Super Masive Black Holes Ejecting Iron? is the Nuclear Sun Model Xploded?

Don't see what this has to do with black holes. Seems more probable, with the magnetic nature of iron, that some magnetic/electromagnetic force, not gravity, is moving iron.
Black holes are just an adjustment to an otherwise failed mathematical model. It's being used, along with unobservable and unmeasurable forms of energy and matter to make observations fit into the standard theories.
Most probably, plasma and electric universe physics has an explanation that doesn't require unobservable and untestable(read unfalsifiable) theories to fit this observation.

Jets were never predicted by any black hole theory. The acreation disc was an adhoc.

Gravity cannot account for a structured jet spanning thousands of light years. This is why magnetic fields were put in place as a "best bet". No mention of the electric currents that must create them though.

We have a device here on Earth that can account for what we see in AGN. Gamma rays, X rays, even fusion and yes even the jets. It's a plasma gun or a dense plasma focus device.

The spiral arms (currents) of the galaxy converge and pinch into the central plasmoid just as in the plasma gun.

I'm sure to be flamed by the keepers of the faith.

All I have to say is... lab proven science or adhoc guesses and unproven physics, the choice is yours.
Of course it means throwing an awfull lot of baggage away that comes with a gravity only universe, such as black holes, dark matter and the like. We couldn't have that now.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

How can you say on one hand "nothing can come out of a black hole", then on the other hand have the big bang theory?

You ask a good question, though the answer you assume is wrong. All physical singularities are not black holes. Singularities

Another big difference is that a black whole is in space-time, while the theory behind the big bang tells us that the singularity before the big bang was the whole of space-time. The big bang singularity was the whole universe -- nothing existing outside of it, so there was no "outside" of it -- no time, no space. it didn't expend matter into the universe, because there was no universe -- it was the universe. Therefore, a singularity that exists inside of space time can be quite different than one that exist outside of space-time.

As I said before, according to the theory of Hawking Radiation, black holes can appear to expel mass as it evaporates, but this evaporation is more like an "accounting trick" rather than it actually expelling mass.

Here's an interesting idea about the Big Bang by Sir Roger Penrose that is "sort-of" on topic and sort of not. It is at least on the topic of describing what the Big Bang singularity could have been:

Penerose's idea is that as the universe ages, expands, and cools, eventually all that would remain of the universe is photons. Photons have no mass, and mass is needed to keep track of time. With no mass in the universe, there is no time in the universe. Without time, there is no way for the universe to gauge its own size. Therefore that ever expanding universe has no scale to it at all, and thus may be considered to be the same thing as a singularity.

I haven't quite grasped what Penrose is suggesting was the impetus for that singularity to "bang", but his whole idea of what the big bang singularity was is an interestingly thoughtful one nonetheless.

here's a link to a talk he presented regarding this idea:
www.newton.ac.uk...
this links directly to a flash presentation

here's a non-flash version (manual audio and manual pictures):
www.newton.ac.uk...

i think something like this




acting on suns like in the picture

xploder

in the current model iron is dispersed though a super nova like this one

X-ray Image of Tycho's Supernova Remnant. (NASA/CXC/Rutgers/K.Eriksen et al.)
The Chandra X-Ray Observatory has taken a brand new, deep look inside the Tycho Supernova Remnant and found a pattern of X-ray “stripes” never seen before inside the leftovers of an exploding star. But astronomers believe these features could explain how some cosmic rays are created. Additionally, the stripes provide support for a theory about how magnetic fields can be dramatically amplified in such blast waves.

link HERE

cool pic lol
looks like a space bubble with smoke in it

xploder

Using the IBIS telescope onboard the European Space Agency’s INTEGRAL satellite, researchers have reported the first measurements of polarization from a black hole binary system, which comprises a black hole and a normal star orbiting around a common center of mass.

The new observations reveal that the chaotic region is threaded by magnetic fields, and represent the first time magnetic fields have been identified so close to a black hole. Most importantly, Integral shows they are highly structured magnetic fields that are forming an escape tunnel for hot matter that would otherwise plunge into the black hole within milliseconds.

source HERE

Laurent and his colleagues detected polarized gamma-ray photons coming from Cygnus X-1 (19h 58m 21.6756s +35° 12′ 05.775″), a well-known black hole X-ray binary system in the constellation Cygnus. They suggest the polarized emission is originating from a jet of relativistic particles in close proximity to the black hole.

Their evidence points to the black hole’s magnetic field being strong enough to tear away particles from the black hole’s gravitational clutches and funnel them outwards, creating jets of matter that shoot into space, according to an ESA press release. The particles in the jets are being drawn into spiral trajectories as they climb the magnetic field to freedom and this is affecting a property of their gamma-ray light known as polarization.

well today the black hole mystery just got more interesting

xploder

Originally posted by XPLodER
in the current model iron is dispersed though a super nova like this one...

According to the current model, not just iron, but almost every other element heavier than iron was formed in a supernova. All of the heavier elements you see around you -- aluminum, copper, iron (to make steel) -- were all once part of a star, and were created during that star's supernova. That's the only time there is enogh energy present to fuse smaller elements into these heavy elements.

As the theory goes, almost all other elements were made in stars, also. The four lightest elements -- hydrogen, helium, deuterium (which is 'heavy' hydrogen), and lithium -- were the only ones that could be made without using the energy inside a star. These four elements were formed very shortly after the big bang. However, anything heavier needed to be fused inside a star, and (as stated above) iron and the elements heavier than iron required the energy of an exploding star to fuse together from smaller elements.

So the carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and everything else heavier than lithium that is in our bodies, and makes up the stuff around us, came from other stars that once shone brightly in our universe a few billion years ago, but are now gone. Like Carl Sagan famously said "we are made of star-stuff" -- and he meant that literally.

Who knows? Perhaps one or more of those stars that created the heavier elements in our bodies had inhabited planets around them -- planets inhabited by a civilization that is as long dead as its star.

The idea boggles the mind.

Originally posted by USAisSatanic
gives more credence that theory of relativity is flawed , and at worst ,utter bollocks .

and yet we have people who think what the textbooks and authorities tell them is right .

Maybe it's the fact that thousands of people work at particle accelerators whose every day work (accelerating particles given electromagnetic impulses and steering from magnetic fields) would fail catastrophically if there were even small deviations from relativistic mechanics.

And then there's the astrophyicists who see gravitational lensing.

And then there's the GPS receivers measuring time from atomic clocks beeping in orbit, were actually locating yourself requires quantitatively precise use of special and general relativity.

And then there's the preposterously precise measurement of the electrons anomalous gyromagnetic ratio which derives from the Feynman diagrams in relativistic QED, agreeing with relativistic theory to many many decimal places.

So there's some awfully good reasons to think that relativity is not, actually, utter bollocks.

i found a link on the cycle of star formation and destruction
BBC

i wounder about the "heavy" elements and the reason super nova were thought to be the only source
if there are seen to massive jets spewing out heavy elements
maby its an interaction with a black hole not a supernova that creates the heavyest elements?

xploder

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Iron is magnetic, maybe this is based all on some fancy electro-magnetic principal?

We have recently discovered Fe0 on the moon. Iron that's never been exposed to oxygen.

We've found if you zap it with microwaves it will melt together to form things. There's a whole mess of scientists right now working on building very large things on the moon using merely microwaves.

Iron in space is NOT the same as iron on Earth. Fe0 iron found on the moon is NOT magnetic. If it was, the lunar dust containing Fe0 Iron would have stuck to the electric drive motors on the Lunar Rovers...it didn't.

The universe is in continual flux. There is no "beginning" or "end."

Cosmology tells us that in the distant future we have a cold, dead, random entropic mass of sparse nothingness to look forward to. Bollox.

We are INSIDE the event horizon of a cosmic black hole - the size of the whole universe, RIGHT NOW. This is why the nighttime sky is dark. But there are things "outside" the darkness, and we can get there. The fabric of the universe is like foam, with tunnels and openings everywhere. Black holes lead to new universes. They're not the "cosmic devourers" of matter and energy we are taught to believe. We're in one.

Also, there is no "age" for the universe. It appears to be different depending where you are, or how you're moving. No one value can be settled upon by observers everywhere.

How do I know these things? Education, contemplation, communication, experimentation, and hallucination.

Well, that's all I have. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Originally posted by 30_seconds
...We are INSIDE the event horizon of a cosmic black hole - the size of the whole universe, RIGHT NOW. This is why the nighttime sky is dark. But there are things "outside" the darkness, and we can get there...

We know stars exist "among" the darkeness of space (i.e., NOT outside that darkness), so why can we see stars if the blackness of space is cause by looking out of a black hole?

Besides, if you could be inside a black hole looking out, it would actually be very bright, because the hole is pulling energy and photons toward it, and toward you. You would see all of the incoming photons of light -- photons which can't be seen outside the hole, because all of the photons are only going into the hole (hence the black appearance from the outside).

Originally posted by Pervius

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Iron is magnetic, maybe this is based all on some fancy electro-magnetic principal?

We have recently discovered Fe0 on the moon. Iron that's never been exposed to oxygen.

We've found if you zap it with microwaves it will melt together to form things. There's a whole mess of scientists right now working on building very large things on the moon using merely microwaves.

Iron in space is NOT the same as iron on Earth. Fe0 iron found on the moon is NOT magnetic. If it was, the lunar dust containing Fe0 Iron would have stuck to the electric drive motors on the Lunar Rovers...it didn't.

Magnetic iron moon dust was a problem of sorts, but the amount of iron content in the moon dust was too small to make large pieces of dust (sand grain-sized pieces of basalt, with a few flecks of iron) make the grains act magnetically.

science.nasa.gov...

Just a thought, but that jet of iron, now just remember how much pressure is needed for a volcano, then a solar flare, only now you're conceeding that it is possible to release matter from blackholes, like it absorbs all light, yes but not the whole spectrum, and what of the black spots? the sun has some scattered ones, but stronger ones on a black holes, then you're looking at the magnetic pull pulling them together, and at a spot that can survive, like rather than on the spiralling mass, maybe at the poles? Then understand that magnetic waste of the blackholes is then iron...and when it errupts, it is relatively strong, just like a volcano vs. a solar flare? Then alas, there is enough energy to escape the blackhole. Then remember that other wavelengths of 'light' escape, maybe not visible. In other words, no matter the size, there are always going to be erruptions of some form, and some form of fusion and radience. And by that, another thought, what if a blackhole could go supernova again? But first consider everything I've already told you for the discussion. Now check out the discussion on the microverse. I've got a post you might want to read.

reply to post by MichaelMalcolmBadenhorst


By the way, that blackhole supernova thing is comparable to the big bang...but smaller, just wanted you to know...