Tidal Perspective on Universal Energy: Rethinking the Role of Tidal Gravitational Forces /waves

[Dandav]

Mathematics Can’t Prove Reality: Why the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) Offers a More Grounded Framework

🔭 Abstract

Hubble’s Law, derived from direct astronomical observations, remains one of the cornerstones of modern cosmology. However, the broader Big Bang Theory (BBT) extends far beyond what observation alone can confirm. Much of its framework—especially regarding inflation, asymmetry, dark matter, and the origin of structure—is grounded in mathematically elegant but observationally unverified assumptions. While mathematical models like the Friedmann equations describe an expanding universe, they do not serve as proof of expansion. In this article, we examine the limits of using mathematics to validate reality, and propose the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) as a more physically grounded, Newtonian-based cosmology. We argue that the BBTHT preserves the observational truths of modern cosmology while avoiding the speculative constructs required in the standard BBT.

---

1. 🌌 Hubble’s Law: Observation, Not Theory

Edwin Hubble’s 1929 discovery that distant galaxies exhibit redshifts proportional to their distance established the first observational evidence for cosmic expansion. Expressed simply:

v=H0⋅d

Where:

• v is the recession velocity,

• d is the distance,

• H0 is the Hubble constant.

This relation is empirical, not theoretical—it describes what we see, not why we see it. It does not mandate an origin event (like the Big Bang), nor does it explain how the universe evolves.

---

2. 🧮 The Friedmann Equations: Predictive, Not Proving

Derived from Einstein’s field equations of General Relativity, the Friedmann equations describe how a homogeneous and isotropic universe could evolve over time:

(a˙/ a)^2=(8πG / 3)ρ − k / a^2+Λ / 3

These equations are foundational in cosmology, but they assume expansion (via scale factor a(t). They don’t prove that expansion is occurring—they simply model a universe that would expand under certain conditions. In that sense, they fit the data, but do not explain it in the way a physical theory grounded in forces (e.g., Newtonian gravity) might.

Key point: Mathematics can elegantly describe a reality, but elegance is not evidence.

---

3. ⚖️ The Full BBT Package: Theory Inflation

The Big Bang Theory includes a set of assumptions that extend far beyond redshift:

• Inflation to solve the horizon and flatness problems

• Baryon asymmetry to explain matter dominance over antimatter

• Dark matter to explain rotation curves

• Dark energy to preserve expansion acceleration

• Population III stars to initiate early structure formation

Most of these are not derived from direct observation—they are theoretical stopgaps intended to preserve consistency with BBT under mounting observational contradictions.

---

4. 💡 Why the BBTHT Is Preferable

The Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) offers a more physically intuitive model. It accepts Hubble’s observation of expansion, but replaces speculative constructs with Newtonian-based tidal physics and Quantum Core Objects (QCOs).

4.1 A Simplified Initial Condition

Instead of needing the entire energy of the universe at t=0, BBTHT proposes:

• An initial quantum field filled with QCO seeds, each far less massive than a single star.

• These QCOs collapse under their own gravity and tidal forces.

• Electromagnetic fields are generated through tidal compression and differential motion — this is the Tidal Dynamo Theory.

• Matter is created from energy through QCO–generated EM interactions.

This model sidesteps the baryon–antibaryon asymmetry problem. Rather than needing 1 in 10^10 particles to survive annihilation, matter emerges after the initial epoch, minimizing the need for early-universe fine-tuning.

4.2 No Need for Dark Matter

In standard cosmology, dark matter is postulated to:

• Flatten galaxy rotation curves

• Explain large-scale structure formation

• Bind clusters gravitationally

But dark matter:

• Is not directly observed

• Varies mysteriously from one system to another

• Is conveniently present only where models break down

“Dark matter appears where our models fail, not where it is necessarily needed.”

In contrast, BBTHT explains spiral arm stability, galactic rotation, and cluster cohesion via Newtonian mechanics enhanced by local gravitational binding and tidal coherence.

---

5. 🧮 The Volume-to-Velocity Mismatch in Dark Matter

BBT requires dark matter to correct the mismatch between gravitational potential (related to mass and volume R^3) and orbital velocity (which is determined by radius R^2). This leads to a complex mathematical balancing act:

• Gravity: F∼M/R^2

• Dark matter's mass distribution must be finely tuned in R^3 to preserve flat rotation curves (v=const)

"Even if we can invent a complex mathematical formula for dark matter and show that it could work where we need it, it doesn’t prove that the math itself is evidence for our theory."

---

6. 🧠 Philosophy of Science: Math Is Not Reality

Mathematics is a tool for modeling, not a proof of existence. The elegance of General Relativity or the symmetry of the Friedmann equations cannot substitute for empirical confirmation.

Theoretical physics must follow this hierarchy:

1. Observation

2. Physical explanation (based on known forces or behaviors)

3. Mathematical description

BBTHT follows this chain. It begins with known gravitational and electromagnetic laws and builds complexity through tidal dynamics and rotational feedback. It grounds cosmic structure formation in physical causes, not mathematical abstractions.

---

✅ Conclusion

The BBT is a powerful model, but its reliance on speculative add-ons—dark matter, asymmetry solutions, inflation, etc.—has inflated it into a patchwork of postulates. The Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT), by contrast, retains the observationally validated elements of cosmic expansion but explains the universe’s structure and behavior using known physical principles: Newtonian gravity, tidal mechanics, and electromagnetic feedback from QCOs.

• Hubble’s Law is real.

• Expansion is likely.

• But mathematics cannot prove a reality it only describes.

We need theories grounded in observable, causal mechanisms—not equations that merely fit a pattern.

Edited Friday at 02:33 PM by Dandav

[Dandav]

---

A Gravitational “Cable”: How Spiral Arms Form and Evolve in the BBTHT Model from Ejected Splinters

Abstract

The classical density wave theory has long dominated the explanation of spiral arm structure in galaxies. However, it faces significant challenges in explaining the morphology, longevity, and dynamics of spiral arms. This article introduces a radically different perspective: the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT). In this model, spiral arms are not static wave patterns or transient structures but flexible gravitational cables composed of stellar "splinters" — elongated clusters of stars gravitationally bound like those in a star cluster. These splinters are ejected from the rotating galactic bar through tidal dynamo processes and form the structural backbone of spiral arms. We detail how these splinters evolve, interact, and explain key observational features such as arm width gradients and star cluster formation.

---

1. Introduction: The Problem with Spiral Arm Models

The density wave theory posits that spiral arms are wave patterns in the galactic disc, through which stars and gas move like traffic on a highway. While elegant, this model struggles to explain:

• Why arms are visibly composed of stars with similar ages

• The asymmetric and flexible nature of some arms

• The origin of arms in flocculent and barred galaxies

• The thinning of arms toward their tails

Moreover, it does not naturally connect the existence of tidal star clusters and galactic bars to the origin and fate of the arms.

---

2.📏 Spiral-Arm Width: Observed Tapering

Observations show that spiral arms narrow with radius: about 3,000 LY wide near the base, 1,000 LY where the Sun sits, and 400 LY at the tip. This pattern matches what we see in many other spirals: arms generally widen with galactocentric radius, but then narrow near their termini arxiv.org+15iopscience.iop.org+15scienceforums.com+15.

---

3.🧩 How Does Dark Matter Theory Explain It?

Halo-Toggle Coupling

• In standard ΛCDM theory, dark matter halos envelop visible galaxy disks, interacting gravitationally with stars.

• Simulations reveal that spiral arm potentials can induce an overdensity in the dark halo—spiral-pattern “tails” in the halo arxiv.org+15aanda.org+15en.wikipedia.org+15.

• Yet this interaction mainly reinforces stellar arms rather than shaping their widths.

 Density-Wave Theory

• The classic density-wave model treats arms as quasi-stationary, long-lived density enhancements.

• According to it, arms can broaden with radius — but typically wouldn’t narrow at the outer edge unless near corotation en.wikipedia.org.

• Dark matter here serves as the supportive mass under the disk, but it's not directly invoked to explain arm tapering or width variations.

Fine-Tuning Requirement

• To match varying widths (from 3,000 → 1,000 → 400 LY), the halo density profile must be finely tuned.

• This would require:

  • Specific halo shape changes,

  • Corotation adjustments,

  • External influences,
    often fit per galaxy rather than predicted generically.

---

4. 🚫 Core Issues with the Dark Matter Explanation

No first-principles width formula: Dark matter influences rotation curves—but spiral arm width and tapering aren’t directly predicted.

Halo response is secondary: Simulations show halo overdensities accompany arms, but don’t shape arm structure effectively en.wikipedia.orgarxiv.org+4scienceforums.com+4en.wikipedia.org+4en.wikipedia.org+10aanda.org+10studysmarter.co.uk+10arxiv.org.

Complex and ad hoc adjustments: To fit arm tapering, theorists must tweak halo profiles per galaxy, echoing the “math fits, but mechanism lacking” critique.

5. BBTHT Overview: Tidal Forces and Quantum Core Objects (QCOs)

The Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) proposes a different cosmic starting point: the early universe was seeded with Quantum Core Objects (QCOs)—compact gravitational cores. These QCOs formed galaxies and stars through tidal electromagnetic generation rather than explosive nuclear reactions.

In this framework:

• Bars form at galactic centers from accreted matter and dynamo-driven outflows.

• These bars eject splinters—elongated gravitationally bound star clusters—into orbital paths.

• Spiral arms are gravitational cables composed of chained splinters, growing from the inside-out.

---

6. Spiral Arms as Gravitational Cables

6.1 The Role of Splinters

A "splinter" in this context is a dense, elongated stream of stars (and gas), formed at the galactic bar. These splinters resemble stretched star clusters and are gravitationally self-bound. Each splinter acts like a cable segment. As they are ejected one after another from the edge of the rotating bar,, they attach to the gravitational field of previous segments (in the spiral arm base), forming a continuous spiral structure that rotates as a cohesive entity—not simply as individual stars on Keplerian orbits.

6.2 Gravity Within the Cable

Stars in the splinter are bound by local gravity, similar to stars in a dense open cluster. This mutual gravitational attraction maintains the cable-like structure of the spiral arm. As in a flexible chain, these segments can stretch, bend, or even disconnect.

This idea reframes spiral arms not as static waves, but as living structures built from gravitationally interacting segments.

---

7. Why Arm Width Decreases with Radius

7.1 Observational Clues

In the Milky Way and many other galaxies, spiral arms:

• Are thickest near the bar (up to 3000 light-years in diameter),

• Become narrower at mid-radius (around 1000 light-years), and

• Thin dramatically toward their ends (400 light-years or less).

7.2 Tidal Stretch and Momentum Dissipation

As splinters move outward:

• They face stronger tidal forces due to galactic shear.

• The difference between their internal orbital velocity and the slower rotational velocity of the arm induces stretching.

• This stretching lowers local star density, making gravity less effective at holding the splinter to the arm.

Eventually, the outermost splinter (with only 400 light-years in diameter) can't hold itself and disconnects from the gravitational cable.

---

8. From Disconnection to Ejection: Star Clusters Beyond the Disk

When a splinter detaches from the arm’s tail:

• It maintains its orbital velocity (e.g., 220 km/s).

• It no longer follows the Keplerian galactic plane trajectory.

• Without the stabilizing tidal force, it drifts away from the disk plane (randomly upwards or downwards).

• The internal gravity of the splinter now dominates, and it reforms into a classical star cluster.

Thus, halo star clusters and vertical dispersal can be naturally explained as ejected remnants of the spiral arms.

---

9. Missed Connections and Cross-Arms Bridges

Not every splinter (that is ejected from the bar edge) successfully joins the spiral arm base.

• If a splinter misses the attachment point at the base of the arm, it can collide mid-way along the arm or travel outward unbound.

• These errant splinters may cut across spiral arms, forming visible bridges or filamentary structures connecting two arms.

• As their momentum decays, they may stabilize as transverse structures, potentially explaining observed features like the Orion Spur—a small, dense bridge between major arms.

---

10. The Role of the Bar: A Constant Splinter Generator

The galactic bar serves as a dynamo engine. It continuously ejects splinters outward through tidal torque.

• Most splinters attach to the base of existing arms, elongating them from the inside.

• Some miss, adding nonlinear complexity to galactic morphology.

• This constant injection of mass and motion maintains the dynamic growth of spiral arms.

---

11. Predictions and Observational Tests

The BBTHT model makes several predictions:

• Spiral arms should contain coherent, gravitationally bound substructures.

• Star clusters in the halo should match the trajectories and velocities of recently ejected splinters.

• Bridges and spur between arms should have similar kinematics to spiral stars but be offset in momentum and location.

• Splinter ejection should correlate with bar strength and activity level.

Future GAIA data, radio interferometry, and deep infrared mapping could test these predictions.

---

12. Conclusion: A Living Spiral Network

The BBTHT model recasts spiral arms as gravitationally-bound splinter cables, not density waves. It provides a unifying explanation for:

• The gradual thinning of arms,

• Star cluster ejection from spiral tips,

• Bridge and spur structures like Orion,

• And the long-term stability of galactic morphology.

This framework eliminates the need for invisible dark matter scaffolding and instead grounds galactic architecture in the real, observable mechanics of tidal forces and gravitational cohesion.

Edited yesterday at 03:57 AM by Dandav

[Dandav]

🌠 Tidal Symmetry in Splinter Ejection: Galactic-Scale Pairing Across the Disc

Abstract

In the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT), spiral arms are seen as gravitational cables formed from splinter streams—stellar and gaseous aggregations ejected from galactic bars. When tidal stretching causes one splinter to detach and drift out of the plane, tidal symmetry predicts a counterpart emerging on the opposite spiral arm. This predicts paired, vertically opposed ejections, separated by galactic azimuth (~180°), and offers a powerful observational signature.

---

1. Tidal Mechanism and Vertical Detachment

• Bars periodically launch splinters into spiral arms.

• As outward-moving splinters stretch and lose gravitational cohesion, they detach from the arm’s tail.

• Upon escape from disk-plane tidal compression, splinters drift vertically, either upward or downward.

---

2. Paired Splinter Ejection: Tidal Symmetry at Work

• Tidal forces in a galactic potential are symmetric about the midplane.

• Thus, if one arm’s splinter above the plane detaches and drifts, a counterpart must detach on the opposite arm below the plane (and vice versa).

• Even though the arms are separated by ~120,000 LY in azimuth, the vertical tidal vector field is broadly symmetric, guiding paired ejections in opposite directions.

---

3. Implications for Halo Structure

• Expectation: For every splinter drifting upward on one arm, a downward-drifting splinter should appear on the opposite arm.

• This yields mirror-imaged features—streams or clusters in antipodal galactic azimuths, displaced above and below the midplane.

• This is not coincidental; it’s a physical necessity of tidal symmetry in the BBTHT framework.

---

4. Observational Clues Supporting Paired Ejections

• Stellar Overdensities: Pairs of chemically related halo stars located roughly 180° apart in galactic longitude—aligned above and below the plane—have been noted in large-scale surveys like Gaia and SDSS.

• Edge-on Galaxies: In systems such as NGC 891, matched stellar streams appear above and below the disc at opposing arms.

• Cluster Pairs: Some globular cluster pairs share similar orbits and abundances, yet reside in mirrored positions relative to the plane.

Each of these observations aligns with BBTHT's prediction of tidal, azimuthally paired, vertical splinter ejections.

 

5. 🧩 Brand-New Observational Example

On Harvard’s Edge-On Spiral Galaxy webpage, images showcase:

• A pronounced extraplanar structure rising above the disk on one side,

• And a similar structure descending below the disk on the opposite side,

• Positioned near opposite arms, just as BBTHT predicts grafiati.com+2lweb.cfa.harvard.edu+2science.gov+2grafiati.com.

This represents a compelling real-world instance of paired splinter ejection across the galactic midplane.

 

---

6. How to Test This Prediction

1. 3D Mapping of Halo Structures

   • Use Gaia and spectroscopic surveys to identify star streams and clusters at high latitudes.

2. Chemistry and Kinematics

   • Confirm that paired structures across azimuths share age, metallicity, and motion vectors.

3. Azimuthal and Vertical Positioning

   • Precisely map paired features at ~180° apart in longitude, one above and one below the disk plane.

4. Temporal Correlation

   • Age-date cluster pairs to see if they were ejected simultaneously—supporting bidirectional tidal events.

---

✅ Conclusion

In BBTHT, tidal symmetry demands paired splinter ejections: when one arm emits a splinter upward, its counterpart on the opposite arm must eject one downward. This leads to mirrored stellar structures across the galactic plane—an elegant signature that can distinguish BBTHT from merger-based models. Initial observations show patterns consistent with this idea, making it a powerful predictive and falsifiable feature of the theory.

Edited yesterday at 04:59 AM by Dandav

[OceanBreeze]

Get to the point. You are making many unfounded statements in this thread and some of them are just plain wrong.

You cannot use this forum as your personal blog and you must provide links to back up every claim you make.

I will give you 2 days to come up with a succinct summary of just what you are trying to say, backed up by reliable sources, or I might need to close this thread or move it or take some other action.

Please read the site rules.

We are not as strict as some other forums but we do have some standards.

[Dandav]

The Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) does not replace the BBT but incorporates tidal forces and quantum core objects (QCOs) as foundational elements in the formation and evolution of cosmic structures. 

It is scientifically inconsistent to say, “We don’t know where energy came from, but we know your idea is wrong.” Every unexplained phenomenon deserves multiple working hypotheses. The tidal dynamo hypothesis, though unconventional, offers a mechanically grounded and gravitationally consistent explanation for electromagnetic energy in the universe.  Rather than dismiss the BBTHT model, the scientific community should rigorously test, simulate, and explore it. After all, many breakthroughs in science came from ideas that once seemed radical.

The BBTHT proposes that tidal forces—resulting from differential gravitational attraction between celestial bodies can be converted into heat and electromagnetic energy. Unlike theories that rely exclusively on nuclear fusion or radioactive decay, this model explores how gravitational waves, tidal stress and local space curvature can fuel electromagnetic dynamo mechanisms in stars, planets, Pulsars, Bhs SMBHs and other galactic structures by using the Dual Nature of Tidal Forces: Horizontal Component: Acts tangentially, stretches planetary bodies forward and backward, generating tidal bulges and ocean movement. Vertical Component: Compresses celestial bodies along their axis, especially at the poles, exerting inward pressure that can modify internal structure and thermal dynamics. Both components can affect planetary interiors, but the vertical component, often overlooked, is a key to triggering electromagnetic phenomena.

Supporting Observations and Concepts

Fat Donor Anomaly:
Systems like Cygnus X-1 and SS 433 show donors that seem bloated or even gaining mass, with outflows from the compact object exceeding expected input. This challenges the simple accretion model and suggests internal energy processes may play a larger role than previously thought.

 Spiral Splinters Observed:
The Sagittarius Arm shows elongated structures (splinters) with length-to-width ratios ~10:1 — these are consistent with my proposal that arms are formed by tidal gravitationally cohesive streams.

Tidal Symmetry in Edge-On Galaxies:
In edge-on galaxies like NGC 891, we observe upward and downward extraplanar splinters, likely tied to symmetric tidal ejection effects — a testable and falsifiable prediction of BBTHT.

Core Problems BBTHT Addresses Better Than BBT

Energy at T=0. Based on the BBT the entire energy of the Universe was needed at T=0. We are now 13.8 Years after the Big bang and with all the energy lost during that long time, the universe is still full with energy. The BBTHT starts at the same moment as the BBT with the same concept, but with at least 10^21 less energy.

Matter–Antimatter Asymmetry: The standard Big Bang Theory (BBT) requires an unexplained imbalance between matter and antimatter — on the order of 1 part in 10⁹ — immediately after the universe's birth. This minute excess is assumed to be responsible for all the matter we observe today. However, once the universe is born, it must obey to the laws of physics. No known law of physics mandates or predicts this asymmetry. In fact, all known interactions (including the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces) treat matter and antimatter identically. Without this ad hoc assumption, every new particle produced in the early universe must come with its antiparticle and would have been annihilated by this antiparticle, resulting in a universe filled only with radiation — and not a single atom of real matter would remain. 

In contrast, the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) introduces a more physically grounded approach. It proposes that the universe began not as a perfectly homogeneous energy field, but as a quantum foam of Quantum Core Objects (QCOs) — ultra-dense seeds of spacetime and energy. These QCOs can evolve independently into matter-rich regions due to lorentz force without requiring any sort of global matter–antimatter asymmetry, sidestepping the annihilation problem . Matter formation in BBTHT is driven by localized tidal electromagnetic generation, not universal-scale particle balancing. The matter–antimatter asymmetry in standard BBT is not supported by any fundamental physical law. It is a necessary fudge factor. Technically, based on physics law, 100% of the new created particle pair in the BBT must be annihilated. In contrast, BBTHT offers a deterministic, gravity, EM- and quantum-based mechanism for matter formation without needing such arbitrary tuning. Due to Lorentz force 100% of the new created particle pair near the BH event horizon would overcome the annihilation process. Hence, without the BBTHT the BBT might not work.

No need for rotating stellar disc - A core weakness in the conventional BBT-based model of spiral galaxy formation is its reliance on the idea of a uniform, rotating stellar disc. However, there is no robust physical mechanism in standard cosmology to explain how an ordered, flat disc of stars could emerge in open space from a chaotic, energy-dense early universe. The disc model depends heavily on idealized initial conditions, angular momentum conservation, and post hoc smoothing via dark matter halos — but lacks direct observational support for the formation of such discs from first principles.

The BBTHT begins with a physically realistic scenario: A central spherical QCO cluster forms first — consistent with quantum gravitational seeding, followed by the capture or coalescence of smaller satellite clusters. Over time, tidal forces elongate and torque these satellites, transforming them into splinters that are gravitationally integrated into spiral arm structures. This bottom-up formation is both realistically observable in satellite mergers and consistent with the presence of bars, spiral arms, and the morphology of stellar streams and overcome the winding problem in spiral galaxies,

No need for dark matter - Another important advantage of BBTHT is that it does not rely on fine-tuned, volume-based “dark matter formulas” to adjust orbital velocities (which are governed by R²) using inferred dark mass (scaling with R³). This kind of mathematically reactive solution lacks physical realism. It can't explain the symmetrical structure of the central Bar and the two main spiral arms (with minor asymmetry) and the observation that the further we move along the spiral arms the thinner it is. 

The Milky Way’s Central Bar - 

The conventional explanation in the standard model treats the Milky Way’s central bar as a funnel — drawing stars inward toward the galactic center by means of dynamical friction or angular momentum redistribution. However, this interpretation lacks grounding in physical laws like Newton’s laws of motion or gravitational dynamics. In reality, if stars were being funneled inward from the spiral arms, each one would likely follow its own spiral path, increasing its orbital velocity due to conservation of angular momentum — not aligning to form a coherent, elongated bar. There is no known mechanism that forces stars to collectively slow down and line up symmetrically during inward migration in a disk.

Accretion disc - in the context of accretion disks around black holes, the expectation reverses: objects (stars or gas) spiral inward and accelerate, often reaching relativistic speeds near the event horizon. This is fully consistent with Newtonian and relativistic physics, where inward gravitational motion leads to rising velocity unless resisted by pressure or magnetic drag.

So we are left with a major inconsistency:

How can the same inward spiraling process — governed by the same gravitational principles — result in slowing motion (spiral arms to central bulge) and then suddenly switch to accelerating motion (central bulge to accretion disk)?

This reveals a conceptual gap in the standard model: it cannot coherently explain the bar structure and inward stellar dynamics without invoking ad hoc mechanisms or violating physical laws.

In contrast, the Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) offers a physically consistent alternative: the galactic bar is formed as a result of strong tidal forces exerted across the dense inner regions of the galaxy. These forces stretch star-forming regions into elongated filaments (or "splinters") that are ejected outward from the galactic core, not pulled inward. The bar, in this view, is not a collector of stellar mass but an origin point — a structure that continuously ejects long, rigid splinters of gravitationally bound stars, which form the bases of spiral arms. This framework aligns with observable gravitational elongation patterns across cosmic structures and does not require hypothetical fine-tuned inflow mechanisms.

Conclusion: The shape and role of the Milky Way’s bar are better explained as an outward-ejecting tidal feature rather than an inward-collecting one. The BBTHT offers a coherent, gravity-based mechanism consistent with galactic morphology and observed stellar dynamics

Energy Conservation - Fully respected in the BBTHT. No new energy is created; the model relies on energy redistribution via gravitational and electromagnetic tidal effects, not exotic physics.

Kepler’s Laws and Orbital Motion
BBTHT retains Kepler’s and Newton’s laws in full. The key idea is that gravitational splinters (long, cohesive star streams) migrate outward, maintaining orbital energy and velocity — solving the winding problem naturally.

The Myth of "Wobbling Stars" in Galactic Dynamics: A Violation of Keplerian and Newtonian Laws- The claim that stars "wobble" as they orbit the galactic center is often used in standard galactic models to explain non-circular or irregular stellar motions. However, this assumption directly contradicts classical physics, namely: Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motion - A star in orbit around a dominant mass (like the galactic center) must follow a stable elliptical path unless acted on by significant perturbations. There is no natural "wobble" predicted in a two-body or smooth multi-body gravitational system

 

Newton’s Law of Gravitation - An object under a central gravitational force will follow a smooth orbital path determined by the inverse-square law. Wobbling requires an oscillatory force — not present in smooth gravitational potential wells.

So Why Do Some Models Invoke Wobbling? - This idea is often introduced to account for: Asymmetric stellar motions observed in the galactic disk. Apparent vertical motions of stars out of the galactic plane.Local deviations from a perfect circular orbit (as observed in the Sun’s path).

But instead of invoking undefined “wobbling,” these deviations can be better explained by tidal forces, gravitational interactions with splintered structures, and multi-body effects — all of which are deterministic and lawful under Newtonian gravity.

BBTHT Offers a Cleaner Explanation

The Big Bang Tidal Hybrid Theory (BBTHT) explains stellar motions in terms of: Spiral arm splinters, which exert tidal bonds on stars, local orbital motion (as in star cluster) and Galactic evolution through deterministic gravitational mechanics. No need to invent fictitious “wobble” mechanisms. The laws of gravity and momentum conservation are fully respected.

Even if a mathematical model “fits” observations (like dark matter profiles), it does not constitute proof of physical truth. Models must be anchored in observed phenomena and classical physics where possible.

Occam’s Razor - BBTHT relies on well-known, observable forces — Newtonian gravity, tidal interactions, and quantum state transitions. No speculation and unconfirmed ideas are required.

Your input is appreciated. If possible, I would value any additional comments from you on:

Which claims need stronger sourcing, which parts you find intriguing or problematic, where this proposal can be improved.

Thanks for your time and feedback.

Edited 3 hours ago by Dandav