More mystery objects detected near Milky Way's supermassive black hole
Astronomers have discovered several bizarre objects at the Galactic Center that are concealing their true identity behind a smoke screen of dust; they look like gas clouds, but behave like stars.
At today's American Astronomical Society Meeting in Denver, a team of researchers led by UCLA Postdoctoral Scholar Anna Ciurlo announced their results, which they obtained using 12 years of data taken from W. M. Keck Observatory on Maunakea, Hawaii.
"These compact dusty stellar objects move extremely fast and close to our Galaxy's supermassive black hole. It is fascinating to watch them move from year to year," said Ciurlo. "How did they get there? And what will they become? They must have an interesting story to tell."
The researchers made their discovery by obtaining spectroscopic measurements of the Galactic Center's gas dynamics using Keck Observatory's OH-Suppressing Infrared Imaging Spectrograph (OSIRIS).
"We started this project thinking that if we looked carefully at the complicated structure of gas and dust near the supermassive black hole, we might detect some subtle changes to the shape and velocity," said Randy Campbell, science operations lead at Keck Observatory. "It was quite surprising to detect several objects that have very distinct movement and characteristics that place them in the G-object class, or dusty stellar objects."
Astronomers first discovered G-objects at the Milky Way's monster black hole more than a decade ago; G1 was first seen in 2004, and G2 was discovered in 2012. Both were thought to be gas clouds until they made their closest approach to the supermassive black hole. G1 and G2 somehow managed to survive the black hole's gravitational pull, which can shred gas clouds apart.
"If they were gas clouds, G1 and G2 would not have been able to stay intact," said UCLA Astronomy Professor Mark Morris, a co-principal investigator and fellow member of UCLA's Galactic Center Orbits Initiative (GCOI). "Our view of the G-objects is that they are bloated stars – stars that have become so large that the tidal forces exerted by the central black hole can pull matter off of their stellar atmospheres when the stars get close enough, but have a stellar core with enough mass to remain intact. The question is then, why are they so large?"
It appears that a lot of energy was dumped into the G-objects, causing them to swell up and grow larger than typical stars.
GCOI thinks that these G-objects are the result of stellar mergers—where two stars orbiting each other, known as binaries, crash into each other due to the gravitational influence of the giant black hole. Over a long period of time, the black hole's gravity alters the binary stars' orbits until the duo collides. The combined object that results from this violent merger could explain where the excess energy came from.
"In the aftermath of such a merger, the resulting single object would be "puffed up", or distended, for a rather long period of time, perhaps a million years, before it settles down and appears like a normal-sized star," said Morris.
"This is what I find most exciting," said Andrea Ghez, founder and director of GCOI. "If these objects are indeed binary star systems that have been driven to merge through their interaction with the central supermassive black hole, this may provide us with insight into a process which may be responsible for the recently discovered stellar mass black hole mergers that have been detected through gravitational waves."
What makes G-objects unusual is their "puffiness." It is rare for a star to be cloaked by a layer of dust and gas so thick that astronomers do not see the star directly. They only see the glowing envelope of dust. To see the objects through their hazy environment, Campbell developed a tool called OSIRIS-Volume Display (OsrsVol).
"OsrsVol allowed us to isolate these G-objects from the background emission and analyze the spectral data in three dimensions: two spatial dimensions, and the wavelength dimension that provides velocity information," said Campbell. "Once we were able to distinguish the objects in a 3-D data cube, we could then track their motion over time relative to the black hole."
"Keck Observatory has been observing the Galactic Center every year for 20 years with some of the best instruments and technologies," said Ciurlo. "This alone gives a very high quality and consistent data set, which allowed us to go deep into the analysis of the data.
These newly discovered infrared sources could potentially be G-objects—G3, G4, and G5 – because they share the physical characteristics of G1 and G2.
The team will continue to follow the size and shape of the G-objects' orbits, which could provide important clues as to how they formed.
The astronomers will especially be paying close attention when these dusty stellar compact objects make their closest approach to the supermassive black hole. This will allow them to further observe their behavior and see whether the objects remain intact just as G1 and G2 did, or become a snack for the supermassive black hole. Only then will they give away their true nature.
"We'll have to wait a few decades for this to happen; about 20 years for G3, and decades longer for G4 and G5," said Morris. "In the meantime, we can learn more about these puffballs by following their dynamical evolution using OSIRIS."
"Understanding G-objects can teach us a lot about the Galactic Center's fascinating and still mysterious environment. There are so many things going on that every localized process can help explain how this extreme, exotic environment works," said Ciurlo.
Explore further
User comments
I am in awe!
OK then, why? Perhaps because they are within a region of space containing extreme matter density, thereby providing a sink for the draining of the all pervasive sub-quantum field components.
This extreme migration toward the sink alters the surrounding region of space to make more fertile the conditions for accelerated generation of new matter, especially within the cores of nearby stars. These close by stars then become extremely active, thereby outgassing to the extreme to produce their surrounding clouds. For this reason the clouds do not get broken apart, since they are being continually sourced from the outgassing, extremely active orbiting stars.
Ah, but that is too much for a merger maniac to consider! Stay instead safely within your technical sandbox. Dream on.
Or, gravity is not responsible for the dynamics at these scales. Shhh, but don't tell the gravity only acolytes though
Kinda funny isn't it? You'd think as smart as these Cosmologists imagine themselves to be that they'd eventually stumble upon the most obvious reason for this, like NO BLACK HOLE at galactic center point Sgr A.
What a way to live a fantasy, deny the obvious, that if everything else at Sgr A can be imaged, how is it that the most obvious object so magically escapes imaging?
Well at least you can admit it. And you absolutely must be if you believe in pseudoscientific claptrap of BH, DM, and such.
Lol. From the loon that thinks comets are electric rocks, and that Earth used to orbit Saturn! Your whole cult is built on pseudoscience, woo boy.
The only black hole is the one in your brain sucking all the common sense out,
Your trademark little round man still living in your divorced mommy's basement.
.......at least we know Saturn & Earth exist, you can't say that about your black hole fantasy at the galactic centerpoint known as Sgr A.......hey little round man, you got pics? I do: http://ircamera.a...ter.htm, 7th & 8th pics from the top of the page.....no black hole at Sgr A,
If there is no BH at the point Sgr A, how much force of gravity can you imagine exists there explaining why these so called gas clouds are not being torn asunder? Here I'll give you the EXACT answer, ZERO, invoking the observable effects of the Inverse Square Law. Call upstairs to mommy & have her toss down another bag of potato chips into the basement for you.
Sorry, what common sense would that be? That Earth used to orbit Saturn? Physically impossible. That Venus was spat out of Jupiter, and did handbrake turns around the solar system? Physically impossible. I could go on, but you get the idea. No, the difference here is down to those with scientific knowledge and understanding, and those who are too stupid to see why their woo is ridiculed. Which is why they get conned by loons like Thornhill.
Whereas in an Electric Universe this is not only possible, it is expected.
"Gravitational systems are the 'ashes' of prior electrical systems." Hannes Alfven
Sorry, who said this was a gas cloud? It seems to me that that is not what the article is saying. What is their mass? What is their current distance from the BH? As they say, we'll have to wait at least 20 years to be sure. And yet a scientifically illiterate loon on the comments section of a science news site somehow knows precisely what they are, and what should happen to them. Sorry, I'll stick to real science by those that understand it, as opposed to Dunning-Kruger affected nutjobs.
As far as science is concerned, there is no 'electric universe.' Please point us to their scientific publications on any relevant science. These people believe Earth used to orbit Saturn! Why on Earth would anybody take them seriously?
says jd
Earth orbiting Saturn? Interesting concept. If such an orbit had been possible, one would think that it should have happened when the planets in our solar system were still smaller pieces of rock without enough of a gravitational pull from a sufficiently coalesced Sun to rein each one in to revolve around the Sun itself. Not to agree or disagree, but depending on the age you are referring to, the inner planets could have revolved/orbited around larger gassy planets such as Saturn as though they were its moons. It is also possible that near-misses could have knocked the inner planets out of those orbits and begun their orbits around the Sun.
WRT an "Electric Universe", HOW do you KNOW the science is infallible as it is now?
https://www.scien...galaxies
"…with apparently separate galaxies connected into vast intergalactic webs by invisible filaments of dark matter." It also mentions "threads" which I take to mean that these threads/filaments are electrical in nature, whether dark matter or not.
Also, https://www.scien...tstart=1
mentions 'filaments'. The picture in this link is very reminiscent of the neurons all linked by synapses within a mammalian brain - also electrical.
Nope, couple of weeks ago last Tuesday, according to these nutjobs! Well, .....within human memory, because our ancestors wrote about it! Not really, but that is how they've misinterpreted the mythology to come up with this nonsense. Google "The Saturn Myth" by David Talbott. Total woo.
says jd
Is that your version of a row of vagina hats?
says jd
I am reading the Kindle version of The Saturn Myth by Talbott. I will get back to you as soon as I have finished. Thanks for your patience.
Cher, I got to know one thing. You pay for him or you are reading a pirate copy?
S'il vous plaît and hurry Skippy, I am sure I am not alone in really wanting to know how he turns out. It's got to be at least as interesting and informational as the plasma-magnetic-electrical-universe stuffs that get posted up here.
De rien mon amie, but I can only speak for me. Everybody else might be really impatient about hearing all about it, and they might get rude if you take too long.
Oh yeah, I almost forget. Is your own edition of the Saturn Myth the version with the directions in the back on how to make a silly looking pointy cap?
I cannot comment on every one of the paragraphs from the book, whether I agree with them or not. Space doesn't allow it.
In the Introduction, the first paragraph says that: "The planet Saturn today is recognizable only to those who know where to look for it. But a few thousand years
ago Saturn dominated the earth as a sun, presiding over a universal Golden Age."
"A few thousand years ago"? "Dominated the Earth as a Sun"? "Within human memory"?
--CONTINUED--
I see what MAY have happened. IMO, it is likely that Talbott read the Bible, the part of the Old Testament in Genesis1-3 that says, "And God said, Let there be light, and there was light", and then he tried to make sense of that passage by thinking that the "source of that light" was the giant gassy planet, Saturn. (While there IS a possibility that a giant gassy planet could have ignited and shone briefly, it would have occurred BILLIONS of years ago and long before humans were created, as well as the first single-cell life forms previously created in the waters of Earth.)
He MAY have rejected the "6-day 24-hour creation cycle", as I do. But he needed a replacement to explain how and why the Creator could provide the Light for the subsequent growth of grasses, herbs and fruit trees, which would be dependent upon light to grow. Gen1-11,12. As I said earlier, the Sun would not have coalesced sufficiently and ignited at that time.
--CONTINUED--
Talbott MAY have somehow equated the ancient Sun worshippers with those who later worshipped the planet Saturn as a god. It just as well could have been Jupiter which is closer to Earth. There may have been a lot of activity going on in outer space within our Solar System in those times and Velikovsky studied the historic artifacts and came up with his conclusions.
An ancient memory could have been handed down from the earliest Homo species through their generations through word-of-mouth or some other form of communication and then through symbolic carvings.
The 2 books by Immanuel Velikovsky and David Talbott are interesting reads, in any case. Thanks for the recommendation, jones.
says Whys
In your comment above, there is no evidence of any scientific knowledge/facts offered by you to offset your "tinfoil hat cuckoo conspiracy theorist" opinion of other commenters. What a waste of characters and space. But I see that you were rated a '5' by five people. Your comment only deserves a '1', but that is MY opinion.
The idea here is that the Earth, Venus, and Mars were part of the Saturnian system, Saturn being a brown dwarf star. The Sun was already formed, possibly a Herbig-Haro object or a victim of one which interfered with the Saturnian system. Saturn and it system of planets were then captured by the Sun and it's electromagnetic influence. Saturn was the first Sun, being the light of brown dwarf star are conducive of life, the conditions within its sphere of influence would have been Eden like. Eden was the whole of Earth, not just a small region of the Fertile Crescent. This explains tropical like flora and fauna found at the poles.
Once Saturn was captured, the electric currents powering it would have been usurped by the Sun and Saturn would dim. Saturn would have beelined it to its current position, Earth, Venus, and Mars in tow in a polar alignment.
Cont
The only problem is that the Earth, Venus and Mars were never part of the Saturnian system.
You can't really believe that?
Trust me; they do! Frightening, eh?
There were no humans alive to remember or record such planetary activity in our SS. The only possible way that humans could have known such activity would be if they were told it by Holy Angels or the Creator Himself.
Are you saying that the inner planets were closer in to the actual Sun while orbiting Saturn? That would mean that Saturn was also closer to the Sun which you say had existed already during the time that Saturn was also a sun. But if that were so, then the Sun would have drawn in Saturn....
-CONT'D-
...by enough grav. pull and the two bodies would have merged, as well as destroying the 4 planets (depending, of course, on the proximity/distance between the Sun and Saturn.
But IF you are saying that Saturn was in its present orbit with Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars orbiting your 'brown dwarf', there would still have had to be a certain distance between Saturn and those 4 planets (where was Jupiter in all this?), so that those 4 could continue attracting mass from the surrounding gases and dust.
But if the 4 planets orbited Saturn, then how did they come to advance closer to the Sun, which you say had already ignited? And why did Saturn lose its ignition and nuclear fusion/burn? My own answer to that would that it was Divine Intervention that caused such a chain of events. Similar to Trump winning and Hillary losing. LOL
Considering the general consensus these are extra large stars, are having their plasma stretched and pulled into the light radius stars their orbiting, what is all this dust in the mean getting up to?
With all these ravenous light radius stars there should not be a smidgen of dust left combined with these extra large stars the amount of gravity hovering up all the available dust.
It is surprising there is so much dust remaining after 5billion years!
"Saturn was the first Sun, being the light of brown dwarf star are conducive of life, the conditions within its sphere of influence would have been Eden like. Eden was the whole of Earth, not just a small region of the Fertile Crescent. This explains tropical like flora and fauna found at the poles.
Once Saturn was captured, the electric currents powering it would have been usurped by the Sun and Saturn would dim. Saturn would have beelined it to its current position, Earth, Venus, and Mars in tow in a polar alignment. "
says CD85
Yes, fossilised plant life has been found under the Antarctic ice fields, so that much is true. Plants were the first life forms in the waters after the first single-celled life had diversified/evolved into bacterial and plant/animal life.
I do not see how Saturn could have been 'captured' by the Sun and escaped from merging, again depending on proximity/distance.
-CONTINUED-
If your 'electric currents' powering Saturn had been absorbed by the Sun, then how was Saturn able to advance to its present/current position in the SS? I think that there are two possibilities: Divine Intervention or along comes a large planetary body with enough mass/weight, etc. to PULL Saturn out of its orbit around the Sun, leaving the 4 planets to remain orbiting the Sun and its sphere of influence. I will accept BOTH possibilities: one natural and one supernatural. Both, IMO, are plausible and more likely happened a BYA or more.
says CD5
This 'war of the gods" is man-made. There is only ONE Creator who has made all things possible and His Holy Angels.
The term/title God/god/gods is also man-made and is a reflection of man's fear of the unknown. The Creator knows this, and yet allows humans to make their mistakes in life. Religions are also man-made and are found to venerate the evil that is so often done by self-righteous humans.
Your 'Electric Currents' just MAY BE the Filaments that are spoken of in https://www.scien...galaxies
Filaments of Dark Matter. Electromagnetic Fields? Invisible Electric Currents connecting STARS to each other, as well as Galaxies? The possibilities are endless for those who are curious enough to check it out.
FTFY.
Your FTFY seems to be missing from my dictionary and Wiki, so I'll let it pass ss a cryptic remark that is of no great consequence, whether nice or nasty. Making changes to my above comment is not an improvement in the perception of your 'intelligence'. Like any other human, your are free to believe as you see fit. Just don't volunteer for a position at a military nuclear facility...unless it is for floor sweeper.
It would be fun to watch your facial expression(s) if the Electric Currents theory turned out to be credible and within scientific norms. If and when the theory is proven, please refrain from thinking thoughts of suicide or murdering CD85 and his EU buddies. Have a good day, sonny.
Trust me, unless the laws of physics change anytime soon, that will not be happening. Why do you think nobody takes it seriously?
An Antidote to Dave Talbott's "Saturn Thesis"
http://www.defend...dote.txt
says granville583762
Umm perhaps the cleaning lady failed to bring her vacuum cleaner to clean up the excess dust
because there was no Electric Current available?
hehe just joshing ya.
Comets and asteroids come in from interstellar space, bringing microscopic dust motes and gases with them. The Moon is said to be the home of residual superfine dust that can clog spacesuits of astronauts and instruments. Dust is everywhere. Even in us.
From the first stars...
Why? Do they only employ scientifically illiterate people? What sort of IQ test do you need to fail?
From @jonesdave, re cantdrive/EU claims re Saturn and Planetary dynamics 'history':and
From @Ojorf, re same:
Guys, ignore 'silly overlays' brought by @cantrdrive/EU 'religionists'. Just concentrate on actual known science:
- our solar system's planets have a 'history' of impacts, relocations, re-orientations etc:
- 'early' phase impacts destroyed many proto/full sized, planetary objects, one/more of which probably resulted in Asteroid Belt;
- strong gravitational interactions may have caused some inner planets to migrate outward and become gas giants there;
- mild (and severe, eg Uranus!) offset spin-axes also indications of 'relocating/re-orientating power of the 'earlier' formation dynamics;
- capture / loss of (even very large) moons/satellites were also likely events back then.
OK? :)
Hey @cantdrive85, maybe if the Electric Universe and the Plasma Universe 'crowd' had been the first to trademark/employ the prefix "DARK", then Electric Universe and Plasma Universe science/claims would be part of the 'dark' mainstream today....as 'dark somethings' have been all the rage in 'professional' mathematical/theoretical astronomy/cosmology 'explanations/excuses' for decades now. You missed that "dark" boat, mate! :)
Not just mammalian... But only electric after chemical interaction... Which, interestingly enough, is driven by smaller electric exchanges...
They alternate AND work together....
First, erase your preconceived notions. This isn't your dad's gravity only cosmology. Electromagnetic principles are the prime drivers of these interactions.
No, Saturn was its own system. So too with the Sun, two systems. They came too close to one another, their "wires crossed". Saturn was captured electromagnetically by the Sun.
Saturn and all of the planets are arranged based on their charge/physical characteristics with respect to the Sun.
It then would become apparent that the scientific aspects of @cantdrive's claims re re-locations/re-orientations, captures/losses etc during earlier planetary dynamics (over whatever epoch and via whatever mechanism: ie, gravity and/or electric), is scientifically valid and tenable. Maeaning that Ojorf's and your ridiculing of @cantdrive's whole post is like "throwing out the baby with the bath water" if you just ridicule instead of acknowledging what is correct science while ridiculing the irrelevant religious crap. Yes? :)
We have dark mode plasma, the biggest difference is dark mode plasma is actually real.
@cantdrive85.Ahhh, but you didn't 'trademark' it, did you! That was your first mistake; it allowed the 'dark' BB/Inflation/DE/'exotic' DM 'crowd' to GAZUMP you and 'corner' the 'dark prefix' market!
Speaking of 'prefix markets', these "dark" prefix gazumpers have lately been trying to gazump everyone on the "exotic" prefix when attributing 'dark properties' to 'dark matter' will-of-the-wisps. Missed that 'exotic' boat too, mate! A bit too slow to realize 'the next big fad' in 'dark/exotic mainstream' theoretical/mathematical 'explanations/excuses', aren't you? :)
Do you ever listen? Their whole frigging cult is built on this idiotic idea that, within human memory, Earth orbited Saturn in a polar configuration, no less, and that Venus was spat out of Jupiter at the same epoch. Now, if you think that is believable, you have even less brains than I credited you with. Nobody is talking about 'the grand tack', billions of years ago, happening over many millions of years. We weren't around to record that! If the EU loons were right, Earth and the Moon would not have been captured - they'd have been thrown out of the solar system.
What is the cut-off time for these events to be possible? Why are these events not possible in the current Universe? For what reason are these events only possible "billions of years ago"?
If there weren't common archetypes from all corners of the Earth that corroborated these myths/religions with a unified thread then it wouldn't hold water. All of the inhabitants of Earth from this era recorded the same events, they had to have seen the same phenomena. It had to to occur in the "heavens" for all to record the same events.
Guess what? That is an archaic term that used to be used for some plasmas that could not be seen in visible light in the lab. They are as detectable as any other type of plasma by spectrometry etc.
It is nothing to do with 'cut off' time. It is the amount of time this is all supposed to have happened in! And when it happened. And how it happened. It is total nonsense. Ask anybody that understands the science. Same with the loony Venus nonsense. Pure woo.
Only if you are crap at interpreting the mythology. Otherwise, it's woo.
And that is what I was doing, you supercilious prat.
So, are you saying that Saturn had its own SS while the Sun existed simultaneously as a separate SS? Did the Sun have its own planets, and if it did, what happened to those?
-CONT'D-
Also, is it possible that Saturn had planets orbiting it that were somehow destroyed and became the Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter, but were not the 4 inner planets of the Sun as you believe?
I agree that electromagnetism and gravitational pull could possibly work in tandem to move young planetary bodies around and into orbit, as long as they are initially far enough away from their star until they become tidally locked or are able to revolve on their axis.
What is confusing is how would Saturn have planets while the Sun had no planets ~5BYA when the Sun is so much larger than Saturn. There seems to be a huge discrepancy.
But I repeat - there were no life forms living on Earth in that epoch, and thousands of Earth years ago, the Earth and Moon had already been 'In situ' for billions of years.
My opinion is that you and Benni should reform your thinking and utilise your keen sense of logic and reason to arrive at a better conclusion re Saturn.
My market is in the Light of Scientific Truth. Those who want to pander darkness, deception, and pseudoscience can do so at their own peril and legacy.
"The biggest people with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest people with the smallest minds, think big anyway!"
Hedy Lamarr
Just wondering. Do you regard yourselves as 'Aussies'? If you do, then I presume that your ancestors arrived in Australia aboard a prison ship from England. You see, the ONLY people of Australia who have the absolute RIGHT to call themselves Aussies are those whose ancestors were arrested in England, loaded aboard a prison ship and sailed to Australia as convicts - men and women. Even if you have Aborigine ancestry also, you are NOT an Aussie unless at least one of your forefathers was a convict. It is an exclusive club, I might add, and newer arrivals from England/GB do not qualify. England had formerly been sending their convicts to America, mainly to the state of Alabama where many died. They were forbidden to send anymore convicts to America during and after the American Revolutionary War. So they were sent to Australia.
Interesting bit of history, yes?
Hell no. Why would I?
I have a thousand characters and limited time, what are ya gonna do?
The Sun obviously had planets. Mercury and the Moon are two prime candidates given their similar morphology. Most of the other gas giants were likely already part of the system given they too were identified in myth but as smaller players. Then again, there have been several tumultuous eras in human history which could possibly be due to stellar/planetary capture. Also, just as Venus appears to be a very "new" planet, so too does Titan exhibit some of these characteristics. In the EU view, planets do not coalesce out of a cloud per the standard theory, they are fused solid bodies "birthed" or expelled out of stars/gas giants.
Under the electrical stress of these events, new worlds may have been born of the electric arcs of these stars. There is a reason Venus' surface is at such an extreme temperature.
Yep, 92 terrestrial atmospheres of mainly CO2!
says CD85
I happen to agree that the "FILAMENTS" are that which are the connectors between stars AND galaxies, and that those filaments all carry the Electric Currents through them. I now think that the filaments have a lot of similarity to the communications medium within brains called 'Synapses' that enable one part of the brain to communicate with all others. So too, the filaments are elongated and are able to either lengthen or shorten to accommodate distances between stars/galaxies. I also believe that these filaments have a double usefulness, that of wormholes/tunnels which could enable an entity to travel from one galaxy to another without having to emerge.
Human testimony would suggest otherwise.
The surface is emanating heat beyond what the atmosphere can explain. Your runaway greenhouse effect is bollocks.
Part of my reason for coming to such conclusions as I have mentioned above, is that the picture in the link that I provided shows such filaments that connect stars and galaxies. It immediately reminded me of a portion of a brain where the synapses are firing while connecting neurons. To me, it is positively beautiful as well as logical - and it WORKS.
Nope, it isn't. And you will fail to back up that claim with science. As usual.
Good for you. You can join the club of precisely zero sane scientists who would agree with you, due to there being zero evidence for such a thing. And there would be.
The scalability of electromagnetism on display. Rupert Sheldrake has done some work on "Universal Knowledge", transmission of knowledge may be transmitted via the Morphic Fields.
https://www.sheld...oduction
says daveyjones
As I said, I was just wondering.
https://www.space...ure.html
"The average temperature on Venus is 864 degrees Fahrenheit (462 degrees Celsius). Temperature changes slightly traveling through the atmosphere, growing cooler farther away from the surface. Lead would melt on the surface of the planet, where the temperature is around 872 F (467 C)."
Just a modicum of common sense would tell one the surface is the source of the heat, per thermodynamics.
Wrong. If the heat were from the surface there would be convection in the atmosphere. There isn't. There is on Earth, as our surface is heated by the Sun. However, very little sunlight makes it to Venus' surface. And if the surface of Venus were molten only a few thousand years ago, it would likely still be molten. And it isn't. So, it must have cooled hellishly quickly to have a crust thick enough to support the sort of surface relief we see there.
says daveyjones
Have you invested heavily in what YOU believe as 'settled science'? A science that can never change according to new discoveries is a dead science. These filaments, I am certain, are being examined, explored, theorised/hypothesised and investigated to find out their exact compositions and their functions. Is it possible that you and others with your frame of mind are waiting for phys.org to produce an article favoring Electric Currents/filaments as scientific fact?
I am not ready to "join the club" and prefer to learn more about it in the meantime.
Strawman alert, you need to stop imposing your own beliefs, you're fooling yourself.
He's a New Zealander. He spent one year at the University in Auckland. He won't tell us why he only spent one year there, but it would be safe to presume it was because he couldn't cut it.
Is that Zordon's tech? morphing fields?
Sorry, CD but it is too funny to pass up on! It's morphing time!
For the record - and I have asked - no-one on the whole internet would deliberately choose to tell you which hemisphere they lived in with your creepy, stalker behaviour that has been going on for years now.
In fact, only 1% would not consider saying they were in a secret government program to colonize mars in order to escape your attention.
That 1% were dying later today so were willing to run the risk.....no...just got an email from them. They've changed their mind. They're not willing to ruin their last day being covered in duct tape in the back of your panel van, they'd lie to you too.
Wrong and wrong, weirdo. It takes a minimum of 3 years to get a degree, but you wouldn't know that. And where I was born has nothing to do with where I was educated, or where I live now. However, by the grace of whichever gods that do or do not exist, I am pretty sure it is nowhere near where you live. Which would be a good thing, if they are letting people who don't understand what radioactivity is within stones throw of nuclear power plants!
Really, woo boy? So, show us the calculations that have been done to account for a planet, with a rocky surface, being thrown out of a gas giant composed mainly of H and He. At what temperature does the H and He solidify to form basalt? The only people being fooled here, are the scientifically challenged loons that believe in this physics defying idiocy.
EDIT:
Or perhaps the basalt was already in existence at Jupiter?
Correct, and there is a whole load of literature on it. Try reading some of it.
I intend to. However, I find it fascinating the idea of a protoplanet having been ejected/exploded out of the Sun ~5BYA. During that epoch the Sun was still young enough to be in flux, enough to be so volatile and energetic with large flares repeatedly coming out of it in vast explosions of hot gases. Such flares have not occurred for hundreds of millions of years at least. I am referring to the type of flare that could reach where Earth is now - and beyond. It is possible that the Sun ejected a giant flare that reached Earth's current location. It would have been in the form of a gas ejecta gathering dust from the surrounding dust as it left the corona.
-CONTINUE
As it moved out of and away from the Sun it would have become molten as it cooled. After traveling a long distance it was held from going further by the Sun's grav. pull and CD's Electromagnetic Field.
CD85 has said: 'In the EU view, planets do not coalesce out of a cloud per the standard theory, they are fused solid bodies "birthed" or expelled out of stars/gas giants. "
I disagree with the "fused solid bodies" , They do not take that form until long after its "birth" and at a very long distance from the Sun where outer space is cold enough that the protoplanet congeals, attracts more dust while enlarging into a planet with a Magnetic Field. The core, outer core, lower mantle and part of the upper mantle are still hot, which is the reason why Earth has a Magnetic Field at all. Venus and Mars are said to have no molten core, thereby having no magnetic field. I can't say that I agree totally with the EU view. But I do favor Electric Current/Filaments between stars.
Good. Then you should be able to find the evidence for them in short order. Start with synchrotron radiation, WMAP, Planck & COBE. Let us know what you find.
SEU,
Look up Gerrit Vershuur and in regards to jonesdumb's challenge, he explains this in detail. And as Wal Thornhill has mentioned;
"If Arp and others are right and the Big Bang is dead, what does the Cosmic Microwave Background signify? The simplest answer, from the highly successful field of plasma cosmology, is that it represents the natural microwave radiation from electric current filaments in interstellar plasma local to the Sun. Radio astronomers have mapped the interstellar hydrogen filaments by using longer wavelength receivers. The dense thicket formed by those filaments produces a perfect fog of microwave radiation—as if we were located inside a microwave oven. Instead of the Cosmic Microwave Background, it is the Interstellar Microwave Background. That makes sense of the fact that the CMB is too smooth to account for the lumpiness of galaxies and galactic clusters in the Universe."
And who is Wal Thornhill, and why would anybody listen to him? Should I link to more of his idiotic beliefs, just to prove that he is totally clueless?
My above comment(s) were made after trying to draw some sort of logical and reasonable conclusion wrt the way and method that a small piece of aggregate could evolve and come into existence as a protoplanet floating in a dusty and gassy environment far from a local Star, regardless of the timeframe for it to accomplish its growth spurt. It seems to me that that small piece would not have much luck attracting enough gas and dust to itself in the right amounts that would provide it with a molten core and a Magnetic Field/Polarities/Spin, and would possibly remain a small piece of aggregate forever - unless it was attracted to and taken up by a Star. Otherwise, small pieces would likely collide with each other and smash and turn into dusty particles. Perhaps this sort of thing happens in other Star systems where there are no planets evident, whether gassy or rocky, of whatever size and composition.
@CD85
Interstellar Microwave Background sounds too limiting. How about Intergalactic Microwave Background?
Perhaps I err in my judgement, but to me, the theory that planets evolve merely by drawing in/attracting small and large pieces of dust and gas to itself and somehow manage to self-create a molten core almost as hot as the coolest part of the Sun, seems unattainable. And why isn't it happening NOW? I suppose it MAY be possible if its first layers are of hotly radioactive dust/elements that remain mostly in the center of the planet with occasional forays to the surface in the form of volcanoes/magma. The circulation of magma in the core enables life to exist on the surface of Earth.
But the idea of a young Sun, fully active and volatile, spewing out radioactive flares millions of miles from itself that creates planetary bodies, does seem very possible. As for the Sun pulling Saturn closer to itself, it just doesn't seem possible.
says CD85
My own estimation is that the CMBR is a transmitter of information...a conduit, if you will, that is a type of algorithm that also allows/prevents chaos/glitches in the Universe. It is programmable and the Developer/Programmer is that of whom most scientists and phys.org commenters deny exists.
Remember, you read it here first.
Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more