New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the galactic plane

New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the Galactic Plane
Herschel's view of the Eagle Nebula. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project Herschel's view of the Galactic Plane. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project

ESA's Herschel mission releases today a series of unprecedented maps of star-forming hubs in the plane of our Milky Way galaxy. This is accompanied by a set of catalogues of hundreds of thousands of compact sources that span all phases leading to the birth of stars in our Galaxy. These maps and catalogues will be very valuable resources for astronomers, to exploit scientifically and for planning follow-up studies of particularly interesting regions in the Galactic Plane.

During its four years of operations (2009-2013), the Herschel space observatory scanned the sky at far-infrared and sub-millimetre wavelengths. Observations in this portion of the electromagnetic spectrum are sensitive to some of the coldest objects in the Universe, including cosmic dust, a minor but crucial component of the interstellar material from which stars are born.

The Herschel infrared Galactic Plane Survey (Hi-GAL) is the largest of all observing programmes carried out with Herschel, in terms of both observing time – over 900 hours of total observations, equivalent to almost 40 days – and sky coverage – about 800 square degrees, or two percent of the entire sky. Its aim was to the entire disc of the Milky Way, where most of its stars form and reside, in five of Herschel's wavelength channels: 70, 160, 250, 350 and 500 μm.

Over the past two years, the Hi-GAL team has processed the data to obtain a series of calibrated maps of extraordinary quality and resolution. With a dynamical range of at least two orders of magnitude, these maps reveal the emission by diffuse material as well as huge filamentary structures and individual, point-like sources scattered across the images.

New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the Galactic Plane
Herschel's view of the Eagle Nebula. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project

The images provide an unprecedented view of the Galactic Plane, ranging from diffuse interstellar material to denser filamentary structures of gas and dust that fragment into clumps where star formation sets in. They include pre-stellar clumps, protostars in various evolutionary stages and compact cores on the verge of turning into stars, as well as fully-fledged stars and the bubbles carved by their highly energetic radiation.

Today, the team releases the first part of this data set, consisting of 70 maps, each measuring two times two degrees, and provided in the five surveyed wavelengths.

"These maps are not only stunning from an aesthetic point of view, but they represent a rich data set for astronomers to investigate the different phases of star formation in our Galaxy," explains Sergio Molinari from IAPS/INAF, Italy, Principal Investigator for the Hi-GAL Project.

New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the Galactic Plane
The RCW 120 bubble seen by ESA's Herschel space observatory. It lies about 4300 light-years away. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project

Astronomers have been able to avail of data from Hi-GAL from the very beginning of the observing programme since the team agreed to waive their right to a proprietary period. The observations have been made available through the ESA Herschel Science Archive, including raw data as well as data products generated by systematic pipeline processing. The data has regularly been reprocessed to gradually higher quality and fidelity products.

The present release represents an extra step in the data processing. The newly released maps are accompanied by source catalogues in each of the five bands, which can be directly used by the community to study a variety of subjects, including the distribution of diffuse dust and of star-forming regions across the Galactic Plane.

The maps cover the inner part of the Milky Way, towards the Galactic Centre as seen from the Sun, with Galactic longitudes between +68° and -70°. A second release, with the remaining part of the survey, is foreseen for the end of 2016.

New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the Galactic Plane
The centre of our Galaxy, the Milky Way, about 25 000 light-years away, as seen seen by ESA's Herschel space observatory. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project

"It is not straightforward to extract compact sources from far-infrared images, where pre-stellar clumps and other proto-stellar objects are embedded in the diffuse interstellar medium that also shines brightly at the same wavelengths," explains Molinari.

"For this reason, we developed a special technique to extract individual sources from the maps, maximising the contrast in order to amplify the compact objects with respect to the background."

The result is a set of five catalogues, one for each of the surveyed wavelengths, listing the source position, flux, size, signal-to-noise ratio and other parameters related to their emission. The largest catalogue is the one compiled from the 160-μm maps, with over 300 000 sources.

New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the Galactic Plane
The War and Peace Nebula, also known as NGC 6357 (left), and the Cat's Paw Nebula, also known as NGC 6334 (right), seen by ESA's Herschel space observatory. Credit: ESA/Herschel/PACS, SPIRE/Hi-GAL Project

"The Hi-GAL maps and catalogues provide a complete census of stellar nurseries in the inner Galaxy," says Göran Pilbratt, Herschel Project Scientist at ESA.

"These will be an extremely useful resource for studies of across the Milky Way, helping astronomers to delve into the Galactic Plane and also to identify targets for follow-up observations with other facilities."


Explore further

Image: Glowing jewels in the galactic plane

More information: S. Molinari et al. Hi-GAL, the Herschel infrared Galactic Plane Survey: photometric maps and compact source catalogues. First data release for Inner Milky Way: +68° > l >-70°, Astronomy & Astrophysics (2016). DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526380
Journal information: Astronomy & Astrophysics

Citation: New Herschel maps and catalogues reveal stellar nurseries across the galactic plane (2016, April 22) retrieved 20 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2016-04-herschel-catalogues-reveal-stellar-nurseries.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
1818 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Apr 22, 2016
The cosmologists and astrophysicists are not particularly interested in what Herschel has shown us. Let's be clear: If these images had returned back straightforward confirmation for the textbook theories for stellar formation, there'd be a push to award the effort with a Nobel. But, they are plainly telling us something very different -- and for this reason, the implications of stars forming much like lightning -- along branching filaments -- are largely ignored.

Apr 22, 2016
they are plainly telling us something very different -- and for this reason, the implications of stars forming much like lightning -- along branching filaments -- are largely ignored
@ha
oh, well then.... by all means, write up your groundbreaking study and submit it to the astrophysical journals for peer review and go collect your Nobel!

should be easy, considering your implications above, right?

if you're gonna troll, at least come up with something more interesting or link source material from a reputable site to substantiate your claim

what you posted above is called a "false claim" by definition
http://www.auburn...ion.html

it's not even an "untested claim" because your eu has been proven to be pseudoscience

Apr 22, 2016
they are plainly telling us something very different -- and for this reason, the implications of stars forming much like lightning -- along branching filaments -- are largely ignored
@ha
oh, well then.... by all means, write up your groundbreaking study and submit it to the astrophysical journals for peer review and go collect your Nobel!

should be easy, considering your implications above, right?

if you're gonna troll, at least come up with something more interesting or link source material from a reputable site to substantiate your claim

what you posted above is called a "false claim" by definition
http://www.auburn...edu(...)

...an "untested claim" because your eu has been proven to be pseudoscience

- StumpRump
How about providing us with YOUR OWN substantiation as evidence that proves EU to be pseudoscience...WITHOUT links from Wiki, YouTube or other web sources, i.e. searching google. Do you even have a knowledge base of your own re EU?

Apr 22, 2016
It's honestly rather hard to imagine how one goes about disproving any paradigm today, given the ad hoc nature of entrenched cosmology. If a paradigm which cannot locate 95% of its bits and pieces is not considered a reason to doubt, it should be obvious that the effort to "save appearances" has consequences for claims that other paradigms are somehow disqualified.

Clearly, there are element of choice, politics and hegemony involved in the process.

Apr 22, 2016
You seem to have already forgotten the actual groundbreaking observations, which are not in this vague press release, but rather the former one ...

http://sci.esa.in...lky-way/

"Observations with ESA's Herschel space observatory have revealed that our Galaxy is threaded with filamentary structures on every length scale."

"these observations revealed that filaments, which may extend to several light-years in length, appear to have a universal width of about one third of a light year."

"In addition, the material along filaments is not at all static: astronomers have detected what appear to be accretion flows, with the most prominent filaments drawing matter from their surroundings through a network of smaller filaments."

Like lightning.

Scientists can pretend that they knew it all along, but it's obvious that none of this has anything to do with gravity, A RADIAL FORCE.

Apr 22, 2016
The fact that the gravitational framework can be wildly contorted to support basically any conjecture today says far more about the framework than its fit to the data. We learn a lot about the scientific community each time that an anomalous observation so obviously fails to elicit questions publicly aired about the framework's legitimacy ...

The appropriate words are ...

- insulated from real critique
- often in error, but never in doubt
- a collective, by now cultural, avoidance of the difficult questions
- extravagant spenders of govt funds, being wrong is simply an excuse to publish another paper
- dogmatic adherence to assumptions and initial hypotheses
- addicted to thought experimenting
- open questions will "eventually" be resolved
- then feigning convenient "discovery" as people grow impatient, to keep the whole thing from falling apart

What a colossal waste of some of the brightest minds in the world.

Apr 22, 2016
You're over-reacting: a Nobel for a set of catalogues and maps of areas of star formation? But a Nobel? - Get real.

Clearly trying to miss the point, or change the subject. His point is the discovery that stars form in filaments, exactly how the EU predicts.
based on the whole body of scientific endeavour over the past centuries: that's how things are done. In science

That's the most laughable bit of horseshit I've read in a while. If the statement were true, there would be no Plasma Cosmology because the proper physics would already be considered. This is remarkably obviously not the case.

Apr 22, 2016
Like lightning

NO! - and this is just one example of how the EU lets itself, and its' followers, down. It's not at all like lightning, it's filaments of matter light years long. You're frantically looking for any evidence to support your wild, unsubstantiated claims - which only the EU has the temerity to call a theory - that electricity is the prime mover in the cosmos.

Basically, nuh uh! That's the argument, nuh uh. No science, just I don't believe it so it can't be so.


Apr 23, 2016
evidence that proves EU to be pseudoscience
@o_s
you mean besides all the historical posts already given?
ok!
do you want to start with the epic fail of the electric sun (and the missing neutrino's too)?
http://xxx.lanl.g.../0009259

"Neutrino physics with accelerators and beyond", Achim Geiser, Reports on Progress in Physics 63(11): 1779-1849, Nov 2000; "Astrophysical neutrinos: 20th Century and Beyond", John Bachall, IUPAP Centennial Lecture, updated 5 Sep 2000. "Neutrino Oscillations and the Solar Neutrino Problem", W.C. Haxton, 28 Apr 2000; "Neutrino Physics", W.C. Haxton & B.R. Holstein, American Journal of Physics 68(1): 15-32 (Jan 2000); "Solar, Supernova and Atmospheric Neutrinos", A.B. Balantekin & W.C. Haxton, Canberra Summer School Lectures, updated 13 Mar 1999; "Topics in Neutrino Astrophysics", W.C. Haxton, The 1998 TASI Lectures, updated Jan 29, 1999; "The Nuclear Physics of Solar and Supernova Neutrino Detection"

2bcont'd

Apr 23, 2016
@o_s-pervert cont'd
still on the sun issue, mind you!
just moving ahead to convection problems with the eu

"Stellar Interiors: Physical Principles, Structure and Evolution", C.J. Hanson & S.D. Kawaler, Springer-Verlag, 1994. See chapter 5, "Heat Transfer by Convection". For discussions of the role of the Reynolds number, I consulted "Atmospheric Convection", Kerry A. Emanuel, Oxford University Press 1994, and "Fluid Dynamics", Victor L. Streeter, McGraw-Hill, 1948. The deep solar (stellar) interior is non-convective. Scott's introduction to "problem" two can be read to imply that standard solar models make the sun convective from the center to the surface. In fact, current solar models place the lower boundary of the convective zone at about 0.72 solar radii. Below that, energy transport is entirely radiative. See "Solar Models: current epoch and time dependences, neutrinos, and helioseismological properties.", Bahcall, Pinsonneault & Basu, 17 October 2000.

2Bcont'd

Apr 23, 2016
@o_s cont'd
of course, i have a lot, lot, lot more on just the problems with their "electric sun" or electric stars issues... too many studies and references to keep listing, because i have at least 10,000 characters plus more

so, perhaps you want to talk specifics?

other than the obvious problems they have with linking pseudoscience websites instead of actual peer reviewed journal studies?

but then there is the misinterpretations of actual studies or the flat refusal to accept known physical proven concepts (magnetic reconnection comes to mind here... and gravity... and Roche limits... ask cantdrive about the breakup fail he tried WRT the following planetary impact of D/1993 F2)

then there is the oft repeated blatant false claim (means lie) that astrophysicists don't know plasma physics, debunked by any college curriculum that offers the Astro program

there is far too much to keep listing!

but you keep believing them... it fits your delusional religious mind

Apr 23, 2016
It's honestly rather hard to imagine how one goes about disproving any paradigm today
@haTROLL
besides being conspiracist ideation, of course you think you have to believe this because otherwise it means you got conned
see also:
https://en.wikipe...c_method

or:
http://journals.p....0075637

.

.

.

.

Basically, nuh uh!
@cdTROLL
by all means, please demonstrate how all plasma is exactly like lightning

don't forget to bring the evidence to the table

yep
Apr 23, 2016
Predictions of the EU are based in lab expirements.
http://arxiv.org/...1027.pdf
Stump there are still not enough neutrinos to support standard model.
Cantdrive is on point saying the astrophysical community is at a loss, especially when lead scientist admit there is charge in space but "it does not do anything"
You boys stick to your magic math and pretend you know everything.

Apr 23, 2016
Stump there are still not enough neutrinos to support standard model
@yep
but that is only part of the epic fail of the "electric sun"... a small part that we know a lot more about thanks to real science, not the predictions or stupidity of the eu
Cantdrive is on point saying the astrophysical community is at a loss
no, she isn't
for starters, if Cassini landed on cd's head after NASA intentionally brought it to her and parked it there, she would claim it was "luck" or some idiotic eu bullshite

so, You boys stick to your magic math and pretend you know everything.
because, unlike you electric morons, i follow the evidence, regardless... and that is the one major failure of the eu

the lack of any kind of evidence that is reputable at all

like i said above to the idiot obutthead... that is just a teaser from simple aspects of just one epic fail of the eu...
science has plenty more

Apr 23, 2016
Sigma 5 at the LHC because "it quacks like a duck..."
http://articles.l...20120705


Apr 23, 2016
filaments of matter light years long

Which is plasma, yang know the same stuff lightning is, although it's mostly in dark and glow discharge. Stars are primarily where the arc discharge occurs.

Apr 23, 2016
Re: "it's filaments of matter light years long. You're frantically looking for any evidence to support your wild, unsubstantiated claims"

Let's not forget that astronomers initially assumed that radio waves from space were either a hoax or a mistake. Since the birth of radio astronomy, all sky surveys have been generated at the 21-cm HI hydrogen wavelength. This wavelength is very special in that it penetrates dusty areas; thus the 2-d maps can oftentimes include enormously complex features at great distances from one another, overlapping onto this single 2-d representation.

Modern cosmologists tend to run the 2d map through algorithms. They're lazy.

The real analysis is being done by radio astronomers like Gerrit Verschuur. It's a painstaking hand analysis, and it definitively shows the very same filaments shown by Herschel. These things twist around and knot, much like laboratory plasma filaments carrying current. He refuses to call them "clouds".

Apr 23, 2016
The only radial aspect to what we are seeing is that along the filament. This process in the plasma laboratory goes by the name of Marklund convection. It is a scavenging of ions from the surrounding space. The conduction of the filament exerts an electromagnetic sump action on the surrounding ions. As those ions are drawn in, they also exert a drag on the neutrals. The same effect is observed in high-voltage power lines here on Earth.

What we see happening with the Herschel data is very much like the phenomenon of ball lightning here on Earth. These spherical structures form along the length of the filamentary discharge. The process apparently scales up to enormous sizes.

The idea that we would go so far out of our way to favor the original theory over what the data is so obviously showing is really quite sad. There is no reason at infer gravitational collapse here because the geometry is just completely wrong.

Apr 24, 2016
Re: "All of this is at the scale of a few lightyears. How does this back up any of your ideas?"

The fact is that we've seen the Debye limit violated more than once, and in all instances, these violations were outrageous theoretical violations:

IN THE AURORA:

In these regions, wikipedia reports that the theoretical Debye length should restrict electric fields to 1 millimeter. When one yet further considers that red sprites, a form of upper-atmospheric lightning which can connect to the lower ionosphere, can reach 50km in length, it would seem that the Debye length has failed to constrain the discharge by a factor of 50 million-to-1.

WHILE FLYING BY HYPERION:

The solar wind is theoretically limited to EM discharges of only 10 meters. The Cassini mission experienced an electric discharge at 2,000 km from the object. That's 2,000 km when the theorists were assuming a limit of 10 m.

Apr 24, 2016
SUN-EARTH "FLUX TRANSFER EVENTS":

These are oftentimes called "magnetic portals", as if there is nothing causing the magnetic field -- which is curious in light of the fact that we are also asked to believe that magnetic fields are like "fossils". Once the confusing jargon is removed, it is just an electric discharge between the Sun and the Earth. They happen every 8 minutes, and the connection is as wide as the Earth itself.

The Earth is 92 million miles from the Sun. Thus, the theoretical Debye limit in this case was off by a factor of 9-million-to-1.

The Debye limit is nonsense. We do not yet know what the true limit for electric field sizes is a plasma. The Debye limit is probably still useful under certain theoretical conditions, but it is clear that these conditions are frequently violated.

Apr 24, 2016
it would seem that the Debye length has failed to constrain the discharge by a factor of 50 million to 1.

Oops...so much for theoretical beliefs. 50 million to 1, I think that's 5 Sigma in the standard theory, is it not?

Apr 24, 2016
Modern cosmologists tend to run the 2d map through algorithms. They're lazy.


No, they're rigorous. Pawing though the data by hand is good for some things like identifying artifacts but almost useless at other things like establishing correlation. Correlation by eye is worthless, you cannot quantify a result if all you have is a few examples picked out by hand. A statistician would laugh at you, correlation is a statistical test. With any two uncorrelated quantities you expect coincidences, the difference between coincidence and correlation is how many you find against how many you expect if they were uncorrelated, you can't do that if you're picking them out arbitrarily.

The people who followed up Verschuur's showed is how terrible correlation by eye really was. If the CMB was really correlated with the HI then a simple cross correlation would have shown that, it didn't. Don't confuse laziness with doing research properly.

Apr 25, 2016
Scientists can pretend that they knew it all along, but it's obvious that none of this has anything to do with gravity, A RADIAL FORCE. -HannesAlfven

Electrical force is a radial force. Magnetic force is just electrical force with a correction for relative motion. Gravity has its own motion correction known as Gravitomagnetism. There are so many similarities between electromagnetism and gravity that gravity has its own version of Maxwell's Equations. So what you thought was an argument was just another demonstration of your own ignorance.

Apr 25, 2016
Re: "If the CMB was really correlated with the HI then a simple cross correlation would have shown that, it didn't."

You seem to be discounting Verschuur's claims without fully understanding what they are. There is no reason at all that cosmologists would have formerly discounted Verschuur's mechanism, as it is not an aspect of gravitational cosmology.

Verschuur has stated as much:

"Because the WMAP team didn't consider or know about the contribution of such a phenomenon they didn't try and subtract it as they did numerous other electromagnetic 'contaminants' in their data reduction, says Verschuur."

And, I'm sorry, but your explanation does not at all address how an algorithm which is designed for one specific purpose is supposed to identify and pick apart overlapping filaments. It should be obvious that the algorithm will not be able to differentiate these distances & features. Only a human could do that.

Apr 25, 2016
Re: "Electrical force is a radial force."

Google "plasma globe".

Your radial electric force is due to a single particle which is not in motion, but plasma physics describes the collective motions of charged particles. You're not operating at the correct scale. And none of what you've said in your response explains why branching filaments would accrete spheres to form stars. And if you actually COULD explain it, this conversation would have already been over.

Apr 26, 2016
Your radial electric force is due to a single particle which is not in motion, but plasma physics describes the collective motions of charged particles. You're not operating at the correct scale.
My gravitational force can be applied to systems of particles in motion. Take, for example, our Galaxy. The stars in the disk are generally moving in the same direction and can thus be considered to be a mass 'current.' Or is this too large of a scale for you?

Apr 26, 2016
My gravitational force can be applied to systems of particles in motion. Take, for example, our galaxy.

Sadly, on that scale gravity fails miserably to explain observed motion. Unless of course you resort to magical fairy dust to explain the discrepancy...

Apr 26, 2016
Nevertheless, the filaments do suggest electromagnetic effects.

Careful to what you admit there, a simple statement such as that opens a big, very big can of worms being nearly the entire Universe is filamentary.

Apr 26, 2016
You are jumping to conclusions.

LOL, after 75 years of intense searching there is nothing whatsoever. Yet after a couple months of an inadequate searching for double layers around 67p it is a foregone fact they don't exist. No double standardstandard at all...

Apr 27, 2016
The leap to DM was a huge jump to conclusions, based upon inadequate knowledge of the plasma the makes up 99.999% of the Universe. Sadly all the possibilities weren't exhausted before the jump to fairy dust was made. Plasma Cosmologists have solved the DM problem (decades ago) but no one cares because they have convinced themselves they know what they don't have an effing clue about.

Apr 27, 2016
Re: "You are jumping to conclusions. If there is DM gravity works fine."

The situation is more dire than it seems.

Dark energy and the Higgs Boson were announced as though they were discoveries. Yet, those who understand the history know that both were needed to "keep the appearances." Each one necessitated the next. Were it not for those "discoveries," the questions we ask here on physorg would be asked more publicly. The scientific community in truth abuses the trust it has secured with the public. It's even the title of a recent book -- Bankrupting Physics: How Today's Top Scientists Are Gambling Away Their Credibility. Chapter 3 explains how dark energy was actually a fudge factor needed to reconcile two different cosmic yardsticks.

There is this sense that things are okay. You feel that way because these people have "saved the appearances." But, at the point where you fool yourself that these were "discoveries," then you are lying to even yourself.

Apr 27, 2016
The same will predictably happen for dark matter. There will be some sort of signal that is at the very edge of our ability to detect it. There will be much complex math that few understand. There will be a loose narrative. There might even be a simulation which was reverse-engineered. There might be one or two scientific papers; people will only look at how many scientists put their names on it (most won't read it, and few would understand it anyways, because it will be written so that few can critique it).

The Internet, science journalists and news media will celebrate. Within two weeks, people will start calling it a "fact."

This stuff is so tired.

But, like the other proclamations, the information will make us none the wiser. These are simply the ones that survive the awful system of scrutiny which has been constructed. The creative, worthwhile ideas are filtered out long before, at the point of peer review. What is left is what scientists specifically asked for.

Apr 27, 2016
Oh, for space sake! The trolls are lying, the images are textbook stellar nurseries. [ https://en.wikipe..._nursery ]

Then they attack cosmology, which has nothing to do with star formation as such. But as I have pointed out many times before, you can see DM (and DE) with your own eyes! On the first 3 peaks in the CMB spectra:

"So now we have it: by taking the three peaks together, we have the total amount of matter, the total amount of ordinary matter, and all the stuff together. Combining this data in different ways gives us the amount of dark matter (peaks 2 and 3) and dark energy (peaks 1 and 3). That plot is one of the major ways we know everything [in cosmology]." [ https://galileosp...niverse/ ]

Go watch the images yourself, then you have seen DM with your own eyes, easy as pie!

Apr 27, 2016
Also, it is obvious the trolls 'cosmologies', to be generous, can't predict the CMB, the DM, the DE and so the ubiquitous GR. Fail, fail, fail, fail - and so they fail as trolls. First rule of trolls: if you fail, stop bitching!

Apr 27, 2016

"So now we have it: by taking the three peaks together, we have the total amount of matter, the total amount of ordinary matter, and all the stuff together.

Anything is possible with statistical gymnastics. Oh, and do not to forget the "energy of nothing"....

Apr 27, 2016
Plasma Cosmology has an explanation for the CMB, doesn't need DM, DE is explained. And the "ubiquitous GR" is nothing more than "a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king."

Apr 28, 2016
Re: "Also, it is obvious the trolls 'cosmologies', to be generous, can't predict the CMB"

What is there to predict? Plasma beams produce microwaves as a consequence of electrons spiraling in a magnetic field. What you have convinced yourself is some metaphysical proof for a primordial event can also be explained by simply proposing a mechanism for thermalizing the synchrotron.

Here is how complicated this is:

You have a bunch of spikey signals as a necessary consequence of electric currents. You have a bell curve. How can you thermalize the spikey signals into a bell curve? It need only occur for an incredibly narrow window of EM, compared to the entire spectrum.

But, instead, you give us God in mathematical formulae, and repeat the word "fail" a bunch of times.

Apr 28, 2016
Re: "Oh, for space sake! The trolls are lying, the images are textbook stellar nurseries"

See paper at http://arxiv.org/...0201.pdf
Characterizing interstellar filaments with Herschel in IC5146

Go to page 2.

Apr 28, 2016
The leap to DM was a huge jump to conclusions, based upon inadequate knowledge of the plasma the makes up 99.999% of the Universe. Sadly all the possibilities weren't exhausted before the jump to fairy dust was made. Plasma Cosmologists have solved the DM problem (decades ago) but no one cares because they have convinced themselves they know what they don't have an effing clue about.

What if - plasma filamentary process IS DM...?

Apr 28, 2016
Oh, for space sake! The trolls are lying, the images are textbook stellar nurseries. [ https://en.wikipe..._nursery ]

Go watch the images yourself, then you have seen DM with your own eyes, easy as pie!

TL - what is generating each of those 3 peaks?

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