Jump to content
Science Forums

# Why are we so sure that there is a need for dark matter?

## Recommended Posts

Please look at the following image:

It is quite confusing.

In one hand we see that stars in the Bulge are moving outwards though the Bars (Red arrows) into the spiral arm base.

On the other hand, stars in the spiral arms (all the other colors) are moving inwards.

So, how could it be?

I assume that this observation had confused our scientists.

They didn't understand that the total velocity of any star in the arm is a sum of three different motions as follow:

On 12/31/2022 at 8:16 AM, Dandav said:

The total velocity of star is a sum of: Local motion + Outwards motion in the arm + Motion of the arm. The star will go with the arm wherever it goes.

The local motion is quite easy as it can be detected by the wobbling motion of the star.

The motion of the spiral arm is significantly higher than the Outwards motion.

Therefore, at the first look you may think that the stars are moving inwards.

However, if we could deduct the motion of the spiral arm from the total motion of the star, we would detect that the stars in the spiral arm are drifting outwards.

Our scientists can easily verify the motion of the arm.

Therefore, I wonder why they didn't try to set this simple calculation.

• Replies 104
• Created
• Last Reply

#### Posted Images

20 hours ago, Dandav said:

I wonder why they didn't try to set this simple calculation.

The answer for that question might be as follow:

Our scientists clearly understand that the Bar is gravitational arm.

They even claim that the stars are LOCKED in the Bar.

Based on that understanding, they have deducted the Bar orbital motion from the total star motion and found that the stars in that bar are moving outwards to the base of the spiral arm.

Unfortunately, as the didn't think about the tidal impact and due to the winding problem, they have eliminated the idea that the spiral arm is also gravitational arm.

Therefore, they currently assume that the spiral arm can't be a gravitational arm and this is their fatal mistake!

Somehow, they insist that stars must move inwards.

Therefore, although they clearly observe that all the stars in the Bulge are moving outwards through the Bar, they say that stars CAN move inwards from the spiral arms to the bulge.

##### Share on other sites

Dear friends.

I have proved that Tidal mechanism meets 100% of all the observations.

On 12/31/2022 at 8:16 AM, Dandav said:

"The tidal mechanism for spiral galaxy"

It offers single realistic phenomenon for the entire features of the spiral galaxy that we observe today and any feature that we might observe in the future.

It ends the era of "Puzzled Scientist" on new discovery.

Based on this mechanism we can easily understand any sort of galaxy in the Universe.

It can also tell us about our location in the past and the expectation for the future.

Please remember - What we see is what we have!!!

It is a fatal mistake to claim that the Bar CAN funnels stars inwards to the Bulge, while we ONLY see that it funnels stars outwards to the Spiral arms.

Therefore, it's the time for the science community to abandum the dark matter imagination, accept this real mechanism and offer me (if they insist) a reward for my work.

Nobel prize would be good enough.

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

While the science comunity consider the issue with the Nobel prize, let's try to explain them the formation of the ring galaxy.

Let's start with the most difficult one - the Hoag's Object.

A nearly perfect ring of hot, blue stars pinwheels about the yellow nucleus of an unusual ring galaxy known as Hoag's Object.

It seems that our scientists don't have a clue how that ring galaxy had been formed.

It is stated:

"Still, despite the fact that we now know how ring galaxies form in general, Hoag’s object — the original ring — is still an outlier that stubbornly refuses to be explained by any one simple scenario."

It is also stated:

"The ring and the core have almost identical velocities, indicating that if there was an interloper that formed the ring, it was a very quite process. There’s no evidence anywhere in its vicinity for a candidate interloper galaxy, which is surprising, nor are there any galaxy fragments. You can’t save the scenario by pushing the collision farther back into the past, as the outer ring of stars is too young. And the inner core, rather than being a spiral, is instead a gas-poor elliptical."

I would like to highlight the key understanding for this ring:

"it was a very quiet process."

So, how can we explain this quite process by the mechanism for spiral galaxy that is called:

"The tidal mechanism for spiral galaxy"

On 12/31/2022 at 8:16 AM, Dandav said:

"The tidal mechanism for spiral galaxy"

Based on this mechanism, the Bar must deliver splinters of stars to the base of the spiral arms.

On 12/31/2022 at 8:16 AM, Dandav said:

4. The Spiral arm is formed by splinters of stars that had been delivered from the Bar. All those splinters are locked together in a row by gravity and form the long spiral arm shape.

Those splinters of stars increase the length of the spiral arms from inside

On 12/31/2022 at 8:16 AM, Dandav said:

Therefore, the Bar increases the length of the spiral arms from inside and transform the spherical motion of stars in the bulge to disc motion in the ring.

Let's assume that at some point of time, the Bar would stop (or decrease dramatically) the delivery the requested splinters of stars to the spiral arm base.

As the stars in the spiral arm are constantly drifting outwards, without new supply of new stars at the base, the whole spiral arm would be disconnected from its current location. The base of the arm holds the whole arm, therefore once it would be disconnected from its current place, it would be ejected strongly outwards. that scenario would take place at both spiral arms at the same time - due to the "Mirrorlike Symmetry" of the tidal impact.

On 12/28/2022 at 7:20 PM, Dandav said:

"Milky Way Galaxy Has Mirrorlike Symmetry"

As the base of both arms would be strongly ejected outwards, the spiral arms would be locked together and set the ring structure.

Actually, if you look carefully on the ring, you would see almost unlimited numbers of tinny spiral arms in that ring.

Due to that ring shape, the tidal force on the bulge would be fully symmetric from all directions (of the ring)

Therefore, the Bar would disappear and we would only see the inner bulge.

That bulge would be squeezed by the tidal force of the ring, and therefore it would set a Pita bread structure instead of the previous bar structure.

However, there is another key issue to explain.

Why The ring and the core have almost identical velocities?

"The ring and the core have almost identical velocities, indicating that if there was an interloper that formed the ring"

Based on tidal mechanism, the stars at the base of the spiral arms get their velocities from the edge of the Bar.

In this case, there is no bar.

When there was a bar, the stars in the spiral arm should have a relarivly high velocity.

In the milky way it is about 220Km/s.

However, without the bar, (based on the orbital curve) it is very clear that the velocity of stars in the bulge is significantly lower than the velocity at the edge of the bar.

Based on the following image we can say that the velocity at 1KPC is about 50Km/s

Hence, as the stars that we see TODAY in the ring has the same velocity as the stars in the Bulge (Let's say 50Km/s), it proves that those stars in the ring had been ejected from the Bule and not from the Bar.

This shows that the bulge had the ability to resume the star ejection process.

Therefore, while all the stars that were there at the first phase creation of the ring structure (with high velocity) have already been ejected to the open space, all of the stars in the ring that we see today had been ejected directly from the Bulge (without the bar structure).

Therefore, they all have the same velocity.

Hence, there is no need for any sort of collision.

Just a "very quiet process".

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

As it had been proved that the tidal mechanism for spiral galaxy covers 100% of the observation and it is a perfect solution for any galaxy in the Universe (without any need for dark matter), then why it is impossible for the science community to offer me the Nobel Prize?

I think that the answer is as follow:

Based On tidal mechanism Stars from the Bulge must be ejected outwards.

However, based on the current mainstream, stars should be eaten by the SMBH.

Therefore, it is stated that the Bar CAN funnels stars inwards to the Bulge, while the observation PROVES that the BAR funnels stars outwards from the Bulge.

Hence, our scientists change completely the observation by the word "CAN" in order to meet the concept of stars that falls into the mouth of the SMBH.

So, how can we close the gap between the current concept to the real OBSERVATION activity.

How can we convince our scientists that what we see is what we have?

##### Share on other sites

In the following article it is stated:

"The Baby Boom Galaxy is so named because it generates over 4,000 stars per year (compared to an average of just 10 per year for the Milky Way).[1][4][5] At that rate, the galaxy needs only 50 million years to create as many stars as the most massive galaxy ever observed.[7]

How galaxies could produce so many stars per year while based on the observations (and on Tidal mechanism) they eject their stars outwards from the Bulge?

What is the source for the matter that they are using for that star production process?

It is also stated:

The discovery also challenges the accepted model for galaxy formation, which has most galaxies slowly bulking up by absorbing pieces of other galaxies, rather than growing internally.[8] Another unusual aspect is the fact that scientists are observing this galaxy at a time when the universe was only a little over 1.4 billion years old, meaning that this galaxy was exhibiting this strange behaviour while the universe was still in its infancy.[5]

We will discuss about the meaning of that discovery later on.

In the following article it is stated:

"Galaxies manufacture stars and this requires huge amounts of gas. So far, however, researchers have only found a trickle of new gas travelling into the galaxies where it is needed.

‘There’s a huge mismatch,’ said Professor Erwin de Blok, of the Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy, who is trying to understand how galaxies evolve."

Therefore, somehow we must explain this "huge mismatch".

From where the galaxies get all the required huge amounts of Gas / matter that is needed for the star manufacturing process?

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

Do you agree that in order to understand something, it it vital to base the understanding on real observation.

So, what do we really see at the SMBH?

We actually observe a severe outflow from that SMBH :

"In the past few years, astronomers have also observed fast molecular outflows emanating from AGNs which left them puzzled. For one, it was a mystery how any particles could survive the heat and energy of a black hole’s outflow. But according to a new study produced by researchers from Northwestern University, these molecules were actually born within the winds themselves. This theory may help explain how stars form in extreme environments"

Those puzzled astronomers found that "it is difficult to create such an outflow by accelerating existing molecular clouds in the host galaxy"

We explore the origin of fast molecular outflows that have been observed in active galactic nuclei (AGNs). Previous numerical studies have shown that it is difficult to create such an outflow by accelerating existing molecular clouds in the host galaxy, as the clouds will be destroyed before they can reach the high velocities that are observed. In this work, we consider an alternative scenario where molecules form in situ within the AGN outflow.

In other words, for many years our puzzled astronomers wish to believe that the fast molecular outflows that hey clearly observe is due to falling stars into the mouth of the SMBH.

They even claim that the Milky Way’s Black Hole is a Picky Eater:

"If there’s one thing nearly everybody knows about a black hole, it’s that they voraciously gobble up anything and everything that drifts nearby. It’s not true, of course, since they’re powered by nothing more mysterious than gravity, so plenty material falling inwards manages to miss the black hole and gets sling-shotted back into space. But even so, astronomers studying Sgr A* (the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way Galaxy) were surprised to notice that less than 1% of the gas and dust drawn into its gravitational field ever get consumed – almost everything else gets ejected. "

Hence, it is stated clearly that "plenty material falling inwards".

Is it real or just imagination?

What do they really see?

From time to time, they see flares which indicates about the mighty magnetic field of the SMBH.

Researchers at the Flatiron Institute and their collaborators found that breaking and reconnecting magnetic field lines near the event horizon release energy from a black hole’s magnetic field, accelerating particles that generate intense flares. The findings hint at exciting new possibilities in black hole observation.

However, they claim that "plenty material falling inwards".

So, where all the material that are falling inwards.

The answer is very simple -

Our scientists have NEVER EVER observed any sort of star or any kind of matter as it falls into the mouth of the SMBH.

But they still wish to believe that all of that outflow from the SMBH that they clearly OBSERVE is due to falling matter even if they don't see any material that falls inwards.

Please remember:

On 1/5/2023 at 6:42 AM, Dandav said:

Please remember - What we see is what we have!!!

Why our scientists continue to claim that the molecular outflows is due to falling material?

Why is it so difficult for those puzzled Astronomers/Scientists to understand that as it "is difficult to create such an outflow by accelerating existing molecular clouds in the host galaxy" then this molecular outflow can't be created from any falling material?

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

Why do we insist to reject the observation as is?

As nothing really falls into the SMBH and molecular outflow can't be created from any falling material, then why can't we consider a possibility that the SMBH creates this outflow by itself?

In the following article it is stated:

"Throughout the universe, matter-antimatter pairs of particles are constantly flickering in and out of existence (because matter and antimatter quickly annihilate each other).

But if one of these particles is dragged into the event horizon of a black hole — the point where not even light can escape — before the pair annihilates, the other particle might slip away as Hawking radiation."

Therefore, Matter and Antimatter pairs are constantly flickering in and out of existence. If one particle would fall into the BH the other one would survive the annihilation process.

However, based on this stephen-hawkings prediction, the Antimatter has a negative energy and it should also have a negative gravity.

Our scientists don't observe any sort of Antimatter with negative energy.

Therefore, we should consider the possibly for matter and antimatter with opposite electric charge:

"In particle physics, every type of particle is associated with an antiparticle with the same mass but with opposite physical charges (such as electric charge). For example, the antiparticle of the electron is the positron (also known as an antielectron). While the electron has a negative electric charge, the positron has a positive electric charge, and is produced naturally in certain types of radioactive decay. The opposite is also true: the antiparticle of the positron is the electron."

Hence, our mission is to discover the process of creating real particle that is associated with an antiparticle with the same mass but with opposite physical charges near the event horizon of the SMBH.

We already know that the SMBH generates Electro Magnetic field around it.

Therefore, Based on stephen-hawkings idea.

"If one particle would fall into the BH the other one would survive the annihilation process."

We have a valid force for that.

It is called Lorentz force

In physics (specifically in electromagnetism) the Lorentz force (or electromagnetic force) is the combination of electric and magnetic force on a point charge due to electromagnetic fields

Hence, while one particle would fall into the BH the other one would survive the annihilation process.

Based on this process, the SMBH would increase its total mass by one particale, while the other particle (even if it has an opposite electric charge) would be ejected outwards.

This process can explain how the SMBH increases its mass while it also ejects molecular outflow.

It was stated:

"In the past few years, astronomers have also observed fast molecular outflows emanating from AGNs which left them puzzled... But according to a new study produced by researchers from Northwestern University, these molecules were actually born within the winds themselves."

Hence, we specifically discuss about new particles / molecular that were actually born within the winds in the SMBH!!!

However, now we must understand what could be the source of energy for that pair production process.

Edited by Dandav

## What is tidal energy?

"Tidal energy is a form of power produced by the natural rise and fall of tides caused by the gravitational interaction between Earth, the sun, and the moon. Tidal currents with sufficient energy for harvesting occur when water passes through a constriction, causing the water to move faster. Using specially engineered generators in suitable locations, tidal energy can be converted into useful forms of power, including electricity."

There are millions or even billions of stars around the SMBH.

Due to the gravitational interaction between those stars to the SMBH, tidal energy is created.

That tidal energy is the source of the Electro-Magnetic energy of the SMBH which is the base for the new born particles / molecular near the event horizon of the SMBH.

Hence, the same tidal force that clearly explain the full activity in the spiral galaxy (including 100% of all features and observations), can also offer a perfect explanation for the energy source that is needed for the New born molecular activity!

##### Share on other sites

We can clearly observe the outwards jet stream from the SMBH:

Bi-Polar Gamma-Ray Jets

"These jets likely were produced when plasma squirted out from the supermassive black hole at the galactic center after it consumed a molecular cloud and stars totalling roughly around 10,000 Solar-masses, and they followed "a corkscrew-like magnetic field that kept it tightly focused."

However, now we already know that this molecular jet stream must be born in the SMBH itself.

it is also stated:

"...announced the detection of giant gamma-ray jets emanating from the galactic core above and below the Milky Way's galactic center and extending some 27,000 light-years through the central bulge."

Hence, that giant gamma-ray jets is moving at 0.3c up to 27,000LY above and below the galactic core and it has a total mass of about 10,000 Solar-masses.

What kind of force can do such incredible work?

The following message about: "a corkscrew-like magnetic field that kept it tightly focused." Is a clear indication that the force is Electro-Magnetic force.

Therefore, our SMBH has a mighty Electro-Magnetic force which ejects so massive molecular jet stream (10,000 Solar-masses) at 0.3c up to 27,000LY directly from its both magnetic poles.

All of that is due to Tidal force/energy that had been transformed into that mighty EM energy.

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

In this article they are using the definition of: "squirted out" in order to highlight the ejection process of the matter in the plasma into that molecular jet stream.

"These jets likely were produced when plasma squirted out from the supermassive black hole at the galactic center after it consumed a molecular cloud and stars totalling roughly around 10,000 Solar-masses, and they followed "a corkscrew-like magnetic field that kept it tightly focused."

This is an excellent definition.

Please remember that the plasma is located near the SMBH' event horizon at a disc that is called "accretion disc".

However, why they are using so strong definition (squirted out)?

Could it be that they OBSEVRE that matter from the plasma is squirted outwards?

If so, why in the same message they add: "after it consumed a molecular cloud and star.."

Do they really see that stars and matter falls into our SMBH, or is it some sort of a wishful thinking?

I couldn't find even one real observation that could support the idea that stars are falling into any SMBH in the entire Universe.

Please remember, the MW galaxy generates about 10 stars per year or about one star every month.

The Baby BOOM galaxy generates 4000 stars per year or about 333 stars per month.

There are billions of galaxies in the Universe. We can observe most of them.

If the idea of falling stars into the SMBH core was correct, then technically every second somewhere in the Universe a star is expected to fall in.

So, how could it be that we couldn't observe even one star as it falls into the SMBH?

Could it be that nothing really falls in and our scientists are just dreaming?

Why is it so difficult to understand that what we see is what we have?

##### Share on other sites

Please look at the following image of M87 accretion disc:

"Telescope project between 2009 and 2013 found the shadow is actually wobbling and has rotated significantly over the past decade.

“Because the flow of matter falling onto a black hole is turbulent, we can see that the ring wobbles with time,” said Maciek Wielgus,

Therefore, we all clearly see that there is changing in the density and quantity of the plasma/matter in the accretion disc.

However, while our scientists monitor that specific galaxy so closely, did they ever discover any star or even atom as it falls inwards from the Bulge into the accretion disc?

The answer is clearly - No, as it was expected to see the impact of a star as it falls inwards from the bulge.

Hence, let's focus on real evidences and observations:

1. The density and quantity of plasma in accretion disc is changing over time, while we do not observe any sort of matter/stars as they fall inwards to that disc from the Bulge.

2. We clearly see the outflow molecular stream from the accretion disc.

3. Based on the verification, thק molecular outflow is a NEW BORN molecular.

"In the past few years, astronomers have also observed fast molecular outflows emanating from AGNs which left them puzzled... But according to a new study produced by researchers from Northwestern Universitythese molecules were actually born within the winds themselves."

Hence,

If nothing falls into the accretion disc (from the Bulge) while we see that the plasma is wobbling (increasing, decreasing, increasing, decreasing...) from year to year then why is it so difficult for our puzzled scientists to understand that the plasma must come from inside and not from outside?

It is stated:

“Actually, we see quite a lot of variation there, and not all theoretical models of accretion flow allow for this much variability,” he added. “As we obtain more measurements in the future, we will be able to confidently put constraints on models and rule some of them out.”

I have a message for Mr. Maciek Wielgus:

It's the time for you to rule out all of them as any theoretical model that ignores the simple idea of NEW BORN molecular is just imagination.

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

Magnetic field

Magnetic field is the most important feature of the SMBH.

In M87 "Along the magnetic field lines, the particles are accelerated so efficiently that they form a jet out to scales of 6000 light years

This mighty magnetic field is the source for the new born particles

##### Share on other sites

New particle creation:

It is stated:

"We’ve just seen that the accretion disk emits more extreme radiation at the edge closest to the accretor. In the case of a black hole, matter in the disk is traveling near light speed just before it passes the event horizon – the point of no return."

Hence we clearly observe that the matter at the edge closest to the SMBH' event horizon is traveling near the speed of light.

However, what is the real meaning of "emits more extreme radiation at the edge closest to the accretor."

How this radiation is created?

Those scientists don't understand that this radiation is actually the simple process of new particle - Antiparticle creation.

We already know the mighty EM power of the SMBH.

Near the SMBH' event horizon new pair of particles are popped up at the speed of light by that mighty EM energy.

Those particles/antiparticles carry exactly the same real mass but opposite electric charge.

Lorenz force would split between the new created particles/antiparticles and prevent the annihilation process.

Therefore, as one particle cross the event horizon and fall into the SMBH at the speed of light, the other one is ejected outwards at the same speed into the inner side of the accretion disc.

Therefore, for any particle that the SMBH "eat" we get one in the accretion disc.

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

The accretion disc is the biggest accelerator in the Nature.

Due to the mighty SNBH' electromagnetic & Gravity forces the accretion disc should be considered as the biggest natural accelerator in the Universe "allowing nuclear fusion to take place"

"Black hole accretion disks also can contain material of high temperatures generated by high accretion rates, allowing nuclear fusion to take place."

Unfortunately, our scientists have neglected the SMBH' mighty Electromagnetism power.

They think that the magnetism power in the disc is due to the disc activity.

That is a fatal mistake.

It is estimated that the total mass in the MW accretion disc is about 3 Sun mass.

That mass can't generate enough EM power that is needed to eject 10,000 sun mass at the speed of 0.3c up to 27,000 LY above and below the disc.

This is a pure fantasy.

Only a mighty SMBH EM power with its 4 * 10^6 sun mass can do it.

That mighty SMBH' EM energy is used to transform by fusion activity the new born particles that arrive at the inner edge of the disc at almost the speed of light to real atoms and molecular as they spiral outwards in the disc.

Therefore, the SMBH invest significant EM energy in order to transform by fusion activity those new born quarks to real protons, real atoms and real molecular.

That fusion activity is totally different from the one that takes place in the Sun.

While in the Sun the fusion activity extract energy from the atoms, in the accretion disc the fusion activity is used the SMBH' EM energy to create new atoms and molecular.

If we could focus on the accretion disc, we should see that in the inner side (at that extreme radiation) there are ONLY small particles as quarks and bosons.

On 1/11/2023 at 6:38 AM, Dandav said:

"emits more extreme radiation at the edge closest to the accretor."

In that inner edge we won't find even one real Atom.

As we move outwards from the inner edge, we should see protons as the gluons is added to the new born quarks.

Later on, we should see the first Hydrogen atom.

As we go to the outer edge of the disc, we should find all the variety of the atoms that we know including gold and iridium. At the last stage we would also find all the molecular the we know as water silicate and so on.

As those Atoms and Molecular would spiral outwards from the accretion disc, they would be boosted upwards and downwards by the same mighty SMBH' EM force at a speed of 0.3c and form the molecular jet stream that we see so clearly.

That EM force would prevent from any sort of particle to get inwards into the accretion disc. It would grab with it any atom that would dare to fall inwards.

Therefore, there is no possibility for any atom from outside to fall into the accretion disc.

##### Share on other sites

Our scientists wish to see fireworks as gas cloud or star are falling into the accretion disc.

Surprisingly to this wish, nothing really falls:

"A few years ago astronomers spotted a large cloud of gas (estimated to be three Earth-masses in size) moving relatively quickly towards SagA*. Some models projected that the cloud (known as G2) would be disrupted by the black hole during 2015, an event that might be accompanied by detectable radiation that could in turn shed light on a black hole’s feeding mechanisms. That did not happen; the year passed without any fireworks, possibly because G2 was too dense to break up. "

There is no fireworks and there will be no fireworks not with any gas clouds or S star in our galaxy and not in any accretion disc in the entire universe.

However, our scientists observe the Gravitational waves from binary neutron stars.

They think that as twin stars fall inwards, then a star around a SMBH should also fall into its accretion disc.

This is totally incorrect.

Binary neutron stars are different systems from the SMBH' accretion discs.

Our scientists only observe the outflow stream from the accretion disc , but unfortunately they continue to wish about a falling gas cloud/star.

How long do we have to wait until they would understand that the SMBH has no intention to eat even a single atom from outside?

Edited by Dandav
##### Share on other sites

Electron

"The electron (e or β) is a subatomic particle with a negative one elementary electric charge."

"Electrons play an essential role in numerous physical phenomena, such as electricitymagnetismchemistry and thermal conductivity, and they also participate in gravitationalelectromagnetic and weak interactions.[16] Since an electron has charge, it has a surrounding electric field, and if that electron is moving relative to an observer, said observer will observe it to generate a magnetic field. Electromagnetic fields produced from other sources will affect the motion of an electron according to the Lorentz force law."

So: "an electron has charge, it has a surrounding electric field,"

Therefore, why is it so difficult to understand that in order to create an electron an electric charge is needed.

How can we believe that there is a possibility to create and electron without real source of electric charge?

In the nature, EM energy is the main and only valid source for electric charge.

Therefore, electron could only be created by EM energy.

Hence, a SMBH with its mighty EM power can clearly create new electron (and any sort of boson).

In its creation near the SMBH' event horizon, each electron must come with its opposite charged particle that is called positron.

Photons can be emitted when a particle and its corresponding antiparticle are annihilated (for example, electron–positron annihilation).

However, according to the Lorentz force law." while the positron is directed inwards into the SMBH, the electron would be ejected outwards into the accretion disc and will be used as a vital EM particle in the new atom creation process.

Any atom must carry electron.

WE clearly see all of those new BORN molecules in the observed fast molecular outflows emanating from AGNs:

"In the past few years, astronomers have also observed fast molecular outflows emanating from AGNs which left them puzzled... But according to a new study produced by researchers from Northwestern Universitythese molecules were actually born within the winds themselves."

Therefore, EM energy source is vital for the creation of any new born atom & molecular.

It's the time for our puzzled scientists to understand that any electron, atom, molecular in the galaxy had been created in the Milky Way accretion disc by its mighty SMBH' EM power.

## Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×

×

• #### Activity

• Leaderboard
×
• Create New...