Discussion
Started 9 January 2020
Gloria Lee Mcmillan
Gloria Lee Mcmillan

What is the cosmological impact of "The Radcliffe Wave" for understanding our galaxy's formation?

Dear Colleagues,
I am a liaison (informal) at my university between science and the arts. I have family in planetary astronomy but this is far afield.
LINK to VIDEO: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/01/largest-gaseous-structure-ever-seen-in-our-galaxy-is-discovered/
A question or two:
What does this newly-reported Radcliffe Wave of gaseous proto-stars tell us about how our galaxy originated?
Is there any chance that this wave will make some difference in our own sun's behavior?
Galaxy Formation
Informality
Astronomy
Cosmology
Stellar Evolution
Planetary Evolution
Physical Cosmology
Astrophysics
Quantum Cosmology
Science Fiction

Most recent answer

Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima
CNEN - Comissão Nacional de Energia Nuclear
Dear Preston,
Intriguin view, thanks for sharing Vera Lima
Cite
3 Recommendations

Popular replies (1)

Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima
CNEN - Comissão Nacional de Energia Nuclear
Dear Preston,
Intriguin view, thanks for sharing Vera Lima
Cite
3 Recommendations

Top contributors to discussions in this field

William Manga Mokofe
William Manga Mokofe
Douglas R. Daugherty
Douglas R. Daugherty
Bashkim Mal Lushaj
Bashkim Mal Lushaj
José Luis García Vigil
José Luis García Vigil
Krishnan Umachandran
Krishnan Umachandran

All replies (6)

Gloria Lee Mcmillan
University of Arizona
Dear Colleagues,
I wrote to some of the team who discovered this Radcliffe Wave, hoping for something to stir the imaginations of our group of hard-science SF writers. One of the Radcliffe Wave discoverers wrote that we --the earth--ould have crossed this Radcliffe Wave. He gave some evidences and concluded that earth is not detached and is connected to fellow voyagers in our galaxy. That remark made me consider some other aspects of how we may be culture-driven, rather than curiosity-driven.
QUOTED from my reply:
So, we are not "detached" travelers, but are connected to this galaxy of ours.  My Ph.D. is in Rhetoric, Composition, and English, so I might explore how culture has caused being "detached" and "individual" as the default assumption, at least in the West. 
We spent a week rhetorically "deconstructing" Galileo in a Rhetoric of Science seminar, looking at the culture of Galileo's day, what could and could nt be perceived or expressed or investigated. 
That might be another way to make this a rhetorical hook for starting and SF story. How according to the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (communications/linguistics) we can only "see" and "think" what language and culture allow.  The science fiction film Arrival film did some work on this!
Cite
2 Recommendations
Eric Lee
Oklahoma State University
the solar cycle of every star in the galaxy is intertwined
Cite
1 Recommendation
Javad Fardaei
Dear Gloria, Here,
I am presenting unprecedented theory, it is called The Quantum Mechanics Universe. My theory of formation of galaxies has been mentioned in this article. Let me know if you have any question
https://www.academia.edu/38373675/Creation_of_a_Quantum_Mechanic_Universe_and_its_Rotation.doc
Cite
1 Recommendation
Weitter Duckss
It is difficult to expect results from a single piece of information.
The universe and its bodies should be viewed as a whole within larger structures. It is not enough to observe rotation separately for each body. It is necessary to evaluate the constant action of attractive forces, which with rotation make up all systems inside and outside our Universe.
„ The matter attraction takes place on the level of particles , dust, smaller objects and to the galaxies, clusters of galaxies, ... Our Earth daily gets richer with the new quantities of matter, incoming from the Universe and estimated to be 300 tons per day..
An object with no rotation around its axis, or with an extremely slow one, can not have objects in the orbits around itself, because there is only the law of matter attraction present there. All of the other objects use rotation to capture particles, dust and other objects, in a lesser quantity, related to the total mass..
Furthermore, an object can not form orbits around the poles (north – south direction). An object, incoming vertically to the poles, has the same speed as those incoming in the direction of rotation (vertically to the equator)..
Despite of large production of hydrogen and helium, and a constant release of these gases into the atmosphere as well, their share in the atmosphere remains unchanged. The loss of hydrogen from the atmosphere of Earth is estimated to be 3 kg/s and the one of helium 50 g/s..“
The processes in the Universe and on the bodies are constant and very dynamic.
Cite
1 Recommendation
Vera Maura Fernandes de Lima
CNEN - Comissão Nacional de Energia Nuclear
Dear Preston,
Intriguin view, thanks for sharing Vera Lima
Cite
3 Recommendations

Similar questions and discussions

Does history repeat itself exactly?
Discussion
5 replies
  • Asked 4 June 2024
  • Alexander OhnemusAlexander Ohnemus
Either history does NOT EXACTLY repeat or the future is too unpredictable to risk such rationalism. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377663987_Respectfully_and_Unfortunately_The_Improbability_of_and_Danger_in_Believing_in_Reincarnation
What is inside an outer space black hole?
Discussion
4 replies
  • Asked 4 June 2024
  • Alexander OhnemusAlexander Ohnemus
What is inside an outer space black hole?
Space Curvature - Is there a mathematical description of the fourth drawing?
Discussion
12 replies
  • Asked 20 March 2019
  • Aleksandar JanjicAleksandar Janjic
Dear all,
in accordance with Friedmann-Lemaitre-Equation there are three different possibilities of space curvature which can be described mathematically and imparted graphically or analogously (Closed, Openend or Flat Universe). In the attached poster a fourth graphic representation is shown, which is however only graphically derived.
Is this sketch describable within Friedmann-Lemaitre-Equations? How can we interpret this sketch? A Universe that is truly infinite, although it has a defined start and a defined end point?
What would be a 3-Dimensional mathematical object to describe the plot (closed hypertorus, while closed means without a connection in the center?). And what numbers for curvature parameter k and density Parameter Ω make sense for this sketch?
I have created this plot purely graphically and wonder whether a mathematical interpretation of such a shaped space-time is possible, or whether it inevitably leads to paradoxes and is thus a graphic that can be drawn abstractly, but ultimately makes no mathematical sense.
Thank you!
Do Electromagnetic Quanta and Gravitational Quanta (Gravitons) Gravitate from Within? Do they Exist, or Are They Mere Mathematical Equations?
Discussion
157 replies
  • Asked 22 June 2023
  • Raphael NeelamkavilRaphael Neelamkavil
ELECTROMAGNETIC QUANTA HAVE EXTENSION AND CHANGE WITHIN.
DO THEY ALSO GRAVITATE? AND DO THE GRAVITONS GRAVITATE OR REPEL?
Raphael Neelamkavil, Ph.D., Dr. phil.
1. MODES OF EXISTENCE OF ENERGY-CARRIER EXISTENTS
Without the presence of existent gravitational propagation wavicles / particles, nothing physical can hold together. Additionally, there are electro-magnetic and other non-gravitational propagation wavicles / particles. Both are carriers of energy. Thus, there can be two kinds of force-carrier existents (energy wavicles / particles) which are forms of physical matter processes and hence irreducibly are matter:
(1) force-carrier existents that get propagated from existent physical processes and pull other objects a step backwards, thus attracting the object gradually into the graviton-issuing object, and
(2) force-carrier existents that get propagated from existent physical processes, do not pull other objects to the issuing object, and thus give a portion of themselves off to other objects.
Do these gravitational and non-gravitational (electromagnetic and other) wavicles exist? Before using them in physics, it must be determined whether they exist and how they may exist, for them to exert causally real physical effects. Existents cannot be vacua, and hence, they must exist, and hence they are:
(1) in Extension (each having a finite number of finite-content parts), because if not extended, EM quanta would be non-existent, and
(2) in Change (existents, which are always with parts, possessing parts which always exert finite impacts on a finite number of others, inclusive of exertion of finite impacts on some parts within), because anything that has no change is not in existence.
In short, any matter particle and any force-carrier wavicle can exist only Extension-Change-wise. Whether they really exist is clear enough: if they do not exist, then the matter particles that issue force-carrier existents (wavicles) too need not exist, since force-carrier wavicles are just another (relativistically, and not absolutistically, source-independent) form of existence of mater particles.
An existent without own parts and own exertion of impacts will be imaginable as existent. Anything that is not in Extension-Change is non-existent – a physical-ontological fact at the foundations of physics, which most physicists (and other scientists) forget while performing their statistical and other related miracles!
This much for an introduction. Now, what are the implications of such existence in the case of EM wavicles and gravitons?
2. ELECTROMAGNETIC AND GRAVITATIONAL QUANTA
If electromagnetic and gravitational wavicles are EXISTENT, then they possess also EXTENSION and CHANGE. They are not absolutely geometric particles, instead, they are elongated at various dimensions.
Let us assume the following as a general principle in physics: Anything physical issues gravitons, which are the basic attractive forces within physical existents.
If an existent energy wavicle is thus a matter wavicle with extension, it must also issue gravitons! In that case, the only stuff in the cosmos that cannot themselves issue further gravitons from within are gravitons themselves. What can this work to in physics and cosmology? I believe that we need a revolution from this viewpoint. This is a proposal that waits being tested by future physics and astrophysics.
Gravitons too are extended and changing wavicles. But they are themselves the wavicles possessing also their parts that attract each other, and are long-range in nature. If they issue sub-gravitons, they will naturally be kept attracted within the issuing sources, because the parts from which they are supposed to be issued are themselves attractive by nature and other matter and energy particles attract each other basically by means of issuing gravitons.
But naturally, gravitons too must be existent, and hence possess parts. What would be the sort of parts that gravitons can possess? Repulsons or Gravitons? Sub-repulsons or sub-gravitons? I think that they cannot themselves be repulsons and sub-repulsons, because repulsons and sub-repulsons without coherence will not stick together as parts of gravitons. Gravitons cannot issue gravitons themselves, since this is self-creation. But they can possess sub-gravitons as parts, but these need not be of the same power as their totality that each graviton is.
In any case, one thing should be accepted: BOTH ELECTROMAGNETIC AND GRAVITATIONAL QUANTA MUST ISSUE THEIR OWN WAVICLES OF ATTRACTION. IN THE CASE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC QUANTA, THE ISSE IS THAT OF GRAVITONS (and whatever other sub-wavicles that might be there for them to give rise to). IN THE CASE OF GRAVITONS, THE PARTS WILL HAVE TO BE SUB-GRAVITONS (plus whatever other sub-wavicles that might be there for them to give rise to).
3. CAUSAL NATURE OF ALL WAVICLES
The Extension-Change kind of existence is what we call Causation, and therefore, every existent is a causal Process in all parts. This is nothing but the Universal Law of Causality. That is, no more do we need to prove causation scientifically. This Law is a pre-scientific and hence physical-ontological Law, meant also for biological existents.
Hence, no quantum physics, statistical physics, or quantum cosmology can now declare that certain processes in nature are non-causal or acausal, after having admitted that these processes are in existence!
That is, existents at any level of formation are fully physical, possess at least a minimum of causal connection with others in its environment, are not merely virtual (nor fully modular / non-local / non-emergent / self-emergent / sui generis in a totally isolated manner). Therefore, any existent must have causal connections with its finitely reachable environment and within its inner parts.
4. IF IN EXTENSION-CHANGE, WHY THEN IN SPACE-TIME?
Physical-ontologically real generalities must be about, or pertinent to, existents in groups, i.e., as parts of a type / natural kind. These generalities are not existents, but pure ontological universals in natural kinds. Extension and Change are purely ontological and absolutely basic characteristics of all existents. Hence, I have termed them Categories.
Space and time are just the measurement-based epistemic notions or versions of the more generally physical-ontological Extension and Change respectively. The latter two are ontological generalities of all existent processes, because nothing can exist without these two Categories.
Hence, space and time are not physical-ontological, not real about, not pertinent to, existents. In short, physical science working only on measuremental space-time cannot verify newly discovered energy wavicles and matter particles by use of the physical “properties” they are ascribed to.
The test criteria for the existence of any existent particles will be Extension (each having a finite number of finite-content parts) and Change (existents, which are always with parts, possessing parts which always exert finite impacts on others, inclusive of exertion of finite impacts on some parts within).
Bibliography
(1) Gravitational Coalescence Paradox and Cosmogenetic Causality in Quantum Astrophysical Cosmology, 647 pp., Berlin, 2018.
(2) Physics without Metaphysics? Categories of Second Generation Scientific Ontology, 386 pp., Frankfurt, 2015.
(3) Causal Ubiquity in Quantum Physics: A Superluminal and Local-Causal Physical Ontology, 361 pp., Frankfurt, 2014.
(4) Essential Cosmology and Philosophy for All: Gravitational Coalescence Cosmology, 92 pp., KDP Amazon, 2022, 2nd Edition.
(5) Essenzielle Kosmologie und Philosophie für alle: Gravitational-Koaleszenz-Kosmologie, 104 pp., KDP Amazon, 2022, 1st Edition.
What is the real shape of the gravitational bending of light?
Discussion
33 replies
  • Asked 22 December 2020
  • Ziaedin ShafieiZiaedin Shafiei
According to Weyl and Chandrasekhar, general relativity (GR) is a triumph of speculative thought. But it is a well-known fact that GR is initiated by two analogies. Analogy is known to be a weak reasoning in science and philosophy. To redress the case this type of reasoning is renamed as Equivalence Principle (EP) in relativistic physics. The renaming, however, could not hide the fact that the presented analogy was not flawless. Irrefutable disproves were side-stepped and the analogy was instated to be the seed of new kind of physics. EP was defended by reducing the size of the lab and the duration of the experiment. This type of defending is like the proponents of flat-earth idea defend their case by reducing the patch of the land for examination until their pseudo-science theory is proven.
The attached document is a short description of EP analogies and its well-known critics. The document also introduces a new EP based on Uniform Deceleration of a spaceship in open space. This new analogy results in a different curvature of light in comparison to what original EP has established using uniform acceleration. The author believes that none of the conclusions from EPs should be allowed in science as they are based on inconclusive comparison/analogy and they ignore glaring flaws in the argument.
The author would like to present this new EP for discussion and criticism.
Is Cyclic Universe the Scientific Version of Turtle All the Way Down?
Discussion
24 replies
  • Asked 17 September 2022
  • Ziaedin ShafieiZiaedin Shafiei
In reference to the attached document, it seems that scientist with the helping hand of metaphysics have created several scientific versions of Turtle All the Way Down viewpoint.
The article criticizes two widely accepted models for the genesis of the universe which can be listed under two hypotheses:
  1. Nothing
  2. Something
Both theories have been discussed in enough detail, but this question/discussion is related to the second theory.
Can electric and magnetic forces be viewed as space curvature with particular limitations like gravity?
Question
8 answers
  • Asked 22 June 2014
  • Panini SingamPanini Singam
Long back perception on gravity was changed from a kind of force to a phenomenon which actually bends space- time in its influence. Is there any chance that even magnetism and electric forces and in fact all 4 types of forces can also be interpreted as such?
Are there redshift and luminosity distances for Cepheid Variable stars and RR Lyrae stars?
Question
4 answers
  • Asked 16 November 2021
  • Robert ShourRobert Shour
Do such measurements make sense? Do they exist?
Comparing redshift and luminosity distances, if that is a sensible question, may bear on the 4/3 scaling hypothesis as it relates to dark energy.

Related Publications

Geometries with integrable singularity -- black/white holes and astrogenic universes
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2011
We briefly review the problem of generating cosmological flows of matter in GR (the genesis of universes), analyze models' shortcomings and their basic assumptions yet to be justified in physical cosmology. We propose a paradigm of cosmogenesis based on the class of spherically symmetric solutions with {\it integrable} singularity $r=0$. They allow...
View
Towards an Understanding of Galaxy Formation
Chapter
  • Jan 1999
Computer simulations have played a central role in defining the modern approach to physical cosmology. Simulations provide the means to calculate the formation history of cosmic structure, given a set of assumptions regarding the physics of the early universe and the values of the cosmological parameters. Several key concepts have been elaborated w...
View
Cosmology : a first course / M. Lachièze-Rey ; tr. por John Simmons.
Article
Incluye índice Incluye bibliografía Contenido: Descubriendo el cosmos. El universo relativisico. Las dinámicas del universo. El universo primordial. Formación de galaxias. Conclusiones.
View
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.
Ask a question