- :: Atom & Cosmos
- :: Body & Brain
- :: Earth
- :: Environment
- :: Genes & Cells
- :: Humans
- :: Life
- :: Matter & Energy
- :: Molecules
- :: Science & Society
- :: Other Topics
- :: Science News For Kids
Peering into the center of five of the youngest clusters of galaxies known in the universe, astronomers recently found several full-grown, cigar-chomping adults among the myriad of toddlers. The remote galaxies hail from a time when the 13.7-billion-year-old cosmos was less than 5 billion years old. Yet measurements reveal that the bodies are just as massive as galaxies like the modern-day Milky Way, which took at least 10 billions years to mature.
The findings appear to call into question the leading theory of galaxy formation, known as the dark matter model — at least as it applies to the dense regions where galaxies congregate into clusters, says Chris Collins, an astronomer at the Liverpool John Moores University in England. He and his colleagues used the infrared Subaru telescope atop Hawaii’s Mauna Kea to observe the galaxies, and the team describes the findings in the April 2 Nature.
“No doubt the theorists will want to say that tweaking [the model] in very dense regions will suffice, but I think the problem could be more general than that,” Collins says.
The highly successful model holds that the gravity of a proposed, invisible material known as cold dark matter draws together gas and stars to form galaxies. Due to the properties of dark matter, the model always builds tiny, lightweight galaxies first, merging these small-fry to make bigger bodies. Indeed, dark matter simulations suggest that at such a young age, the galaxies the team examined should have attained only 20 percent of the weight that the astronomers observed.
In the dense environment of a cluster galaxy formation is predicted to occur more quickly. Nonetheless, there doesn’t seem to have been enough time, some 4 billion to 5 billion years after the Big Bang, for the five massive galaxies to have formed by the merging of smaller galaxies, according to the model. The findings suggest that some massive galaxies formed wholesale, rather than building up stars and gas little by little as they cannibalized their neighbors.
“These observations are certainly surprising,” comments theorist Gus Evrard of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Although more data and even larger-scale simulations are needed to determine whether the observations and theory are truly inconsistent, “the difference between nature’s brightest cluster galaxies and the simulated sample is quite striking,” he adds.
Evrard is a collaborator on the Millennium Simulation, an international effort that combines the largest supercomputer simulation of the growth of dark matter ever attempted with new techniques for tracking the evolution of the visible universe. Collins’ team directly compared its observations with the masses of galaxies predicted by this simulation when the universe was about one-third its current age.
“Our result is strong evidence that, for reasons we as yet do not understand, the process of galaxy assembly at early times was much more rapid and efficient than the [dark matter model] in the simulations would have us believe,” Collins says. Although the dark matter scenario for galaxy formation accurately predicts many features over a wide range of cosmic history, “it seems that in these extreme cluster environments, something else is needed.”
In the dense regions examined by Collins’ team the simulations predict extremely rapid growth. But even in these regions the masses of the galaxies were much heavier than the model allowed.
Over the past few years, other astronomers have peered even further back in time and also found some monster galaxies among the newborns (SN: 10/8/05, p. 235). These heavyweights, although less massive than the ones found by Collins and his colleagues, would have had much less time to bulk up and could have put even tighter limits on models of galaxy formation. However, theorists argue that dark matter models allow a few statistical oddballs. Modelers explain away the handful of early massive galaxies as extremely rare objects that happened to be in the densest dark matter regions, Collins says.
In contrast, galaxy clusters aren’t rare. Moreover, the rapid growth rate of galaxies in clusters is already included in the Millennium Simulation.
One reason that the dark matter model may fail to produce massive galaxies rapidly is that at high densities, nearby gas gravitationally snared by a young galaxy would be compressed quickly and heated. Hot gas cannot form stars and in addition would likely loiter in the halo of the young galaxy rather than sinking toward the center to add to the system’s mass.
A report in the Jan. 22 Nature by Avishai Dekel of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and his colleagues offers a possible solution to this cosmic conundrum (SN: 3/22/08, p. 186). His team’s high-resolution simulations show that some gas funnels toward the center of the galaxy before the gas heats up and can therefore make stars. That would mean that galaxies could bulk up more efficiently in the past.
“Dekel’s stuff points to the underlying difficulties of forming large galaxies quickly and suggests a nice possible way out, but even here it may not be the last word,” Collins says. “I think our data will stimulate more theoretical work.”
In their models, theorists could also attempt to ramp up the rate at which gas turns into stars in the brightest members of galaxy clusters, Evrard suggests. However, he cautions that it could be difficult to fatten up only the brightest members while leaving neighboring galaxies svelte. “The unintended consequence could be gigantic galaxies in today’s universe that aren’t seen and they certainly would be easy to see,” he says.
Speaking of the distance to the observed galaxies, Evrard says, “The observers have laid out a 10 billion light-year tightrope and challenged the theorists to balance on it. It may not be easy.”
Found in: Atom & Cosmos
- Cowen, Ron. 2008. From dark matter to light. Science News 173(March 22):186. [Go to]
- Cowen, Ron. 2005. Crisis in the cosmos? Science News 168(Oct. 8):235. [Go to]
- Learn more about the Millennium Simulation at www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/millennium at [Go to]
- Collins, C., et al. 2009. Early assembly of the most massive galaxies. Nature 458(April 2):603-606. doi:10.1038/nature07865
- Dekel, A., et al. 2009. Cold streams in early massive hot haloes as the main mode of galaxy formation. Nature 457(Jan. 22):451-454. doi:10.1038/nature07648


Rog Dog
According to my idea, stars are formed out of gigantic, three-dimensionally expanding energy concentrations in the centres of galaxies, which release/radiate/emit energy waves with an atomic nature. Energy waves that open up/radiate contain expanding quarks.
A sufficient energy pulse from outside sweeps with it the energy waves released by the quarks, which would otherwise push other quarks away in a relation analogous to their expansion. Now, the quarks start to expand and come close to each other in a way similar to cold fusion, forming what is called protons and neutrons, which are similar expanding energy concentrations releasing energy waves.
This explains one of the mysteries in modern physics, that is, how it is possible that new stars still come into existence near the gigantic black holes in galaxy centres. If the black holes indeed had a force that the calculations show, that attractive force ought to prevent the formation of new stars. My idea, in turn, could predict the new stars in the vicinity of the huge black holes in galaxy centres.
Quasars*
Quasi-stellar objects (QSO)
Is it possible that the visible universe moves in a moment entirely away from the space where it locates now, so that everything expand / explode at the same time and become for example to times bigger than they are now?
Are the galaxies photons of a substance that is in one size larger scale?
Are the quasi-stellar objects formed at the same time when the giant energyconcentrations of the galaxycentres pass by the similar concentrations that come against nearby?
Maybe the whole visible univese moved for the first seven billion years inside a substance that was one scale larger.
Also the photons give way to the photons coming against by waves that open up by themselves. The nearer the passing happens the more the opening energy from the energy concentration comimng against makes the concentration to explode energy in frontsides and with this energy they pass to another direction.
Is the corona of the sun formed when the energybudles coming against the sun pass nearby the energybudles opening up from the sun? Or does there happen straight smashes?
Galaxies*
The galaxies rotate like wheels. If there would exist a drafting force, should the galaxies have ten times larger mass than it is at present observed. This is because the farthest stars of galaxies circulate the centre of galaxy so fast. The gravity of observed mass is not able to keep them in their orbits. The stars that circulate the furthest should be thrown away from their tracks.
Although the modern physics does not understand how the gravitation is transfered, it still has found out that galaxies consist of some mystery substace that has this drawing force.
The dark substace is different from the observed substance. Yet it has the the same kind of drawing force as the observed substance has.
No, there is no gravitation!
All the stars of the galaxies have arised from the black holes of the giant centres of the galaxies. They expand three-dimentionally, opening up energywaves that have the nature of atoms. The stars expand and push themselves away from the galaxy centre in a curved orbit in a same relation as they expand.
That is to say that also the furthest stars are thrown away from the centre of the galaxy. The same way as their speed of movement around the galaxy centre lets us suppose. Only this is not observed, because everything expands three-dimentionally in same relation.
Black holes*
The Interaction / The Black Holes
How do the orbs interact with each other?
They open up energywaves, by which they interact with each other.
The less the orb has exterior surface, the less it interacts with other pieces. Also the density of energy matters as well.
In a energy concentration there can be a lot of energy, although it would have just a little exterior surface in relation to other orbs.
The denser the energy in an orb is, the less it has exterior surface in relation to the quantity of energy.
The less exterior surface, the slower the energy opens up away from the orb and the less it interacts with other orbs.
The denser the energy of a piece is, the more efficient it stops to itself for example the neutrinos coming from the stars and also the less there comes neutrinos away from the piece.
There woun´t come any neutrinos of the stars from the direction of a black hole, because they stop themselves to a black hole.
However, towards the black hole there move neutrinos all the time and they expand and open up energywaves, while transfering their kinetic energy with them to the orbs.
From the pieces that move near the black hole loose more neutrinos from the side that it away from the black hole. This is how a certain exterior pressure is formed around the black hole.
The closer to the black hole the piece is, the less energybundles come from backside of the black holes and the stronger the exterior pressure is.
When one understands that all the energy concentrations expand and open up energywaves that have the nature of expanding energyconcentration, one can undestand that the black hole does not draw other pieces towards itself. It devours all the other pieces, because it expands and pushes pieces that locate nearby away from itself slower than the pieces and the black hole itsel do expand.
However, some of the black holes are in a way in a diet. They push the gas that locates nearby away from themselves faster than they expand.
Someone may wonder, why the black hole finally begins to reject the pieces that approach the black hole faster than the black hole and the piece themselves expand. It is based on a fact, that allthough the black hole opens up slowly its energy, do these dense energywaves have large energic particles, which also transfer their kinetic energy with energywaves opening up from themselves towards the expanding atomcores of other orbs.
The modern physics does not understand these large energic particles. According to my theory, the speed of these large energic particles has accelerated just because of the fact, that they also do expand and open up energywaves by which they can make the large energic particles in front of them to speed up all the time.Their speed accelerates slower than the speed of the photons. Correspondingly their speed slows down slower than the photons speed when they move for example towards the sun. The speed of a ship accelerates slower than the speed of a boat. The speed of the ship also slows down slower than the speed of a boat.
This way it is easy to understand how the expanding star that pushes itself away from the expanding black hole explodes a lot of its energy towards the black hole. Those opening and expanding energybudles that come from the expanding black hole make the expanding atoms of a star explode faster than normally. It achieves an illusion that the black hole absorbs with some kind of gravitation from a star the mass of a star towards itself.
In fact, the energy coming from the black hole makes the expanding star to explode its energy much stronger than normally. With this energy that explodes towards the black hole it pushes itself away from the expanding black hole in a curved orbit."
http://www.onesimpleprinciple.com/l2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXSz_VePop8&feature=channel_page
Idea of expanding atoms
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnmQWMLv53Q&feature=channel_page
Redshifting (no Doppler) with entropy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrePNnvzvQg&feature=channel
Hello, The world's scientific community
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBfx8Gh-x-c&feature=channel
Hello Brian Cox and Stephen Hawking
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8ZnmMxGzBM&feature=channel
2. No Gravity. Kuopio
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFPYHdllHa4&feature=channel_page
3. Bending light. Kuopio
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e805oRZNU9U&feature=related
A Commonsensible Recapitulation
A. "Heavyweight galaxies in the young universe"
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/42419/title/Heavyweight_galaxies_in_the_young_universe
New observations of full-grown galaxies in the young universe may force astrophysicists to revise their leading theory of galaxy formation, at least as it applies to regions where galaxies congregate into clusters.
B. Some brief notes in "Light On Dark Matter?", at
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=22994&st=0entry373127
- "Galaxy Clusters Evolved By Dispersion, Not By Conglomeration"
- Introduction of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
- "Dark Energy And Matter And The Emperor's New Clothes"
- "Evolutionary Cosmology: Ordained Or Random"
- "“Movie” Of Microwave Pulse Transitioning From Quantum To Classical Physics"
- "Broken Symmetry" Is Physics' Term Of Biology's "Evolution"
- "A Glimpse Of Forces-Matter-Life Unified Theory"
C. Commonsensible conception of gravity
1. According to the standard model, which describes all the forces in nature except gravity, all elementary particles were born massless. Interactions with the proposed Higgs field would slow down some of the particles and endow them with mass. Finding the Higgs — or proving it does not exist — has therefore become one of the most important quests in particle physics.
However, for a commonsensible primitive mind with a commonsensible universe represented by
E=Total[m(1 + D)], this conceptual equation describes gravity. It does not explain gravity. It describes it. It applies to the whole universe and to every and all specific cases, regardless of size.
2. Thus gravity is simply another face of the total cosmic energy. Thus gravity is THE cosmic parent of phenomena such as black holes and life. It is the display of THE all-pervasive-embracive strained space texture, laid down by the expanding galactic clusters, also noticed in the expanding energy backlashes into various constructs of temporary constrained energy packages.
3. "Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe backwards in time to the early hot dense "Big Bang" phase, using general relativity, yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past.
At age 10^-35 seconds the Universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the Universe will ever hold."
At D=0, E was = m and both E and m were, together, all the energy and matter the Universe will ever hold. Since the onset of the cataclysm E remains constant and m diminishes as D increases.
The increase of D is the inflation, followed by expansion, of what became the galactic clusters.
At 10^-35 seconds, D in E=Total[m(1 + D)] was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity started. This is what started gravity. At this instance starts the space texture, starts the straining of the space texture, and starts the "space texture memory", gravity, that will eventually overcome expansion and initiate re-impansion back to singularity.
D. Commonsensible conception of the forces other than gravity
The forces other than gravity are, commonsensibly, forces involved in conjunction with evolution:
http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=4770
The farthest we go in reductionism in Everything, including in Life, we shall still end up with wholism, until we arrive at energy. Energy is the base element of everything and of all in the universe. At the beginning was the energy singularity, at the end will be near zero mass and an infinite dispersion of the beginning energy, and in-between, the universe undergoes continuous evolution consisting of myriad energy-to-energy and energy-to-mass-to-energy transformations.
The universe, and everything in it, are continuously evolving, and all the evolutions are intertwined.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Life's Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/112.page#578
EVOLUTION Beyond Darwin 200
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=405entry396201
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/100/122.page#1407
Please login or register to participate.