...
but ignoring that part, you still haven't actually proven that any scientist above actually ignored ANY legitimate evidence that will directly refute the claims!
i think this threw you off... because i said to ignore the whole argument of "outdated intentional misinterpretation of facts" because you had no evidence!
so it brings us full circle: EITHER:
1- research scientists are all incompetent

2- research scientists are all in a conspiracy to deceive you

3- research scientists know something you don't
-potholer54

the evidence is clear to anyone using critical thinking skills (logic)
it's #3
yeah... that full circle comment might have mislead you too

let me reiterate: i was specifically referring to YOU ...
your lack of evidence!
... the 3 questions

get it now?

hello?

spark boy?

anyone home?
jonesdave
3.8 / 5 (10) Feb 26, 2016
Re: "The formation of radio halos is believed to be linked to the merger of galaxy clusters"

Most cosmic radio emissions are in fact synchrotron -- produced by electrons spiraling in magnetic fields. Something to keep in mind.


In which case they'd be detectable across a number of frequencies, including microwave. The lack of such predicted detection is the reason Peratt's galaxy model fell flat on its arse. And it's why this is also total nonsense.
Steelwolf
2 / 5 (8) Feb 26, 2016
When one remembers from their physics classes that a Gaussian Unit is denoted as a field at the size of one centimeter, so, having a 1 micro gauss field, over some 300 Million Light Years adds up to a LOT of cubic centimeters and a LOT of energy in the form of plasma to have that kind of flux density enough to send radio waves of that kind of power.

Yet another crack in the wall of the Dark Matter Purists. Need to combine some of these studies, both at quantum microscopic scales as well as the macro cosmic scales. The fractal iterations make the same events inevitable, on different time and size scales, but we can learn a lot about how the Quantum Scale stuff works by realizing that the Cosmic Structures form exactly the same and exhibit the same traits as do the Quantum level ones once time is greatly slowed to the larger scale. Thus even the light speed laws are conserved but it allows us to study the time much closer to the Big Bang.
Alfven
2.1 / 5 (7) Feb 26, 2016
Re: "In 1998 Van Flandern wrote a paper[36] asserting that astronomical observations imply that gravity propagates at least twenty billion times faster than light, or even infinitely fast. These claims were dismissed by mainstream physicists."

Van Flandern was, btw, not even the first to point this out. These calculations date back hundreds of years. And if this is news to somebody here, then that also suggests that the person does not even understand the "miracle" which Relativity must accomplish in order to solve this problem. It also suggests that each person who does not understand this has never actually tried to simulate the solar system with a speed of gravity at the speed of light.

The idea that Van Flandern is ridiculous for pointing to his Yale education, historical computations and solar system simulations -- which all say the same thing -- is inviting people to be lazy and avoid engaging the true complexity of this widely acknowledged problem.
Alfven
2.5 / 5 (8) Feb 26, 2016
Re: "So? he also believed that certain geological features seen on Mars, especially the "face at Cydonia", are not of natural origin, but were produced by intelligent extra-terrestrial life"

Anybody who believes that they can ignore everything that a person says for the sin of being wrong once or even twice would have long ago already blocked you, Stumpy, because you are wrong almost every day.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (10) Feb 26, 2016
Anybody who believes that they can ignore everything that a person says for the sin of being wrong once
@alfie
now read that part again because apparently you didn't actually comprehend what was written: nowhere did i state that you could ignore him because of a mistake

in fact, if you actually READ what i wrote, it says:
being right once doesn't mean said person will always be right
this is a cognitive bias that simply demonstrates your need to find justification for your conspiracist ideation (and unfounded beliefs)

this means, by definition, that being right ONCE doesn't automagically make you correct in everything

this is also why the driving force behind science is EVIDENCE and not the opinions of the people

this is also why i linked the three questions, alfvie!
(so... did your sock get the axe for posting pseudoscience? - just wonderin')
gkam
2.7 / 5 (7) Feb 26, 2016
"actually, i was intentionally attacking YOUR character "
----------------------------------------

Of course, Stumpy, it is what you do when you lose.
Maggnus
4 / 5 (8) Feb 26, 2016
Tom van Flandern helped create the GPS system, incidentally.

From a Department of Energy paper, "Aberration and the Speed of Gravity" at http://arxiv.org/...087.pdf, "It is certainly true, although perhaps not widely enough appreciated, that observations are incompatible with Newtonian gravity with a light-speed propagation delay added in."

In the paper I've pointed to, Relativity's fix for this is termed a "miracle" and the author is unable to justify the miracle without a few pages of incomprehensible mathematics.


You find the mathematics incomprehensible, yet you feel you are qualified to comment negatively on them?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (8) Feb 26, 2016
Tom van Flandern helped create the GPS system, incidentally.

From a Department of Energy paper, "Aberration and the Speed of Gravity" at http://arxiv.org/...087.pdf, "It is certainly true, although perhaps not widely enough appreciated, that observations are incompatible with Newtonian gravity with a light-speed propagation delay added in."

In the paper I've pointed to, Relativity's fix for this is termed a "miracle" and the author is unable to justify the miracle without a few pages of incomprehensible mathematics.


You find the mathematics incomprehensible, yet you feel you are qualified to comment negatively on them?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!

"Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity I do not understand it myself any more."

― Albert Einstein
Didn't stop him from babbling on about his pseudoscience though did it?
Vietvet
4 / 5 (4) Feb 26, 2016
Tom van Flandern helped create the GPS system, incidentally.

From a Department of Energy paper, "Aberration and the Speed of Gravity" at http://arxiv.org/...087.pdf, "It is certainly true, although perhaps not widely enough appreciated, that observations are incompatible with Newtonian gravity with a light-speed propagation delay added in."

In the paper I've pointed to, Relativity's fix for this is termed a "miracle" and the author is unable to justify the miracle without a few pages of incomprehensible mathematics.


You find the mathematics incomprehensible, yet you feel you are qualified to comment negatively on them?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!!!!

"Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity I do not understand it myself any more."

― Albert Einstein
Didn't stop him from babbling on about his pseudoscience though did it?

Vietvet
4.2 / 5 (10) Feb 26, 2016
Darn, that last comment was posted while I was trying to edit it.

Canti do you know the expression "tongue-in-cheek"?

Einstein also said: " How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought independent of experience, is so admirably adapted to the objects of reality?"

gkam
2 / 5 (4) Feb 26, 2016
"Canti do you know the expression "tongue-in-cheek"?"

Yup, also known as facetiousness. But hard to pickup sometimes in print. I get stung by it.
my2cts
5 / 5 (3) Feb 27, 2016

"Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity I do not understand it myself any more."

― Albert Einstein
Didn't stop him from babbling on about his pseudoscience though did it?
Einstein did not have Landau&Lifschitz's Field Theory textbook.
Read it and stop whining.
my2cts
not rated yet Feb 27, 2016
Steelwolf
2.7 / 5 (7) Feb 27, 2016
And Stump, stop using your idiotic straw man argument of:

EITHER:
1- research scientists are all incompetent

2- research scientists are all in a conspiracy to deceive you

3- research scientists know something you don't

Because there are a LOT more options than you give. Sorry, you receive an F on this piece.
Steelwolf
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 29, 2016
Just a little calculation for example, for a 300X300X1 Ly space, at just a mili-gauss field, gives just under 5 x10^69 Gauss overall attraction...just on the EM potential required to produce those frequencies. There are also seen further energy sources, such as the galaxies within that gas cloud which are of much higher magnetic/gravitic field strengths.

And please understand that we in the Electric Universe Crowd, those of us that stick to real science and scientific method, DO understand the that there is a gravitational force. We are merely saying that there are Also things which are clearly Electro-Magnetic and Plasma in nature and that this has major affect on cosmology just as it does on atoms. What is the static charge of Andromeda, what about that of The Milky Way Galaxy? Are they of different 'valences'? Minor changes in charge and field polarity over such vast volumes and times can change it's attraction or repulsion on other galaxies. Fractal Iterations All!
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2016
And Stump, stop using your idiotic straw man argument of
@Steel
did you actually use the youtube link? -i didn't think so
https://www.youtu...dYvz0VwQ

paraphrasing- when a pseudoscience acolyte has their pseudoscience idea (like eu) that is against known evidence in science, they should consider the above three questions before going out to "spread the word"...

If they can't prove #1 or #2 with reputable physical evidence, then it suggests #3 is the reason that no one in the mainstream sciences is promoting said pseudoscience (like eu)
(it also suggests either a capitulation to their own weaknesses or a push to educate oneself)

this isn't a matter of strawman argument so much as it is taking time to actually find the FACTS and evidence!

2Bcont'd
Captain Stumpy
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2016
@steel cont'd
you receive an F on this piece
And here i was trying to ingratiate myself into the eu cult... what to do, what to do? [sarc]
And please understand that we in the Electric Universe Crowd, those of us that stick to real science and scientific method, DO understand the that there is a gravitational force
then you are NOT in the eu so much as you are in the Plasma Cosmology group
We are merely saying that there are Also things which are clearly Electro-Magnetic and Plasma in nature
HOLY F*CKING SH*T! THAT is what MAINSTREAM SCIENCE SAYS TOO!

ignored the rest... mostly because you are attempting to make the argument that because science doesn't have the answer right now then the eu claims MUST be correct

this is the actual strawman, BTW...
you need to be more patient, as well as willing to say it's ok to NOT know the answer until you can provide the evidence FOR an answer

which is the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, BTW...
Captain Stumpy
3.3 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2016
@Steel last
Because there are a LOT more options than you give
not really
what is the scientific method?
https://en.wikipe...c_method

one of the biggest problems in eu isn't just the missing evidence, but it is their rewriting of the known physics laws and observed physics phenomenon that we have a LOT of evidence for
...kinda like the whole argument cd gave for Shoemaker-Levy 9 and the Moon craters, or the Grand Canyon... you get the point yet?

considering that, there really are only three things you should ask yourself when you run into such a grand ToE that explains everything with no room for questions, like the eu claims

Now, that is not to say their claims are the same as Plasma Cosmology - that is a different beast entirely

point is: if you have what you THINK is science and it differs from what the BULK of the scientists in the world are saying... and you are NOT one of those scientists...
ASK THE QUESTIONS
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 02, 2016
Just a little calculation for example, for a 300X300X1 Ly space, at just a mili-gauss field, gives just under 5 x10^69 Gauss overall attraction...just on the EM potential required to produce those frequencies. There are also seen further energy sources, such as the galaxies within that gas cloud which are of much higher magnetic/gravitic field strengths.

None of the above makes any sense. If this is what the EU crowd is doing all day then they deserve all the respect that they get.


Maths was never really their strong point. Or science in general, actually.
Steelwolf
2 / 5 (4) Mar 02, 2016
Poor Stumpy.
Fact: Some Researchers ARE Incompetent.
Fact: Some Researchers (as have been proven by numerous real world court cases) are or have been in conspiracies, usually for economic or egotistic reasons.
and finally Fact: All Researchers know something others dont, just like everybody else knows things that Researchers do not!

So, your straw man decompresses rather explosively.
And as to where the math comes from, look up Gauss Unit, and it shows that it is the strength of a field over a 1 centimeter space...linear distance. If you cube that for the volume of space I used as an example and you get the number I showed. Pretty straightforward. Have to convert them pesky light years into centimeters, but that is just more zeros in the exponential notation, so sorry but that was a pure plugin from the numbers that they give in the article. The number given showing the strength for any place within that volume, the end number being the total E of magnetic attraction involved.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2016
Fact: Some Researchers ARE Incompetent
@steel
1- some doesn't mean "all"
2- the bulk of the incompetent seem to be in the eu cult
Fact: Some Researchers (as have been proven by numerous real world court cases) are or have been in conspiracies, usually for economic or egotistic reasons
and if you take the number of BAD apples, and compare them to the GOOD apples, what would you get? what is the ratio? what are the numbers?
until you can actually produce evidence for ANY claim, it has no validity
Fact: All Researchers know something others dont, just like everybody else knows things that Researchers do not!
and the likelihood that the eu knows more about plasma physics than the MS scientists is nil, especially given their track record actually discussing the physics with other REAL scientists
another point: just because you know SOMETHING doesn't mean it is relevant, nor does it mean it is in the field of expertise of the scientists
STRAWMAN CLAIM by you
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 03, 2016
And as to where the math comes from
@steel cont'd
but you still haven't been able to validate any claims ABOVE, let alone the eu cult dogma claims!
jumping to math when you can't validate the reasons for your faith is like saying: "i love pizza, and since Pizza is considered Italian food... therefore i must be pope"

also note: not one point in your argument above even addresses my post let alone the delusional strawman you built with it

more to the point: making the claims without evidence is simply called conjecture
you can also call them "untested claims" but that would also require looking for evidence... and since i've already posted evidence refuting this particular stupidity before, then i know it is there, and i know you didn't read it the first time, proving once again that you're not here for science

you're here, like cd, ha, et al, to promote your cult and recruit
gkam
1.8 / 5 (5) Mar 03, 2016
Hey, folks, only Stumpy gets to be the policeman here. He decides if your post meets his criteria, which he usually does not understand. He makes things up, screws them up, and refuses to own up to his posts, but if he cannot find it in Wiki, or does not like what you post, you are in for it. His team of vandals and snipers, Ira, otto, antigore, will eviscerate you as much as possible. Apparently these folk have had no lives of their own,so they tear down those of others, who had actually done things.

Stumpy got mad at me and turned on me because I hurt his feelings by criticizing the Bush Wars of Mass Killing and Corporate Profit, into which he may have invested his identity. I do not know why he s is so scared of opening up, unless he assumes we all have his character.

Now, to "get even" for me sending proof of my life, he tries to destroy me. The game is on. We will find out who he is, and he will answer to why he is an internet vandal and troll.

Steelwolf
1 / 5 (2) Mar 03, 2016
Wow, I give a series of facts, and explain my method and the terms involved and poor Stumped still does not get it. Very True gkam, the stump is just another troll who only has this as his one paid job: smearing anyone whose ideas are even questioning the DICTATES of the DM Theories. Even when prior properly validated and per reviewed, and still not discredited, science has already identified the mechanisms involved that do not require dark matter at all, or much, MUCH smaller amounts of it.

And no, I am not here to promote a cult, or to recruit, I am not interested in such. I DO ask pertinent questions and do make observations, sometimes backing them up with the proper math. I am one of those people that can take disparate research and find the commonalities and reasons for it. Like I have posted numerous times, it comes down to fractal iterations, quantum level is no different than super macro-cosmic, once the time scale is scaled accordingly. There is matter finer than electons.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2016
Stumpy got mad at me and turned on me because I hurt his feelings
OT, BAITING
i got mad because you are a CHRONIC LIAR

reported
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2016
I give a series of facts
@steel
no, you gave a series of UNTESTED CLAIMS
you offered no evidence for the claims, so they're not "facts" unless you can prove it
see http://www.auburn...ion.html

And no, I am not here to promote a cult, or to recruit,
then why advocate for a known pseudoscience cult?
the eu is falsified as well as known pseudoscience
that isn't opinion, untested claim or anything other than FACT, and it's been proven time and time again here on PO alone, let alone elsewhere
here is JUST ONE thread: http://phys.org/n...ggs.html

need i demonstrate MORE links/references? because that thread alone has enough to demonstrate the eu fallacy WITH EVIDENCE

i am using caps because apparently you are having issues reading... i don't know if it is visual or a problem with comprehension/literacy, so i am choosing to test this with CAPS first (visual)
Steelwolf
1 / 5 (2) Mar 04, 2016
You have no idea of how hard I laugh at Stump when he gets so riled up. He supports a specifically limited view idea of cosmology that does not allow him to look outside of the box, almost like Schrodinger's cat, only if Stumped looks out he will die. His method is very simple, make statements that he knows are false about what the person has stated, and then hammer on those false outtakes with his frothing Caps.

I have an open mind and the EU and Plasma Cosmology types are able to answer more question, in a simpler manner, using verified, data taken from other studies, peer reviewed in the way they performed their work, and have come out with entirely different viewpoints than does the "Standard Mainstream Cosmology" taught in Most science departments these days. Not a matter of conspiracy theory: I have talked with the folks on the inside, this is a De Facto conspiracy to with hold such things as free energy devices, I have seen them in action, to protect their mass profits.
Steelwolf
1 / 5 (2) Mar 04, 2016
And Stup, you cannot prove YOUR facts either, all you do is link a post to a (supposedly relevant) You Tube video, and insult the bearer of data different than you have been told. Funny, but is that not what this site is, giving data not seen before, allowing people to make new inferences and see where it links up with their own works? Stumpy and his alts act like a wet blanket on this whole process.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.