Thoughts in Science
visitors
Black Hole Genesis This was my first post: Discover Magazine's April, 2003 article titled "In the Beginning, All Was --Black Holes?" may have hit the black hole on the head. It said that the early galaxies had more mature black holes than the standard model predicts. I ask, wouldn't it seem reasonable that the singularity that preceded the big bang was, in theory, the mother of all black holes. When the bang occurred, the outgoing material would be black holes of galactic masses. These black holes were sent outward, spinning at incredible rpm's. Outward may not have meant radially. When two black holes made near misses on each other, primordial material was ripped off in spiral shapes creating spiral galaxies. The primordial material coalesced into stars. My theory is that the early black holes preceded stars and were not created from them. This was "black hole genesis". Clifford Lazar Los Angeles 3/8/03, 3/10/03 This is my second: Black Hole Genesis Scientific American Magazine (July, 2004, Page 32) reports that Reinhard Genzel has discovered "...giant galaxies just a couple of billion years after the big bang...with mature stars.." Again I suggest: Isn't it likely that the big bang was the mother of all black holes? Further, the first big bang products were massive black holes, some of which may have later banged. What followed was a universe filled with
speeding and spinning black holes that made near passes on each other. The near misses ripped the black holes’ event horizons, spewing primordial material, and later hydrogen and helium, which spiraled off the central black holes -- these were the first galaxies. This theory seems to fit with the current data. What would this theory predict? 1. The existence of a few free black holes. 1a. Evidence of free black holes
in the early universe. 2. Evidence of distended galaxies, without evidence of a colliding galaxy. 3. Distant black holes could partially explain acceleration. 4. More abundant black holes could partially explain dark matter. Sincerely, Clifford W. Lazar Los Angeles, CA USA 4 July 2004 Here is my third post:
Hypothesis:
Dark energy is composed of fast spinning black holes.
Dark matter is composed of slow spinning or non-spinning black
holes.
Fast spinning black holes would tend to drag matter and
time in the direction of the spin, imparting centrifugal force, a repelling
force. The greater the spin the greater offset to the gravitational
pull.
Slow or non-spinning black holes would slow the orbit of
neighboring matter while at the same time allowing for faster orbits as the
matter sinks towards the black holes.
This fits with black hole genesis (see above): the original
matter, at the big bang, was black holes. Black holes preceded galaxies.
Galaxies were created by black holes making near misses by
each other, stripping off matter that became hydrogen gas, that coalesced into
1st stage hydrogen stars in spiral galaxies.
Primordial galaxies would tend to be spirals. They
would be composed of hotter hydrogen stars.
Detecting Fast Spinning Black Holes Detecting Slow Spinning or
Non-Spinning Black Holes A way to detect slowly spinning or non-spinning black holes is to detect lensing of the origin light patterns with red shifts differing from the same light patterns but no apparent source of the lensing..
Cliff Lazar
Los Angeles, CA 4/30/05, 5/1/05 This was sent to kstanek@cfa.harvard.edu on 8/3/05:
I would like to suggest an alternative model for the
relationship of black holes to galaxies:
The big bang was the mother of black holes. Billions
of black holes were ejected from the big bang. [The black holes were all
different in size and spin.] Black holes (BH) existed before galaxies.
Black holes were moving near the speed of light and made close passes on
nearby BH's.
The close passes induced higher spin rates in the
smaller of the pairs sufficient to rip off matter in spiral forms. The
larger BH may not have had a sufficiently high spin to rip of matter.
The matter ejected from the smaller BH coalesced into stars visible as spiral
galaxies.
Other black holes had very little or no spin -- they are
dark matter. Some black holes had spin below the ejection threshold
-- they are dark energy. Their spin pushes away nearby matter by the
rotating gravitational field.
These dark matter and dark energy black holes can be
detected by lensing and motion of nearby objects.
Clifford Lazar Fourth Post A Supermassive Black Hole, Forming in an Existing Galaxy, is Problematic If a million solar mass star existed in a galaxy, its transition to a super nova, with a remnant black hole, would reduce the total mass of the black hole compared to the parent star simply because the debris that exploded would be expelled, even out of the galaxy. Thus the concept of a second generation black hole, sucking in galactic matter, when the parent super massive star hadn't sucked in its neighbors, seems unlikely. Why haven't super massive stars, which suck in their galactic neighbors, been discovered? The signatures of super massive stars sucking in galactic neighbors would be similar to black holes, except the light from the super massive stars would accompany the signatures. Clifford W. Lazar 11/26/2008 Fourth Post The Big B'Bang If the Big Bang was composed of two or more expellations of mass from the origninal singularity, it might better explain the subsequent morphology/shape of the universe. The first expellation was the stuff the made the hydrogen and helium. The expellation was more homogeneous than hetrogeneous. The next expellations were composed of the stuff that compose black holes, i.e., supermassive black holes. The supermassive black holes sped through the diffuse hydrogen and helium and generated negative conical or parabolic wakes that compressed the diffuse material into the filaments and clusters that we see today and at multi-light year distances in the beginning of the universe. posted July 13, 2009 by Clifford W. Lazar black holes black holes black holes black holes black holessupermassive black holes
|