A New Look at Near Neighbors,
Part Two
Oct
22, 2009
The standard model and the
Electric Universe model paint
fundamentally different pictures of
how galaxies are formed and driven.
In Part One of this article, the
Electric Universe theory's proposal
that magnetic fields are integral to
galaxy formation was examined. A
galaxy originates through the
Bennett pinch of two or more
Birkeland currents which also trap
interstellar gas as they rotate
inwards towards each other. Star
formation begins in the galactic
core created by the interstellar
plasma trapped between the Birkeland
filaments.
However, what is found when magnetic
fields are measured in some
galaxies? Rainer Beck made extensive
observations of galactic magnetic
fields and put some focus on M31 and
M33 In a recent
paper summarizing his
observations:
“Ordered fields with spiral
structure exist in grand-design,
barred, flocculent and even in
irregular galaxies. The strongest
ordered fields are found in interarm
regions, sometimes forming 'magnetic
spiral arms' between the optical
arms.”
These magnetic fields tracing the
spiral arms are established by
current flowing through them, both
from the intergalactic circuit
feeding the galaxy, as well as from
homopolar action of the galaxy
itself. The magnetic fields Beck
mentions exist because the spiral
arms behave as large Birkeland
filaments.
In a separate paper, Beck looks at
the magnetic fields in M31. The
Andromeda galaxy is dominated by a
magnetic ring (or torus), whose
magnetic field is radially oriented.
As Beck states, there is no existing
explanation for this magnetic ring.
However, one can imagine that
homopolar motor action is driving
the rotation of charged plasma at a
distance from the galactic center.
The moving plasma ring (i.e.
electric current) establishes a
magnetic field that further pinches
the rotating charged torus, which
further strengthens the field.
Synchrotron radiation from the ring
illuminates the ring in the radio
spectrum.
M33 has no such magnetic ring.
However, as the Electric Universe
model predicts, it displays a
magnetic spiral structure, with the
greatest magnetic polarization
between the visible spiral arms.
Similar structures are seen in other
galaxies, NGC 6946, for example. The
work on
NGC 6946 is also by Beck, where
he identifies large scale magnetic
fields in the spiral arms:
“Three more magnetic arms are
discovered in the outer galaxy,
located between HI arms. The RM
structure function confirms
large-scale coherent fields. The
observed anti-correlation between
the field’s pitch angles and the RM
values is a possible signature of
helical fields.”
The ordered spiral arrangement of
the magnetic fields, coupled with
the dynamo signature overlaid on the
spiral structure, aligns well with
the postulated galactic circuit
described in Part One.
In the standard model a
super-massive black hole in the
galactic core is deemed essential
for driving the gravitational
formation of a galaxy. In contrast,
the Electric Universe model views
the galactic core as an incidental
result of interstellar plasma
trapped between two or more
Birkeland filaments.
In 2001, a
paper by Merritt et al. proposed
that M33 lacked the super-massive
black hole required by the standard
model. However, the authors did not
completely lose faith and postulated
a central black hole, but one that
is over three orders of magnitude
smaller than the theory requires.
The stellar orbital velocities near
the core are far too low to support
the presence of a compact mass
equivalent to the “typical”
super-massive black hole. If that’s
the case, then how did the galaxy
form in the standard model?
A quote from an article about the
discovery states:
“Douglas Richstone of the University
of Michigan, who has been a
prominent champion of the role of
black holes in galaxy formation,
said he did not understand how
bulgeless galaxies like M33 could
have formed without a supermassive
black hole. 'I think it's a problem
for the black hole story,' he said."
EU theory predicts that the
rotational energy of a galaxy is
influenced by the currents flowing
radially in the galactic plane, but
does not require a specific
rotational velocity profile.
Depending on the magnitude of the
radial current, there will be
different rotational velocity
profiles. This is similar to what is
observed with stars. Stars with
greater current densities are
observed to have higher rotational
velocities.
In essence, there are some
fundamental distinctions between the
two models:
1) The standard model requires the
rotational velocity of a galaxy
closer to the core to exhibit a
steep rise (i.e. a compact body in
the form of a supermassive black
hole must reside in the galactic
core). The Electric Universe model
has no requirements on the velocity
profile close to the core.
2) The standard model requires a
flat rotational velocity towards the
edge of the galaxy, indicating a
dark matter halo. The Electric
Universe model has no such
requirement, and can explain
different velocity profiles based on
varying electric current densities.
3) The Electric Universe model
requires galaxies to exhibit
coherent large scale magnetic
fields, these will be particularly
evident around active star forming
regions, and will trace the spiral
arms. The standard model has no such
requirement and would predict
younger galaxies to have no coherent
magnetic fields.
Some obvious galactic features can
be used to test the validity of the
two theories. Have there been
galaxies observed without
“supermassive black holes” or
without “dark matter”? Yes, there
have and this should cause the
community to rethink the validity of
the model, but they have not.
Have there been galaxies observed
with magnetic fields exhibiting
patterns predicted by the Electric
Universe model? Yes, there have, and
in addition there have been no
galaxies observed without magnetic
fields.
However, the astronomical community
appears to have an infinite capacity
to ignore unwelcome data. It is not
uncommon to discover articles where
observations obviously falsify the
standard model (as in the paper
mentioned above) but the researchers
simply claim there is more to learn.
That is undoubtedly true, but they
are being disingenuous by not
grappling with the major issues
uncovered by those findings.
The wheels of change do turn slowly,
but they turn nonetheless. If the
history of science has shown us
anything, it is that scientific
dogma does not survive very long
after its main supporters pass away.
In the meantime, a coordinated and
formalized study of the electrical
properties of the Universe itself
must wait. This is a shame, since
there have never been better tools
available for studying the magnetic
and electric properties of the
Universe.
Tom Wilson
|