The Universal Vortical Singularity

[G_burnett]

The X-ray afterglow of GRB 080916C appears orange and yellow in this view, which merges images from Swift's ultraviolet/optical and X-ray telescopes.
Image credit: NASA/Swift/Stefan Immler.


bit of a vortex pig tail ...what? what?

[Vincent Wee-Foo]

The X-ray afterglow of GRB 080916C appears orange and yellow in this view, which merges images from Swift's ultraviolet/optical and X-ray telescopes.
Image credit: NASA/Swift/Stefan Immler.


bit of a vortex pig tail ...what? what?

The vortex pig tail was indeed there, and it appear like it is a corkscrew pair similar to the Cat's Eye Nebula.

[Vincent Wee-Foo]

after thought, please explain to me your define of time and to what platform of science the define is given? Ty

IMO, Newtonian time that is invariant is a correct concept. You mentioned Newton plagiarized someone else work, what did he plagiarize? Did he plagiarized absolute time as well? Where is your source of information?

I thought he ought to be shot for denying Cartesian cosmo. From the UVS perspective, Cartesian absolute space is filled with vortical aether is the correct concept, Newtonian absolute space is nulified of matter is incorrect.

However, his Newton's law of universal gravitation theory is very practical for applied science, desipte it did not explain the causality. And he should be credited for bringing spheroidal Earth theory and many of Galileo's work into public acceptance.

Kind regards.

[G_burnett]

Hi Vincent, Happy Easter to you over there.

Wren is my concern that fell off as a collaboration then as some said maybe just a love affair that had fallen off.

It was a much different forum of communication and information passage, lack of language, that went on back then including a caste system of who's who.

It was also interesting to note that in his early years he was motivated to excel in studies by the wish to be better and show up a bully then in higher educational surround he gave nothing of consequence till out of the educational system and having his MA.... in his attic then.

the calculus arguments later then compromise to say both came to the invent by different means at the same time, leads back to Germany too a connect. .. for both.

The full understanding of centrifugal calculations later was a shared accreditation and if gravity was really understood from the given it should not have been so missed or misunderstood my thought.

hmmm i just love a conspiracy theory i guess, all that pip pip cheerio stuffiness ...

kind regards graham

[dipayankar]

I understood, but why would one galaxy (of roughly the same size as another) take almost double the time to become full size?

From the UVS perspective, it is the vortical motion of a underlying galactic vortex that coagulates plasmatic stellar matter as stars in an unisonal interaction and they are collected on the accretion disc and therefoce form the galaxy as observed. See a UVS topic on "Evolution of stars and galaxies".



From the perspective of UVS, the BB model is a cargo cult science. See a UVS topic on "Validity analysis".

[Vincent Wee-Foo]

I understood, but why would one galaxy (of roughly the same size as another) take almost double the time to become full size?

You have to be more specific with your question; there could be many possibilities.

Two galaxies could be weaved simultaneously in a galaxy cluster of five million light years across on two end and became full size together in absolute time, an observer at one end could see the galaxy nearer to him has fully developed while the galaxy at the other end in time dilated image is only half way through in the same galaxy cluster.

Other factors could be involved are the magnitude of torque-induced preccession according to circumstances for individual galaxies, its phase or its localized harmonic cyclical events of the driving cosmic vortex of the galaxy cluster would also play a part.

[G_burnett]

ok, Newton is fine to the consensus of sage and Katrina ...

forget if i gave this link to you or not? but here it is again, enjoy! kind regards graham
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02731177

[dipayankar]

Okay let me be more specific. How much time do you think Milky way took to form? 1 - 1.5 billion years. Why did those initial galaxies form in such a frenzy? What were the forces acting on them?

You have to be more specific with your question; there could be many possibilities.

Two galaxies could be weaved simultaneously in a galaxy cluster of five million light years across on two end and became full size together in absolute time, an observer at one end could see the galaxy nearer to him has fully developed while the galaxy at the other end in time dilated image is only half way through in the same galaxy cluster.

Other factors could be involved are the magnitude of torque-induced preccession according to circumstances for individual galaxies, its phase or its localized harmonic cyclical events of the driving cosmic vortex of the galaxy cluster would also play a part.

[Vincent Wee-Foo]

Okay let me be more specific. How much time do you think Milky way took to form? 1 - 1.5 billion years.

From the UVS perspective, the primordial Milky Way with a spiral collection of illuminating stars in vortex rings could have formed vortically in a cosmic instant. Similar to what the age of star HL Tau thought to be at 100,000 years old, the first vortical collection of star clusters that made up the primordial illuminating Milky Way could have evolved in a short span of time. Evidently, the outer ring of the Cartwheel galaxy appeared to be formed in very short time, presumably this is how the first vortical collection of stars could have formed in a rotating stellar medium that vortically organizes as a galaxy.

Why did those initial galaxies form in such a frenzy? What were the forces acting on them?

See a section under Cartwheel galaxy group under "Evolution of stars and galaxies" , "Lyman-alpha blob" that this is a huge concentration of a gas with ionized hydrogen atoms, and a report on "Blob may signal monster galaxy feeding" that suggests the blob may be an early galaxy caught in the act of forming.

From the UVS perspective, the galaxy evolution mechanism on how those initial galaxies were form in such a frenzy is magnetohydrodynamics of the gas blobs; vortical motion that causes precession effects. Heuristically, CMBR dipole rotating motion is the prime mover and the blobs are resonated locations of the universal medium with condensed stellar materials that have culminated vortical momentum. Details for this is illustrated in "The model of UVS".

[Vincent Wee-Foo]

ok, Newton is fine to the consensus of sage and Katrina ...

forget if i gave this link to you or not? but here it is again, enjoy! kind regards graham
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/02731177

Hi Graham,

Who is Katrina?

Btw, this sciencedirect site has got lots of papers on natural science. The previews only show the contents, did not show its synopsis, introduction or some key chapters. However, if they have any papers on natural paradoxes, optical illusions of nature and the likes, else I would jump straight in if any of those were available.

Maybe I should create that option in sciencedirect?

Thanks.