Home Translated by a
GALAXIES GENERATION THEORY and associated DARK CONVEX OBJECTS (DCO's) in the Universe.
Speculations on the Universe, as of 2000-03-19 Deutsche Version: Galaxien Nachwuchs Theorie
Introduction: For the universe, the formation of large structures in the universe, the formation of clusters of galaxies, the galaxies, the stars and planets, I developed ideas that are different, like what one reads that way.
My ideas are purely speculative. In order they are to be based only sometimes vaguely listed by me clues. Evidence I cannot provide.
My designs are divided into the four following main points:
@ Conventional Part
@ Exotic Part
@ Information on the Dark Convex Objects (DCO's)
@ Other terms
(1999-06-02 to 1999-08-08)
@ Conventional Part: (1999-06-26 to 1999-08-08)
This includes the formation of the planets, the moon and the continents of our planet. The star formation already belongs to the exotic part. The conventional part works with atomically constructed matter, while the exotic part essentially used no matter atomically constructed.
Gas Planet formation: (1999-07-04)
This arose when the sun slipped another star.
During the contact phase emerged between the two objects, a boundary layer having a plurality of vertebrae. After the two suns were again disconnected from each other, pulling each wake turbulence behind him. From the vertebrae of the tail to the rapidly rotating gas planets formed, while the two suns only mitbekamen by their encounter a low rotational momentum.
Earth formation: (1999-06-02)
In my opinion, the earth is condensed from a supernova Cloud, along with many other planets.
Three evidence suggesting:
The earth consists essentially of the chemical elements (e.g. iron, silicon) which can arise only in a supernova explosion.
The enormous heat in the earth can be explained most simply, if one starts from a condensing in a hot environment.
Looking at the supernova cloud M1, so is a fiber-education recognize that led Crab nebula to the name. In such a fiber, or in such a cancer-leg in my opinion created by the earth.
Moon formation: (1999-06-20)
Sometime the Proto-Earth arrived in the solar system and was in one of the gas planets such as Jupiter decelerated. In this case, the moon from the earth was separated off. The former Proto-Earth can be compared to a large liquid drops. If a drop decelerated in a gas atmosphere, it is divided. In principle I therefore belong to a group that believes that the Moon originally belonged to the earth. Only the chop-off mechanism, I do not think so.
Water origin: (1999-08-29)
Both the water and the earth atmosphere were originally bound in the soil. During the braking process in a gas planet the Earth was heavily filled. After leaving the gas planet again, there was a global evaporation in an almost unimaginable scale. This created a steam-containing primordial atmosphere was much denser than today's atmosphere. After some time the earth cooled off to the point where the water vapor condensed. It got to the primordial rain which completely covered the earth with water. So there was initially a long time no country.
Continent-emergence: (1999-07-25 to 1999-09-26)
A) After the moon from the earth had been separated and the planetary pair Earth / Moon had reached approximately its present orbit around the sun, the earth turned yet not. Just as Earth's Moon always shows the same side, so the soil showed the moon always the same side.
B) The Moon distance was significantly smaller than today and the moon had probably a greater mass.
C) Both the earth and the moon had the shape of ellipsoids and the earth was completely covered with water.
The continents emerged in my opinion, in three phases.
Stranding of the two first continents:
Before perhaps 500 million years stranding the two first continents began. Back then hit a big meteorite so on the elliptic earth that she commuted back and forth slowly. In each case the pendulum turning point occurred in the peripheral areas of the ellipsoidal caps excessive volcanism. This in turn was caused by the outgoing from the moon restoring forces. In each case the back-swing the Vulcan eruption were distributed by a huge tsunami. Both first continents were stranded in the area of that ellipsoidal caps.
In particular, the combination of 'strong, long-lasting volcanic activity' / 'large, regular floods' were able to build large areas of today's continents layers. Only the young fold mountains are not stratified. Using the example of the Grand Canyon can be seen that the sequence of layers partially over reaches a kilometers. Such a thing cannot be the result of sporadic flooding. There must be a period in Earth's history have been, during the first continents were flooded regularly and completely.
Exposing the two first continents so permanently originated Country:
By some event ended the regular massive flooding. This could have been caused by an alien planet, the moon further from the earth moved away on the present distance. Tides were just about the same as today. Also volcanism decreased strongly.
The two alluvial first continents stuck now permanently out of the water and were soon populated by land plants and land animals.
The two first continents were about the same size and consisted essentially of a respective central lowlands, which was surrounded by a mountain chain. Since the two first continents lay on the globe over, they were all around separated by thousands of kilometers of water. See also the keyword first continents.
All land masses had the same climate all year round. So there was no particular seasons. However, the day / night cycle was about 28 days. The cold and warm phases in the 14-day rhythm were in my opinion the reason that initially developed animals with changing body temperature (Wechselblütler).
Somewhere here I had picked up the following conclusion, which I took over:
"The first land animals appeared only before about 400 million years ago. It can be concluded that there was no permanent land previously ".
Indication of the assumption that the moon before about 400 million years ago with a small planet made contact: Different look of Moon front side and backside. The near side of the moon consists essentially of crater poor wares, while the far side of the moon is covered with impact craters. The near side of the moon could be only 400 million years old therefore.
Tearing apart of the two first continents: (1999-09-26 to 1999-10-03)
Before about 200 million years ago hit a little faster Planet tangentially into the ground, pierced the crust and pushed into the mantle. Thus, the earth's axis shifted by approximately 90 ° and the earth got its present rotational speed. Where today are the flattened poles, were about the ellipsoidal caps with the first continents before planetary impact. This torn apart by the gravitational acceleration. Due to penetrate the Earth asteroids, formed in the area of the Pacific Ocean one arch. The first continents drifted away from the bulge and were thereby partially slid over the poles, which led to the uneven distribution of land. After the atmosphere had cleared again, the first warm-blooded animals could develop because the nights only had about as long as today.
Clues on small planet wheel turning some 200 million years:
- Creative Pause nature, which lasted about 25 million years, nearly all kind of died.
- Pear shape of the earth (dent in the Indian Ocean, the Pacific bruise)
The asteroid came probably in the region "Indonesia / Philippines" into the ground.
@ Exotic Part: (1999-06-26 to 1999-08-08)
This includes the formation of stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies and large structures in the universe. The exotic part works with forms of matter, which does not exist in the solar system. This material forms I call nucleon masses. Nucleon masses do NOT have atomic structure.
For the universe: (1999-06-09 to 1999-06-11)
For the universe, I developed the "galaxy-young theory" because I like about any of the known theories. There are two main things that led me to the development of the above theory
1) In the spiral galaxies in my opinion is clearly seen that the spiral arms coming out of the center. This also applies to the bars of the barred galaxies. So I am one of those people who think that there is a development from the inside out.
2) For the universe is believed that it was set from an unknown source in the room finally long ago and goes out after that last a long time the last star. In my opinion, creates nature with an entire universe, only to then ultimately be left indefinitely unchanged and dark in the room.
Galaxies Generation Theory: (1999-06-11 to 1999-07-11)
Says this theory that always regrow new galaxies, so as is the case with the plants and animals.
The two main messages of the galaxy-young theory are as follows:
. 1 There is a reverse process to the star-process in which especially the helium is again split into hydrogen atoms. This reverse process takes place in the "Dark Convex Objects" instead.
. 2 A neutron star can evolve to a galaxy. The "Dark Convex Objects" are those objects that are developmentally between neutron star and galaxy. Thus, they are the precursors of galaxies.
The cosmic fuel cycle: (1999-06-26 to 1999-07-11)
If you (like me) assumes that the universe has always existed, the last sun would long since extinguished. An eternal universe requires therefore inevitably a fuel cycle.
The basic idea of the cosmic fuel cycle means that the fuel "hydrogen", which burns in the stars to helium is produced elsewhere in the universe again. I am therefore of the opinion that there are regions in space, which split the helium and the higher atoms back to hydrogen. These regions are the "Dark convex objects" (DCO's).
The transformation of the "non-hydrogen atoms" in hydrogen atoms is carried out but not directly, but indirectly via the nucleon matter.
Process and reverse process: (1999-06-26 to 1999-08-08)
Is usually referred to the process as what goes relatively quickly and easily, while the reverse process, which can be referred to as regeneration, in usually goes much painstaking and slow of equip.
Within the galaxy-young theory of process in the stars proceeds and the reversal process in the DCO's. The process in the stars I call cosmic process and the process in the DCO's a cosmic reversal process.
Star formation: (1999-12-05 to 1999-12-26)
Back in 1989, I came to believe that stars are formed in the border area or in the boundary layer between a DCO and the dark complex matter.
A few years later, the realization came added that the DCO and the dark complex matter rub and thereby must form a turbulent boundary layer, so that it comes to star formation.
In order to substantiate my ideas of star formation, it was necessary to find the DCO for as many star formation regions, which is in intimate contact with the dark complex matter.
After I had been found over the years for some of the star formation regions, the relevant DCO, I took the end of 1997 to early 1998 systematically the star formation regions before that displayed in the following book are: "Gaze into the universe (David Malin), Chapter 6: Where stars are born".
For all significant star formation regions I found ultimately the respective relevant DCO
Allen found and involved in star formation DCO's in common is that they are relatively located far are in the dark complex matter. Thus, the DCO edges are especially often seen only unclear. Helpful for the search was that I already of a more readily understandable DCO's knew the typical DCO forms, but then do not form more stars.
Star formation regions: (1999-12-26)
Roughly one can distinguish in the star formation regions between the star formation in the spiral arms and the star formation in the dark complexes. Both types of star formation regions in common is that dark matter and complex DCO surface rub against each other.
In a spiral galaxy, first comes the star formation in the spiral arms, and later the star formation in the dark complexes. The transition between the two types of star formation regions is the edge of the dark disk. As long as the spiral stream of dark complex matter about the dark disk or on its edge slides along, star formation occurs in the spiral arms. Once the spiral is moving outside the dark disk area, it the maintenance is lacking by the dark plate and it breaks sooner or later into individual complexes. Now is star formation before in the dark complexes.
When star formation in the spiral arms and in the bars of barred galaxies Dark complex matter glides across the dark disk. The turbulent boundary area is consequently between the dark disk and the power of darkness complex matter. The dark disk surface is largely identical to that of a DCO's because a dark plate is no more, as a late stage of development of DCO's. The stream of dark complex matter has either a spiral shape or a bar.
In the star formation in the dark complexes slides Dark complex matter in a DCO when entering the dark complex matter.
Galaxy formation: (1999-07-11)
Each galaxy emerged from each a "mature" DCO.
The galaxy formation is an essential part also star formation.
In addition, the different types of galaxies and the specialties of the galaxies are explained , Such specialties include the active site of the Bulge, the spiral arms or bars, the dark clouds and the globular clusters.
In principle, this can be all relatively easily by means of the presumed by me DCO's explain.
It is clear to me that the observations only of principle and are superficial.
Barred galaxies: (1999-07-11)
These arise from oblate DCO's, the so-called dark plates.
The two dark beams slowly come out of the center of the dark plate and push yourself through this. After a bar-piece was pushed through the dark plate edge, it does not hold more by the dark plate. It breaks, bends approximately at right angles and lurches in the further course on dark plate edge along.
Spiral galaxies / dark plates: (1999-07-18 to 2000-03-19)
The spiral arms come to my mind out of the galaxy-central region. This I Derive from the visual impression of spiral galaxies.
Hence the following question arises: Where does the matter that feed the spiral arms with replenishment? My answer is clear and unambiguous: The matter comes from the dark disk.
In each spiral galaxy is a dark convex shape more or less visible. It is only slightly smaller than in the spiral galaxy normally. The dark convex shape I interpret as a dark disk that is only a few light-years thick.
So now you have a source for the Spiral replenishment. It is the content of the dark disk.
The matter has to be forced out of the dark disc center to the outside, that there are two or more spiral arms. This is in my opinion especially the case when the dark disk tray rotates faster as the dark disk content. Through this rotation difference of the dark disk content is pushed through the central dark panels opening to the outside.
Spiral galaxies / movement of a spiral arm: (1999-07-25 to 2000-03-19)
After the spiral has reached over one half of the central dark panels opening to the dark disk, it flows at a constant speed through this without being appreciably wider.
Also, when the dark disk rotates in reality, you should still check for understanding the next sentences as standing: The spiral arm stream always flows the same way about the dark disk. The spiral arm stream consequently always comes out at the same location of the central dark disk opening and reached the dark plate edge and always in the same place. With increasing distance of spiral arm stream the galaxy center its circumferential speed is relative to the dark plate getting bigger, while the radial-velocity remains the same size as a first approximation.
Excluding rotate the previously mentally paused dark plate again, then for the circumferential speed of spiral arm stream that it is zero in the first approximation, while the outgoing from the galaxy center radial velocity of spiral arm stream turn remains about the same size. The circumferential speed of spiral arm stream is therefore approximately zero, because the interior of the dark disk is not co-rotate. It only rotates the dark disk tray.
Perhaps the following thought model makes the whole thing a bit better understood:
Imagine a person in front of which stands at the edge of the central dark disk opening up. This person consequently rotates together with the edge of the dark-plate opening. From the depths of the dark disk opening individual packages come at short intervals, for example, 10 seconds after the top. These come to exactly where the person is. Whenever a packet arrives at the top of the person, the dark disk stops abruptly with together with the person. The person taking the package and throw it in the direction of the dark disk rim. The package is flying straight and without circumferential velocity of galaxies center outwardly therefrom when the dark disk exerts no influence on the package, what in my thoughts model is the case until now. Immediately after the package-shedding the dark disk rotating at its original speed until it reaches the next package above the person arrives. Because the dark disk continues to rotate towards the dropped packets, this fall against the dark disk back ever. It forms the typical spiral shape of the galaxy.
With increasing distance from the galaxy center, the distance between the individual packets increases. That is, the spiral arm stream would stretched. However, such a spiral-strain does not match the visual impression of typical spiral galaxies. It is also necessary that the outer spiral arm parts be pushed through inner driving spiral arm parts further outward. For these two reasons, the first simplified conceptual model is adapted somewhat to reality:
The spiral arm stream glides across the dark disk. The friction between the dark plate the spiral arm stream his radial-velocity decreases with increasing distance from the galaxy center and its peripheral speed increases from initially approximately zero to higher values. Both speed changes offset each other such that the spiral shape is retained. The two speed changes but remains under the strain of spiral arm streams.
Spiral galaxies / prevention of spiral-winding: (1999-07-25 to 2000-03-19)
From the red and blue shifts of galaxies radiation stretching movements result in circular orbits for the radiant spiral galaxies-matter. This would lead to an ever closer winding of the spiral arms. For this reason, the spiral and rigidly rotating density waves have been defined. See for example the book "galaxies" of Time-Life. With the density waves in my opinion the dark component in the spiral arms is meant. At least up takes the pressure wave are exactly where the dark component.
After all, there is a commonality between my imagination and the "textbook" concept: It's the rigidly rotating element in a spiral galaxy. For me, the dark disk rotates rigidly. In the book Galaxies / Time-Life, the spiral density wave rotates rigidly. However, I found no statement about how quickly rotates the density wave in relation to the rest of the galaxy matter. This is probably because that the dark component in the spiral arms does not radiate or only weakly so shines that they (except optical) is undetectable. It can thus in particular no red / blue-shifts for the dark spiral component to be determined.
In my idea of the spiral galaxies-emergence the spiral-winding is prevented by the dark spiral component and a velocity component in the radial direction of has the inside outwards. The radial speed component prevents the spiral-winding.
Dark complex: (1999-08-01 to 1999-08-08)
These are often referred to as the dark clouds or molecular clouds.
The found in the literature term "dark complex" I assumed, because he describes the appearance of these objects in my opinion the best and because it does not specify their composition.
The term "dark clouds" does not appeal to me because these dark objects look slightly cloudy especially in the area of star formation regions. The term "molecular clouds" tells me also not to, because it leaves no room for other forms of matter.
In an astronomical lecture I heard that dark complexes of gas molecules, dust and "perhaps from something" exist. There is in my opinion in the dark complexes a certain disharmony between the determined composition and the resulting forms, so that one could take the view that there could "perhaps a little" give into the dark complexes.
Dark complexes are components of spiral arms and come thus ultimately from the interior of dark plates. From this, what they consist substantially. See the keyword "dark complex matter".
Dark complex matter: (1999-08-08 to 1999-11-28)
From the cosmic reversal process follows that dark complexes consist essentially of neutrons. For this reason, I call the dark complex matter like as neutron mass.
The dark complex matter has the optical impression creates a certain stability or alternatively sometimes a certain toughness. They must therefore have a structure. This structure is in my opinion of neutron chains.
Individual neutron decay, while neutrons remain stable in the atomic nucleus. I assume that neutrons also not disintegrate when they are lined up as a chain. Neutron chains are certainly cheaper as individual neutrons, when it comes to preventing the neutron decay.
Dark complex structure: (1999-08-08)
The neutron-chains can form either a mesh or scaffold or they are present as braid.
A framework of neutron chain could for example take the form of cubes. Of course, other shapes such as honeycomb conceivable. When framework the ends of the neutron-chains are attached to the backbone nodes. Thus, the neutron chain ends are protected from neutron decay.
A network of neutron-chains would be comparable to a fiber mat. When braiding the ends of the neutron chains are free. This decay, the two neutrons to the chain ends lighter and the chain becomes shorter and shorter.
A neutron chain framework has greater stability as a neutron chain braid. Basically, I would imagine that a neutron chain framework merges under certain conditions in a neutron chain braid.
Dark complex density in neutrons per cubic centimeter: (1999-08-08 to 1999-08-15)
The density of dark complexes arises when one assumes a certain cube size of the neutron chain framework. I appreciated this cube size to 1x1x1 mm.
In the book “Schülerduden Astronomie", the density of a neutron star with 10E13 and 10E15 g / cm3 is specified. That's 10E10 to 10E12 g / mm3. This is probably assumed that touch the neutron. Considering the neutron mass of 1,675E-24 grams are then approximately 6E33 neutrons tightly packed in a mm3. Considering the cube root of it, so arise about 1,8E11 neutrons for neutron chain with a millimeter in length.
In the 3-dimensional cube composite each cube delivers three edges. This eliminates about 5,4E11 neutrons on a 1 mm cube. That 5,4E14 neutrons per cm3. The literature describes the dark complex density is approximately 10000 = 1E4 hydrogen atoms per cm3 indicated. Since the neutron mass is approximately equal to the mass of hydrogen, are about 10 orders of magnitude between my density adoption and which will specify otherwise. 10 orders of magnitude is a factor of 10 billion.
Dark complex density in milligrams per cubic meter:
Assuming that a 1 mm large cube provides 5,4E11 neutrons, as calculated on the neutron mass of 1,675E-24 grams approx. 9E- 13 g / mm3. That's about 1 milligrams per cubic meter, or about 1 millionth the density which has the Earth's atmosphere. A cube with 10 meters edge length would have the mass of one gram.
Dark complex radiation attenuation: (1999-08-15)
The density of dark complexes derived from the radiation attenuation that cause dark complexes. Here, it is assumed that dark complexes consist of atomically constructed matter. I assume, however, that dark complexes consisting essentially of electron-free matter. Same density assuming takes my opinion electron free matter cause a substantially lower radiation damping, as atomically constructed matter. This I base with the substantially lower volume demand of a neutron in comparison with the volume requirements of a hydrogen atom. One could thus allow a significantly greater density of dark complexes, if they consist of electron-free matter.
Dark complex additives: (1999-08-15)
In principle, it may well be that there are between the neutron chain structure also hydrogen, helium, molecules and fine dust. A skeleton with a millimeter mesh size provides sufficient clearance for such additions.
Dark complex radiation: (1999-08-15)
The dominant radiation is identical to the radiation from the coal monoxides. I believe it is possible that this radiation could alternatively also be derived from the neutron chains.
Dark complex origin: (1999-08-15 to 1999-08-22)
If the procedure is not the GNT, so is the origin of the fine and finely divided dust in the dark complexes a certain problem. This I infer from an article in the. Magazine stars and space, which reported on the dust in search of supernova cloud M1. While it is small roundish dust regions were found. On Article end but said the author in substance that the dust found insufficient by far for the dark complexes. I think it is rather possible that the small, round dust-areas could be the precursors of terrestrial planets.
Large structures in the universe: (1999-12-12)
These consist of very many galaxies together. Depending on the size of the studied space-region structure found to be described differently:
- Galaxies organize itself as a spheroidal galaxy clusters
- Galaxies organize itself as a disk-like super-clusters of galaxies
- Galaxies organize itself as the "Great Wall" of
Galaxies organize in the environment of threads (strings) to.
Galaxies arrange themselves in bubbles and especially where touching the bubbles.
Galaxies arrange themselves on the edges of the honeycomb.
Perhaps there is the greatest room ranges assume that arrange themselves galaxies in skeleton form. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that there is a framework of DCO's in space. This DCO framework basically consists of struts and nodes. The galaxies are located in the vicinity of the struts and nodes of the DCO stand because they are out of this apparent and gravitationally bound by that.
That DCO's in skeleton form arrange and not in a different way, I derive from the shape of the DCO's. These are not spherical, but elongated because of their special gravity field and slim. The formation of the suspected DCO stand I imagine in principle as follows:
If two DCO's slow enough to each other, so they remain in contact with each. Relatively easy to imagine this may be that the two DCO's align parallel to each other. In addition, I am of the opinion that to shift the two DCO's to today and until such time as the two DCO's are in line and touch the ends or tips of the DCO's. It is now a chain of two DCO's emerged consisting. Superimposed to another DCO to the two existing ones, so this results in a linear chain of three DCO's. This creates a "thread" or a string in the room.
So resulting chains meet in the room and there is a node, radiating from the three or four frame struts. It would consequently give strings that end on one side only in a framework node or both sides run out of the room.
In the framework nodes can cause large accumulations of DCO's.
@ Information on the Dark Convex Objects (DCO's): (1999-06-26 to 1999-07-04)
Number of found DCO's: (1999-07-04 to 1999-12-05)
So far I found on about 350 astronomical images about 200 DCO's. On some of the astronomical images are several DCO's. Thus, I found a whole bunch of DCO's on different shots, so repeatedly. The recognition of a DCO's on different shots is important because of reproducibility. Some poorly recognizable and therefore unsafe DCO's I dash back from my list because they are not visible on a control shot.
Sophisticated DCO's: (1999-12-19 to 1999-12-26)
Its interior matter is low density, which is suitable to produce stars.
Sophisticated DCO's are easily deformed. They deform in particular to extremely flattened dark plates when straight in rotation.
Meaning of DCO's: (1999-12-05)
The DCO's I think the most important or most important sky objects. In my opinion, these objects have the function of the Creator in heaven, because of them ultimately all seen what we know.
Movement direction of DCO's: (1999-12-26)
Some emission nebulae, the moving direction of the main DCO's still indicates a kind of tail. So you can see in particular that the Trifid DCO (M8) from top left to bottom right, the lagoon-DCO (M20) from the lower left to the upper right and the Adler-DCO (M16) almost exactly moves from left to right. All three nebulae in common is that they are on the edge of the galactic dark plate. Consequently, the galactic dark plate edge moves among the three DCO's from right to left across. The oblique DCO web provides a resultant is when the DCO shall take from the intergalactic space from the top or bottom of the dark plate edge.
It arises from the stated by me moving direction of the DCO's three listed no contradiction to the rotational direction of the galactic dark plate or the galaxy, when referring the DCO movement toward the dark disk and looks for relatively dark plate. The galaxy rotates when viewed from above in a clockwise direction.
Influence of DCO speed on the matter and energy-collecting: (1999-11-07 to 1999-11-14)
With decreasing speed of DCO's in space, it will encounter less material per unit time. At a decreasing rate, it will not, however, take on less radiation, as the speed of the upcoming radiation from all sides is large compared to the DCO speeds.
Influence of matter density in the DCO environment on the matter and energy-collecting: (1999-11-14)
With decreasing matter density in the DCO around the DCO will collect less Matter
The energy-collection rate is, however, not appreciably decrease. Although no matter is in the DCO environment in an extreme case, but there is still a power supply from more distant regions. This fact is important because the DCO a long period needed in it as little matter, but continuously collects energy.
Classification / classification of the DCO's: (1999-12-19)
The DCO's can be grouped into any of the known celestial object groups in my opinion. The DCO's are a new independent celestial object group.
Disposable isolation of DCO's: (1999-11-28)
One of the main problems is to find a plausible explanation for the energy intake of DCO's. The DCO must be able also to collect energy when it is much hotter in its interior, as in the DCO environment. I paraphrase this DCO capability with the concept of one-way isolation. This means that energy always flows only in a direction going from outside to inside in the DCO. The energy flow from the inside to the outside must be locked.
This problem would be easily solved if one were the DCO concede a Schwarzschild radius. This radius should not be calculated for the corresponding formula, because otherwise would get too large values, but he may have to be recognized as quasi constant value over the DCO surface. A few millimeters thick gravity layer over the DCO surface that is so strong that it cannot leak radiation energy, would be sufficient.
With this statement, however, I am dissatisfied with my assumption that DCO's are able to reflect radiation and limited express. As a way out of this dilemma, I see the time, only the possibility that the relatively thin insulating layer gravity is not at or above the DCO surface, but only under the DCO surface, ie in the shell of the DCO's. At the DCO surface gravity should not be much higher on the sun.
In principle, there could be a solution model for the complete disposable insulation, which does not require the action of gravity. The matter of which there is a DCO-shell, would have to have the property to pump radiation or thermal energy to the DCO in specifically contrary to a temperature gradient of millions of Kelvin.
For atomically constructed matter of this pump mechanism unthinkable. The DCO shell consists however of very compact nucleon matter, in which the heat in general can act very limited, so that the structural disposable isolation at this point should be mentioned at least.
Discovery of the first DCO's: (1999-10-24)
The first DCO I found in spring 1989. It is the DCO in the Lagoon Nebula. Years later I realized that this is an overlapping DCO pair.
Recognizability of the DCO's: (1999-10-03 to 1999-12-05)
This is always poor to very poor. There is no single DCO, which would represent a "leap out" at an astronomical recording. The DCO's One has somewhat arduous behold by scans an astronomical receiving a long time. It therefore goes without saying that there is no DCO, which can be seen in the sky with the naked eye.
If you want to follow the edge of DCO's around, it is noticeable that there is a relatively well discernible edge region and almost always a bad or are not recognizable edge region of the DCO's. The DCO recognisability is therefore usually asymmetrical.
Comparatively are clearly visible such DCO's who are about to leave a star formation region. In these cases, a relatively large amount of light is present in the DCO environment.
The Discoverable by DCO's on astronomical images largely depends on the exposure time from. Longer exposure times generally lead to a better recognition. There are also cases in which the visibility is again worse by a too long exposure.
Renewed acceleration of DCO's: (1999-11-21)
This has to be considered in relation to the career of a DCO's and the DCO mass increase. To re-acceleration occurs when a small intergalactic DCO gets into a spiral galaxy. With increasing mass of small DCO's, the renewed acceleration falls out less and less. This is the mass ratio "spiral galaxy / small DCO". The ever smaller emerging accelerations are a cause for reaching mass limits of DCO's.
Existence of the DCO's: (1999-06-26)
This is not detected, so speculative.
Color of the DCO's: (1999-08-15 to 1999-10-24)
This is undoubtedly black. Other colors in the DCO domain of lightened foreground matter.
Forms of the DCO's: (1999-07-04 to 2000-03-19)
There are around ended and pointed end DCO's. Approximately half of the DCO's is round ended. Accordingly, the other half of the DCO's is cone ended.
The ratio of length to width is approximately between 1:1 and 7:1.
The round ended DCO's look something elliptical. This includes some nearly circular DCO's, however, are probably in perspective greatly shortened.
The pointed end DCO's are one hand football or lemon-like and on the other to distinguish spindle-like shapes. The spindle forms have extremely pointed ends.
See also: Symmetry of the DCO's
All DCO's, regardless of their size, the same characteristic forms.
Galactic dark plate: (1999-12-26)
Like all spiral galaxies and barred galaxies is based on a dark plate, so the galaxy has a dark plate. We are located outside the dark disk rim.
Birth and death of a DCO's: (1999-11-14)
The birth is defined by me at the time, in which the gravitational field of the grown-up neutron star collapses. The death of a DCO's, which has managed to galaxies, is not to define as precisely because such a DCO dies in installments or disappears. Whenever something is dissolved by the dark complex matter to gas, is left a little less by the DCO. The dark complex matter heard so according to my definition just for DCO. How quickly a DCO dissolves, also depends on type galaxies.
Besides the few DCO 'which made it to the Galaxy, there is the great mass of the DCO's, the prematurely disappear in other DCO's. This final disappearance of smaller DCO's in larger, can be regarded as death-time of smaller DCO's.
Size of the DCO's: (1999-07-04 to 2000-03-19)
The size is between about 20 km of the neutron star and ca.30000 light years for a dark plate. So far I found DCO's in different sizes. The smallest identified by me DCO's are estimated to be only a few light days large. The largest found DCO's that are not flattened, have an estimated 10,000 light-years. I know virtually all intermediate sizes, be it 1 light year or are there 10, 100 or 1000 light years.
However, there is an observation gap between neutron stars and the smallest found DCO's. This gap you will never be able to completely close, unless a very small DCO come and visit us in the area, but what I can do without.
If we find a plant or animal-type specimens of different sizes, so the is suggest that the specimens of this species grow. This conclusion I transfer to the DCO's. The fact that one finds DCO's in all sizes, could be regarded as an indication or even proof of the DCO growth.
There are at the planets, stars and galaxies also very different sizes. Nevertheless, I do not claim that this celestial object species grow remarkably. Planets, stars and galaxies is given their size or mass substantially at birth. The mass then still added during the object lifetime is relatively small.
In the DCO's, the situation is quite different, because their life is much higher, as the planets, stars and galaxies. Although the DCO is given an initial mass in the form of neutron star mass. Due to the enormous lifespan of a DCO's its growth is collected matter but the dominant feature when imagines its development in fast motion.
Large-scale influence of DCO's: (1999-10-24)
It could be the resulting curved gravity field many DCO's, which leads to the repetition in the spacious room structure. The spacious room structure apparently consists of bubbles or honeycombs.
Intergalactic DCO's: (1999-12-05)
Such it must be because the DCO's that have reached our galaxy and other galaxies, somewhere must have come forth. The problem is that these intergalactic DCO's are completely invisible. The intergalactic DCO's are perfect camouflage artists. They seem to be able to guide the light around them and be recognizable until it has come to a collision with star formation.
Life of a DCO's: (2000-02-20)
In any case, this is substantially greater as the life of a galaxy. The time from the neutron star to the first DCO stars I guess at present to a hundred to a thousand times the lifetime of a galaxy. The lifespan of an average galaxy I guess to 100 billion years. The galaxy is actually just the final burning of a DCO's.
Proof of DCO's: (1999-10-24 to 1999-12-05)
My only evidence are often only vaguely recognizable forms on astronomical images in the visible range. In all other wavelength ranges, the DCO's are gone.
A limited evidence of DCO's could the movement of these objects be. Once one has some DCO's measured precisely, so can perhaps find a position-change over time.
Naming the DCO's: (1999-06-26)
The name arises from the dark convex shapes, which can be seen on some astronomical images. I'm speculative assumption that these dark convex shapes caused by DCO's.
Surface of the DCO's: (1999-08-15 to 1999-11-07)
This is probably smooth as a mirror. I think it is therefore possible that the DCO's rays reflect. The reflection-assets of DCO's could be an explanation for why they are so difficult to see.
Cross section of a DCO's: (1999-11-28)
A DCO is not a homogeneous structure across its cross section with safety. Partially or fully mature DCO's made in my opinion from a relatively dense shell, does matter is within a substantially lower density.
Edges of DCO's: (1999-11-28)
The edge of a DCO's always runs continuously. If we follow the edge of DCO's, one finds no indentations or notches or other discontinuities. Only with pointed end DCO's the steady course of the edge is interrupted by two tips.
Maturation of DCO's: (1999-11-28)
This depends mainly on how much energy the DCO has already collected per unit mass. Much energy collected and a high percentage of 'recycled' material represents a high level of maturity.
Collecting radiation through the DCO: (1999-11-28)
See 'disposable isolation of DCO's'.
Sparkle's DCO: (1999-12-05)
Certainly there is the chaos of the Milky Way band recordings forms that are purely coincidental approximately elliptic or convex, and have nothing to do with a DCO. Such cases can be resolved by a control recording with a different focal length and / or with a different exposure time generally. A filter or another filter can bring something.
Because of the many over the years collected elliptical and convex forms, I have come to believe that behind the shapes found there more like just a big coincidence.
Basically you could still this opinion that all detected cases random and therefore slip-DCO's are. If one looks for example to approximate triangles or squares examined for astronomical Milky tape recordings long enough, so you might find some. It should be noted, though, that I do, so the beginning of 1989, the opinion was initially that DCO's are spherical. So I was originally looking circles and therefore initially found preferably squat DCO's. Gradually I found out, however, that the spherical or circle-like shapes rather rare and the elongated, slender forms are the rule.
Swarms of DCO's: (1999-12-05)
Such it must be because I increasingly DCO's found in some regions of our galaxy. Most notable in terms of DCO wealth is the region around Eta Carina. A similar DCO wealth there is in the region of the Tarantula Nebula, located in the Large Magellan Cloud.
Gravity field of the DCO's: (1999-08-15)
From the elongated and partly pointed end forms the DCO's, I conclude that they must have a strange gravitational field. I have come to the conviction that the DCO's own a bipolar, curved and partially broken-down gravity field. Furthermore, I believe that the gravitational field of a DCO's at no time is so strong that it can restrain radiation.
Stern reflection on DCO's: (1999-11-07 to 1999-12-05)
So far I found only very little star (2 to 3), which are stuck on the DCO surface. This I explain the fact that only very old and almost burnt out star stuck on the surface after a collision with a DCO. All other star dissolve apparently after colliding with a DCO again from this starting; are thus reflected by the DCO. From the fact that the DCO's are not added in the star-rich regions with stars, it can be concluded that the DCO gravity field is not very strong.
Radiation oversupply of DCO's: (1999-12-05)
The radiation transmission into the interior of a DCO's is certainly a problematic process, because the radiation and the resulting transformed energy must flow in exactly the reverse direction, as is usually the case: the energy needs to flow from the cold DCO surface into the hot interior of the DCO's. I am therefore of the opinion that only a very small flow of energy in the interior of a DCO's is possible. This matches the DCO more radiation as it can dissipate inside, so this is my opinion preferably reflects and leads, if at all, only to a slight warming. Such a radiation oversupply is thought to arise when a DCO is in a star-rich region.
Symmetry of the DCO's: (1999-10-03 of 1999-12-05)
All DCO's, which I found so far are very symmetrical. Most DCO's are symmetric with respect to both axes. A small remnant of about 15% is uniaxial symmetric. In the case of the two axes is, the two center lines, as they exist in ellipses.
Processes in DCO: (1999-12-19)
This is based on a DCO, wherein the matter collection phase is substantially complete and the DCO only collects radiation and other tiny particles. Furthermore, it is assumed that within the DCO's are the nuclei of the collected material. Nuclei that are heavier than iron are probably already split by the compression. Between the nuclei resting electron. Using the data collected by the DCO radiant energy initially the atomic nuclei of iron and the lighter nuclei are separated into individual nucleons. This requires in particular with the helium nuclei an enormous energy. After this separation work is finished, the further radiation is used to complete the protons. There are finally the neutrons originated. However, the DCO Shell pumps continue incessantly energy in the DCO, which now ensures that the DCO inflates slowly. This is the third development phase of the DCO's for matter-collection phase and the radiation collection phase. During the inflation, the average DCO density decreases steadily.
Presumably, all pre galaxy DCO's that I've found so far, are in the swell phase.
Career of a DCO from neutron star to galaxy: (1999-10-03 to 1999-11-28)
Pro Galaxy manages an average of only a neutron star back to the galaxy. All other neutron stars that have emerged in a galaxy, eventually lose their autonomy. These neutron stars also begin the career to the Galaxy, but swallowed by other DCO's. In the DCO that is mentioned in the other embodiments, is that a DCO, which makes it to the Galaxy.
The career and the development of a DCO's from neutron star to the Galaxy is mentally difficult to capture. Almost inconceivably huge changes are required to make a neutron star, a galaxy. This applies both to the mass ratio "Galaxy / neutron star" as well as the density ratio "neutron star / galaxy". However, I think that there is this development path from the neutron star to the Galaxy. At the same time this development path is the most important element of the galaxy-young theory; in addition to the principle of process and reversal process.
Even after a neutron star is no longer register as a pulsar, it continues to exist. Since each finally developed large object in any way further, this should also apply to neutron stars. Surely the neutron star will be massive because of its gravity. I now believe that the neutron star from a certain mass to be gravity field largely loses. It comes to the collapse of the gravitational field. From this point I refer to the neutron star as a DCO.
The collapsed gravitational field has the consequence that the DCO is thrown by a rotating spiral galaxy. The DCO is now flying away with the rotation speed of the spiral galaxy from this. This speed is compared with the speed of rotation of the planet, quite high.
Since the DCO is now flying at a relatively high speed through space, it collides with much matter per unit time. The bouncing matter increases the DCO mass relatively quickly. The phase in which the DCO comes to matter, I call matter-collection phase.
With increasing mass, the DCO is getting slower. A few DCO's get on their way through the universe by chance in a spiral galaxy. Because of the galaxies rotation the DCO is accelerated again. The DCO leaves the Galaxy again by the centrifugal force, because it is still largely powerless difficult.
On the Mechanism of reacceleration in one or even several different spiral galaxies, the DCO nearly reach the mass of a galaxy. The fast galaxies rotation is thus for the preservation of the species "galaxies" required.
Once the DCO has finally come to a near standstill, its mass increases in the course only by the matter, which comes to the DCO.
The DCO ultimately does not have to only reach the mass of a galaxy, it also has to collect as much energy as a galaxy in their lifetime in the form of stellar radiation emits energy.
Since the energy supply in the universe just is very low, the energy-collecting phase is much take longer, as matter-collection phase. During the energy-collection phase, the increase in mass of the DCO's may only be very small, because for every kg of collected mass still quite a high amount of energy needs to be collected.
The only very small increase in mass I imagine as follows:
Sometime the DCO reaches the scaffold DCO's. There superimposed itself. Through the influence of DCO's, form the framework, will be around the scaffold cleared relatively empty of atomic matter. The DCO's of the framework are only irradiated substantially and collect energy. This harvested energy is first used to break down the Helium nuclei into individual hydrogen nuclei. Even after this has been completed, the DCO continues to collect energy. This excess energy causes the DCO inflates. So his seal decreases. Eventually, the DCO is so charged with energy that it detaches from the DCO skeleton. Since galaxies usually occur in groups or clusters, it could also be that a whole part of a DCO stand while 'mature' is and this scaffold part resolves to a cluster of galaxies.
Ripe, is 'soft' DCO's reach another mass increase even by swallowing small solid DCO's. Once a DCO forms through their own matter star, it is called a galaxy. While the Galaxy phase, the DCO is consumed at different rates depending on the type galaxies. The career of the DCO's, which made it to the Galaxy is now complete.
Importance of the DCO's: (1999-12-05)
See "What the DCO's".
@ Other terms: (1999-07-04)
Stimulating star: (1999-10-24)
It stimulates an HII nebula to shine. Go from him in my opinion produced by the stars of an open cluster. I am therefore of the opinion that the stars are formed through the intermediate step of the exciting star. Stimulating stars form much less frequently than most other stars.
A new star arises stimulating always behind a layer of dark complex matter. The early phase of an exciting star is so trackable only in IR. The rating detachments from the exciting star done apparently in a phase in which it is still completely surrounded by the dark complex matter. A star-forming region is the only optical conspicuous when the exciting star, has largely resolved the dark complex matter that surrounded him before. When a star-forming region in the optical is striking that star formation is essentially already over. I am therefore of the opinion that detach from exciting star no star, if he is no longer surrounded by dark complex matter. Star detachments from the exciting star will therefore be detectable only in the IR.
In the exciting star can be either be a star-nest or around a star with a special internal dynamics.
A star-Nest would consist of many individual stars, the mutually touch and it would not be in single stars resolvable.
A star formation region can host multiple stimulating star. In the case of the great Orion Nebula, the four Trapezium stars are the exciting stars.
A stimulating star evolves in my opinion not very spectacular. Is it only times the food considered in the form of dark complex matter, it is relatively fast weaker and then finally all go out.
Matter atomic constructed: (1999-08-08)
Matter circling in the electron around the nucleons or disorderly fly around between the nucleons. In contrast, see: Nucleon matter.
Production of hydrogen-helium gas clouds: (1999-11-21)
This is the last stage of the cosmic reversal process. Carried providing a hydrogen-helium gas cloud by a dark complex part is dissolved by outside influences.
The dark complex represents a permanent fuel storage for new stars. He does not evaporate, as long as it is not subjected to external influences. External influences are particularly collisions with DCO's, massive stellar radiation or collision with another dark complex.
Looking into the galactic center: (2000-02-20)
This is possible in the infrared. As we look at the narrow side of the dark panel in view of the galactic center, we must penetrate about ten thousand light-years of the dark disk to the galactic center is reached. According to the development of the galaxy, I think it is possible that their dark plate is substantially depleted. So we need to penetrate only the dark plate edge, which is estimated at a few light-years thick.
Book title: (2000-03-19)
In the early days I played with the idea to write a book. One of the biggest problems was going to find a suitable book titles and so I've come up with a variety of these. For example:
Dark convex objects, the gods of the universe? Or
The Dark convex objects on the track (Based on the book "The stars on the track").
Meanwhile, the time the need to write a book obsolete. There are even now the Internet.
DCO / DCO's: (1999-06-26 to 1999-07-11)
Abbreviation for "Dark Convex Object" / for "Dark Convex Objects"
Dark bars: (1999-07-11 to 2000-03-19)
The beam of barred galaxies consist not only of stars but also of dark matter. This dark matter has in my opinion so much stability that a continuous straight beams can form. To straighten the dark bar probably wears but also for the dark disk gravitational field of barred galaxies.
The dark bar I consider the limiting case of a spiral arm stream. A dark bar is nothing more than a straight aligned spiral arm stream.
Dark plates: (1999-07-04 to 1999-12-19)
A dark disk is an extremely flattened DCO's. Spiral galaxies and barred galaxies arise from dark disks. You could call a dark plate as dark disc.
Dark disk formation: (1999-12-19)
In principle, results in a dark disk of a mature DCO by this flattens more and more by increasing rotation. For rotation see "galaxies-rotation".
Dark plate forms: (1999-07-25)
About half of the dark plates round ended and half cone ended.
Since the ratio of round- about the same as at the DCO is to cone ended, I see this as an indication that dark plates an advanced form of the DCO's are.
Dark Plate opening: (1999-07-25)
This has in the large spiral galaxies have a diameter from 1000 to 2000 light-years or about 10% of the dark disk length.
Dark plate precursor: (1999-12-19 to 1999-12-26)
This is a mature DCO meant that is not rotated, and so was not flattened.
Dark cloud: (1999-08-01)
See exotic part "dark complex".
Dark matter: (1999-09-05 to 1999-12-26)
According to the GNT this is in the DCO's and the dark plates. In my opinion, the amount of dark matter could be even greater, as it was found when the DCO's have a reduced gravity field.
Galaxy rotation: (1999-12-12 to 1999-12-19)
This is caused by the rotation of the dark disk. The rotation emergence of a dark disk I imagine as follows:
I suppose that a dark plate has a curved gravity field. I also assume that there is a gravitational background in space. I imagine now that there is an object with a curved gravity field begins to turn when it is in a (linear) gravity background. The rotational acceleration of a spiral galaxy holds my opinion until its dark disk is so badly damaged that the curved gravitational field is lost. It may therefore be that the rotation speed as the Andromeda galaxy will grow even further.
The Rotational beginning of a dark plate precursor could be triggered by the collision with another DCO. This first rotational acceleration of dark plate precursor a slightly curved gravitational field. This leads to a further rotational acceleration. It could come in the course to an over-reaction between faster rotation and more curved gravitational field, so that ultimately the so amazingly fast swirling galaxies form.
Gas-dust cloud: (1999-11-14)
The term 'gas' is a mixture of hydrogen, helium and molecules.
Abbreviation of Galaxies Generation Theory.
Law of gravity: (1999-09-05)
Every natural law applies only under certain conditions. For elementary laws of mechanics no longer apply. I think it is likely that the law of gravity for the DCO's not true. I hope that someday someone manages to find the basic law for the DCO's.
Helix Nebula (Planetary Nebula): (1999-12-19)
On a high-resolution HST image of this planetary nebula can be seen as parts of the rejected stellar matter flows around the other stellar matter. The flow around a sense as an obstacle parts of the nebula must have been slowed down somewhat. In my opinion, the old central star of the Helix Nebula has come to a DCO and gave his matter essentially two-dimensionally. Relatively dense parts of the votes stellar matter are stuck to the DCO and will now flows around resupplied matter. Unfortunately, I have not yet succeeded, the DCO, on the spreads of the Helix Nebula to find. The DCO is certainly a lot bigger as the mist. I would have to find a suitable overview image that is exposed long enough.
Cosmic process: (1999-11-21 to 1999-11-28)
This is essentially the rating process, including the initial local gas clusters and star formation. For cosmic process according to my definition, the rejection of stellar mass (planetary nebulae or supernova clouds) at the star end and the star remnant include (white dwarfs or Pulsars / Neutron Stars). Sometime after the star remnant emits nothing more, the cosmic reversal process starts.
During the cosmic process, the matter density increases from the initial value in the neutron mass (dark matter complex) to the final value in the neutron star.
Cosmic reverse process: (1999-08-22 to 1999-11-28)
This is essentially the process that makes the undo what has passed in the stars. The cosmic reversal process is thus essentially the reverse process for rating process. However, for the cosmic reversal process belongs more like the star-reversal process. It includes in particular the galaxies form-emergence to and the supply of hydrogen-helium gas clouds of star formation. The aggregation of such gas clouds already belongs then to the cosmic process.
During the cosmic reversal process, the matter density decreases from the initial value in the neutron star to the final value in the neutron mass (dark complex matter).
Medium to radiation: (1999-10-17 to 1999-12-12)
That there is such a medium, I think now likely. I am of the opinion that it could be in this medium to the gravity background that exists anywhere in the room in my opinion. From this gravity background we notice anything because he is equally strong from all sides. This is comparable to the atmospheric pressure, which we do not notice, because it is equal on all sides. There is in almost all wavelength ranges a background in space. Since it is obvious that there is a gravitational background. The strength of this gravitational background could be higher, as you would appreciate this spontaneously. Perhaps he is one hundred times of the earth gravity.
Molecular clouds: (1999-08-01)
See exotic part "dark complex".
Neutron: (1999-08-08 to 1999-11-14)
This I regard as the "noble" and most complete elementary particles that ultimately emerge all other elementary particles and all radiations. Furthermore, I consider the neutron as a preliminary end product of cosmic reversal process that is stable in the dark complexes.
Neutrons are the direct precursor of the hydrogen atoms. This state of affairs is for the cosmic reversal process is essential.
Neutron mass: (1999-11-14)
The neutron mass is substantially identical to the dark complex matter. See why "dark complex matter".
Neutron stars: (1999-09-05 to 1999-12-19)
This bear her name in my opinion wrongly. The neutron fraction in a neutron star is not higher, as in the starting material. The electrons are only pressed against the protons. This, however, still far from neutrons originated. A neutron may again occur only when all that was collected again, which the neutron has lost on its way to the iron-Proton. Up from the mass of a neutron star neutron real mass has become, it takes a very long road. The mass of a neutron star is found ultimately as part of a dark complex again.
A neutron star did extremely much radiation per kg. One can three phases of the radiation output differ. Stern radiation, supernova radiation and Pulsar radiation
Assuming that an iron ball with roughly one solar mass coincides on the density of a neutron star, so there are no additional neutrons, because during three phases emitted electromagnetic radiation (and certainly a few other things) is missing.
In my opinion, you cannot also assume that a portion of the compressed iron matter is converted in the neutron star to radiation and so replaces the output in the three phases of radiation, because again I think after the conversion of mass into radiation (and vice versa) is very restricted.
Even assuming hypothetically that a hydrogen sphere with about one solar mass is compressed to the density of a neutron star (without leading to fusion), would initially no neutrons arise, although the hydrogen protons to neutrons are much closer as the iron-protons, because the emitted when neutrons decay anti-neutrinos have been lost in space and have to be laboriously collected from other distant sources again.
Neutron decay: (1999-11-14 to 1999-12-19)
When neutron decay no electromagnetic radiation is emitted. It could therefore in a dark complex by an intruding DCO disintegrate very many neutrons, without this being demonstrated on earth.
Under favorable environmental conditions of the neutron decay remains off. Such favorable conditions could also be in undisturbed dark complexes.
Non-hydrogen atoms: (1999-07-11)
Helium and all other atoms with the exception of hydrogen.
This is the generic term for protons and neutrons. In my opinion there is not only the transformation of the neutron to proton but also the reconversion from proton to neutron.
Nucleon masses / nucleon matter / nucleon matter: (1999-07-04 to 1999-07-11)
These have no free electrons. The electrons are therefore bound to the nucleons or integrated therein. The most compact form of nucleon matter is in the neutron stars. In contrast, the dark complexes consist of extremely widened nucleon matter.
Problem "eternity": (1999-06-01)
We are used to that objects not last forever, so come and go again
Looking at the universe as a (finite large) object, so even this would have to be created and disappear again.
It runs again our experience, if you had to imagine now suddenly on the "object" space, that it is never created and will never go away.
Problem "infinity": (1999-06-01 to 1999-06-26)
We are used to that objects are finite in size and therefore manageable.
We have no practical experience with the handling of an infinitely large object.
One can of a Do not remove the infinite object to capture it with a look.
Probably ask for the above reasons with me considerable problems on when I try to imagine an infinite object.
Looking at the universe but as an infinitely large structures, this can in my opinion, never came and never go away. (From what is something infinitely large have arisen and what should go by something infinitely great?)
Protons: (1999-08-22 to 1999-10-24)
There is only one type of neutron. When the protons you have to hand, strictly speaking many types differ. A hydrogen proton is not identical with a helium-proton. I consider protons than neutrons dismantled. The dismantling grade depends on the nucleus from where the proton is.
The fact that the proton-decay is not detected, comes to meet my expectations. I assume that protons never disintegrate, but are completed within the cosmic reversal process again to neutrons.
Space Expansion: (2000-02-20)
When I first heard in 1987 that, I doubted this emotionally spontaneous. Ultimately, there is still no direct evidence for a second spatial expansion. The microwave background radiation is only an indirect proof. Today I have to question the space expansion, because the galaxy-young theory does not tolerate space expansion. It is inconceivable to me that the cosmic reversal process and the DCO development works in an expanding space.
Black holes: (1999-07-04)
In my opinion there are no such. I do not think that matter can coincide as far as desired. Nor do I believe that a gravitational field can increase the extent that it holds back radiation.
Schwarzschild radius: (1999-10-17)
The calculation of the Schwarzschild radius is based on the assumption that the law of gravity applies fully. The unconditional 'law of gravitation I doubt, however.
Gravity background: (1999-12-12)
This is a gravity-Level which acts equally on all sides and its effect therefore cancels for objects with a straight gravity field. Among such objects I understand all that consist of atomic matter. For objects from nucleon matter I would imagine that they possess a curved gravity field under certain circumstances. It must, in particular, the rotating plates of dark spiral galaxies possess a curved gravity field in order to explain their rapid rotation halfway satisfactory can. See also "galaxy rotation" and "medium to radiation".
Spiral arms: (1999-08-01 to 2000-03-19)
Spiral arms consist not only of stars, but they also have a dark component. This consists of dark complexes that are lined up in a spiral shape to each other. The dark component of the spiral arm I call spiral arm stream.
Spiral arm stream: (2000-03-19)
This is the dark component of spiral arms meant that consists of dark complex matter. The individual dark complexes of the spiral arm stream contact with each other as long as the spiral arm stream is on the dark disk. Has the spiral arm stream leave the dark disk, so the contact of the individual dark complexes will sooner or sometimes later lost.
What I mean by a spiral arm stream will, most likely referred to in literature as a density wave.
Spiral arm stream and dark bars are basically the same. A spiral arm stream is nothing like a curved dark beams. However, the bending of spiral arm stream created less by bending forces than by its propagation mode. Both dark beams and spiral arm stream originate from inside of dark panels.
The name spiral arm stream I chose, because he like a river through the darkness plate flows, its velocity remains approximately unchanged.
Rating process and reverse process simplifies the rating process: (1999-11-14)
The following statements represent a conceptual model to better illustrate with the aim, in particular, the basic principle of the reversal process.
Rating process: The starting point is a gas-dust plume in the universe that just has the mass of the star later. In conceptual model that cloud is isolated in space. So it is no part of a galaxy and there are no other galaxies in space. Procedure:
The gas-dust cloud contracts and it is created a star. The star merges over a long period hydrogen into helium, stating radiation. At the end of life the star converts a portion of the helium still other elements to, and stressed some of its matter as cloud in the environment. Thus, the rating process is complete.
Inversion process for rating process: In principle, the rating process count down. The repelled from stellar matter so contracts again and emitted by the stellar radiation is collected again. Part of the contracted matter is split again into hydrogen. After the splitting of the material is finished to hydrogen, expanding the "object" to a gas-dust cloud with the starting composition and dimensions. From this cloud arises again the original star, which the circuit would be closed.
Comments to the star-process and in particular to the reversal process of thought model:
The star formation of a standing alone in space gas-dust cloud and the star-process can be quite good imagine. In particular, for the star-process one has to rely on any environment. The reverse process against it necessarily requires an environment. Reasons:
The repelled from the star at the end of life matter does not fall back on the star-rest and the radiation emitted during the Star-life has disappeared in the depths of space. It must involve the existing in reality environment so at least. Then the star-rest could put back on its initial mass with the help of other matter and the initial mass may be by means of other radiation back to the original value that was bound in the gas-dust cloud, charged.
An understanding of the remaining two steps of reversal process is not better by the inclusion of an environment.
First there is still the reconversion of helium and the higher elements to hydrogen. An "object" that accomplishes this One has to first imagine quite abstract. Since the reconversion much energy is needed, the "object" must absorb essentially energy and that for a very long time (based on the Stern-life).
Ultimately, then still have this "object" back to a gas-dust cloud expand which is suitable for re-emergence of the idea model star.
In addition to these two remaining steps still another problem:
Due to the added taken environment that is necessary due to the reversal process necessarily arises for the "object" a mass limit problem: The star-rest is filled by foreign matter. As this occurs in any amount, you cannot just assume that the mass growth of the "object" just then ceases when the mass of the original gas-dust cloud is reached. For this reason and because of the two remaining steps, the reconciliation of the "object" to the DCO's is now required:
The stars, the reached masses are relatively easy to explain: The respective mass limit arises mainly from the environment in which the star is born. The star formation environment happens to have a comparatively small (usable) mass.
For a lapsed "object" which receives continually mass, a mass limit is very difficult to detect. Such "object" could be arbitrarily high mass, when you let him just enough time and time is not in short supply in the universe. It should be easy to understand that a-collecting "object" likely much more massive, as the most massive star known. Reaching the collecting and huge crowds "objects" I call DCO's. As I imagine the star-reversal process using a DCO's, is described under the heading "career of a DCO from neutron star to the Galaxy". Under this heading 'Abstract imagined object' that accomplished the reconversion of helium and the higher elements to hydrogen' and 'expansion of the object' to a gas-dust cloud' also addresses the still remained open points.
Conversion of mass into energy: (1999-09-05 to 1999-10-17)
I am of the opinion that mass cannot be converted freely into energy. There, only a certain part of the neutron mass is converted into energy.
Furthermore, I believe that energy as much volume consumed in space, such as the mass, from which the energy is created. It's like sugar, which is dissolved in water. Although the sugar will not be visible. Its volume requirement remains.
First continents: (1999-10-03 to 2000-03-19)
These were round or elliptical likely. They consisted of a large plain, surrounded by a volcanic mountain ring. From the ring mountains did not remain today much left by erosion. Meanwhile dominate the young fold mountains that formed at the edges of the supercontinent-floes. Both lowlands today, however, are still well understood:
. The lowlands of the "northern" supercontinent is today the region "Siberia / Hudson Bay"
. The lowlands of the "southern" supercontinent is today the region "Amazonas / Congo / Niger"
Both first continents were about the same size. This arises when one adds the continents.
For "northern" supercontinent include Asia excluding India, Europe and North America with Greenland.
For "southern" supercontinent include Africa, South America, Australia, Antarctica and India. Particularly Antarctica ensures that the "southern" supercontinent few percent smaller as the "northern". The approximately equal size of the two first continents could be regarded as an indication that they originated by symmetrical operations.
For some TV show I kept following statement:
The two first continents must have very early separated because they poorly or partly assembled. Fit
I am of the opinion that the two originally first continents ever had no contact. The found contact area could also be a result of chance. It could be that there is a border area were both first continents that fits randomly about each other. It is unclear to me why there should have been originally just one supercontinent and how this one supercontinent to have originated.
Before the two first continents began to break apart, the earth must have been in a different situation, because otherwise the first continents not even could not have form. The forces were able to break the first continents apart would have prevented their formation from the outset. It would be best if created a global archipelago.
Start on 1999-06-01