Milky way gamma-ray jets by plasma influx to galaxy center

[quantauniverse]

The first ever galactic gamma-ray JETS have been discovered emanating from the milky way's disk, by Harvard scientists Meng Su and Finkbeiner studying Fermi images. Finkbeiner says "Shoving 10,000 suns into the galaxy center would do this." "A molecular cloud weighing 10,000 solar masses would make the influx of motion for the galactic core to fire up again." These jets are so close and are the only ones near enough for Fermi to be able to detect. They are at a 15 degree angle to the bubbles discovered in 2010, and of the same 27,000 light year length. Obviously they are a permanent ancient feature, and must be common in all galaxies. The scientists explain fully the electromagnetic phenomena forces of plasma rotation producing the jets, but always again the collaborators make up black holes as the reason for their formation, instead of just sticking to the facts. Birkeland pinches explain the influx of plasma that causes the jets.
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2012/06/milky-way-gamma-ray-jets-produced-by.html
http://redorbit.com/news/space/1112544398/gamma-rays-from-milky-way%E2%80%99s-past-show-historically-active-black-hole

[sjw40364]

Because the facts do not fit their theory, so why stick to the facts?

[quantauniverse]

the facts are the data and observations that prove EU true, but they malign distort the facts by making up their own cosmology interpretations.

[Xuxalina Rihhia]

Because the facts do not fit their theory, so why stick to the facts?

Deductive theory is this: get the data, adjust hypothesis/theory to fit data, then publish (EU)

Inductive theory is this: get the data, manipulate the data to fit hypothesis/theory, then publish (Mainstream "astronomy.)

Black holes are mathematical constructs made by dividing by zero. if they are infinitely dense in infinitely small volume, then how could one be 2 solar masses and another be 2 million solar masses in the "singularity?" Infinite density in zero space should be infinite mass and the so-called black holes are anything but infinite in mass. The "black holes" in galaxies are all plasmoids, be they galactic plasmoids or quasars. This brings me to another question, what is the difference between quasars and the plasmoids of say, our own galaxy. Is one bigger than the other, with more mass? Could a quasar have planets orbiting around it, including one that might support life? Thanks in advance for the answers, since I'm curious about such things.

[Goldminer]

Because the facts do not fit their theory, so why stick to the facts?

Deductive theory is this: get the data, adjust hypothesis/theory to fit data, then publish (EU)

Inductive theory is this: get the data, manipulate the data to fit hypothesis/theory, then publish (Mainstream "astronomy.)

Black holes are mathematical constructs made by dividing by zero. if they are infinitely dense in infinitely small volume, then how could one be 2 solar masses and another be 2 million solar masses in the "singularity?" Infinite density in zero space should be infinite mass and the so-called black holes are anything but infinite in mass. The "black holes" in galaxies are all plasmoids, be they galactic plasmoids or quasars. This brings me to another question, what is the difference between quasars and the plasmoids of say, our own galaxy. Is one bigger than the other, with more mass? Could a quasar have planets orbiting around it, including one that might support life? Thanks in advance for the answers, since I'm curious about such things.

IMHO, A QUASAR is a protogalaxy. All the stars and planets orbiting the stars are forming inside the QUASAR. Of course, I've never been inside a QUASAR, and no one else I know has been either. Your questions are very good, the answers to them are what still need to be discovered.