Abstract:  Joseph_Sixpack's original intuitive processes 
concerning the distribution of mass within all spiral 
galaxies may benefit from some additional and alternate 
theories/hypotheses.  Isn't that a nice way of saying the 
original ideas are all wet?  :-)



         yet another galactic formation hypothesis?

Remember in the Universe+ discourse that the hypothesis was 
presented that spiral galaxies were ALL formed from a near 
collision resulting in a very high speed collision course 
between two or more supermassive (not hypermassive) black 
holes each distributing approximately one half of the 
resulting spiral galaxy mass (both seen and unseen) in the 
arms of the galaxy  whose x-y vectors of unloosed mass 
distribution decreased as the two black hole bodies closed 
to either a merger of remaining masses or a binary orbit of 
VERY high velocities, considering the remaining masses 
involved.  

Supporting this substantially intuitive theory of 
joseph_sixpacks, is the resultant flat pancake form that 
most galaxies take, presumably, after distribution.

They look like giant long playing records.

This is a configuration that is consistent with a slingshot 
type of centrifugal distribution.  Just lift your hand held 
electric eggbeater out of the cake mix while it is still on 
and you will see what i mean.  

Okay, at that point, Joe figured that he had nailed down the 
distribution process of galaxies pretty good.

until...

He saw a great large picture taken by the Hubble telescope 
in a book (see odds and ends chapter) for a further 
discussion) of the Galaxy of the Messier Objects called 
"M100".

The book is:
 "The Universe - Images from the Hubble Telescope"
  It is compiled or written by Leo Marriott.
  ISBN: 0-7858-2044-2  copyright 2004 and costs $30.
  Great book!

In short, it looks like to joe that there is way too much 
mass at the edges at the outer portion of M100.  Mass exists 
there that couldn't be easily explained by a single simple 
closing solution or concept.

So... yet another theory or hypothesis is offered that may 
amend somewhat the original.

So let's begin at the beginning...



        Sir Isaac Newton Speaks from centuries past

From page 127 of the book:
Origins - Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution 
by the authors, Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Donald Goldsmith are 
the words from a 1692 letter to Richard Bentley master of 
Trinity College at Cambridge University from Isaac Newton 
explaining or comparing finite and infinite universes:

    "If all the matter in the universe were evenly scattered 
    throughout all the heavens, and every particle had an 
    innate gravity toward all the rest and the whole space 
    throughout with this matter was scattered was but 
    finite, the matter on the outside of the space would, by 
    its gravity, tend toward all the matter on the inside, 
    and by consequence, fall down into the middle of the 
    whole space and there compose one great spherical mass.

    But if the matter was evenly disposed throughout an
    infinite space, it could never convene into one mass;
    but some of it would convene into one mass and some
    into another so as to make an infinite number of great
    masses, scattered at great distance from one to another
    throughout all the infinite space."

Okay, so there is my original Universe+ hypothesis stated 
only in rough outline by Sir Isaac Newton, but still over 
314 years earlier than my opus dopus.

The hyper big invisible goodfellows rule...

And in the descriptive two words of Newton, it is then, when 
the 'great masses' come together, as by then, hypermassive, 
black holes, that these cosmotic distributions, may and can 
occur.  

But remember, Mine, the Joseph_Sixpack Universe plus 
concerning galactic formation is just a joseph_sixpack 
hypothesis.  

Nothing can be proven yet, or perhaps, ever be proven, 
unless we are fortunate or unfortunate to witness the light 
show from a similar distribution event in space.

So at this point, it is just a guess folks.

Now the pieces of mass speed jolly outward towards other 
waiting 'great masses' for re-accretion.  Slowly 
accelerating on their way towards their awaiting goodfellow.

i am confident that we could chase 'my original "female" 
idea' back into the Chinese Annals or other ancient works to 
around at least 3,000 years before Christ.

So much for intuitive cosmology.

Tyson and Goldsmith go on to elaborate Newton's letter to 
Bentley.  Good book.  read it.



                          So what?

Now what about all the hoopla about the acceleration of the 
expansion of the universe.

simple.  let me restate.

it is just all the light emitting (stars) and non-light 
(radiation retaining masses) flotsam and jetsam left over 
from its last distribution heading for the nearest 
GoodFellow's hypermassive event horizon and gravitational 
fields.

If the red shifts were not changing, indicating an 
acceleration, we could have some hope that it is just tired 
light.

But the nail in the coffin of visible matter, and all those 
things that are living next to it, is that the red shift is 
accelerating.  Now even Dr. Zwicky's 'tired light' concept 
won't cover the acceleration of the red-shift that carries 
with it, an acceleration in the expansion of the  universe.

So in due time, we can kiss our entire 'beautiful' galaxy, 
and us, and all the milk contained therein, goodbye.

Nature appears, in fact, to be quite indifferent to our 
desire for eternal existence under this set of 
interpretations of the physical.  hardly consoling

But don't unplug the coffee pot just yet.

We may have probably up to and perhaps over, three (3) 
billion years left before the coffee gets too hot to drink.

 

            Well okay, yet another hypothesis...

We can list yet another distribution process that might 
create galaxies and it is, ala Newton:
The simple accretion of mass by mass over perhaps 
billions of years.

That infers that in the center of each galaxy, there is a 
SINGLE black hole and NOT a binary black hole system.  Each 
selected mass simply gravitationally (warped spacetime bent 
rubber sheet stuff) caused external mass to just slip and 
slide down the rubber sheet into the main collecting rubber 
sheet dimple.  There are a lot of big dimples in the sheet 
now.  Some of the biggies are no doubt sliding towards one 
another as we speak, er... write.

The rubber sheet theory (single accreting mass) has a lot of 
weight, as opposed to the binary black hole theory of 
galactic creation of Joseph_sixpack.

Let us first look at the moon.  Notice all the little and 
not so little pock marks remaining on the surface.  Even the 
moon's little gravitation system draws a lot of flak from 
extraneous mass buzzing around the galaxy.

Our own sun takes its share of hits too, i am sure.  What 
exactly happens shortly thereafter is something i am sure a 
lot brighter minds than my 1 watter have given a lot of 
consideration to.

A peek at our own planet shows some dastardly deeds from the 
celestial steeds in the past, and probably will in the 
future too.

Even tiny asteroids show pock marks of hard hitting 
accreting or colliding mass...  unless... the asteroid was 
once part of something much larger and what we have left is 
giant bolder which looks just like a water rounded roller in 
some giant surf except for the asteroid hits.  All the 
planets and moons of everything under observation shows 
evidence of the accreting nature of the warped bedsheet or 
the secondary results therefrom.

So in sum, the whole M100 galaxy and other spiral galaxies  
like it could be the result of a single accreting black hole 
and what we see is the result of the warped rubber sheet of 
spacetime.

That single galactic accreting event or concept flies in the 
face of joe's earlier binary galactic creation distribution 
event.  Which one, if either, is correct?  sigh... your 
intuitive guess is as good as my intuitive guess.

In short, is mankind swirling down to a single black hole 
toilet to the central waste reclamation plant?

Or, has he been thrown far from the madding crowd, to putt- 
putt around in company of our galaxy until ever slowly 
accelerating, our solar system and all the rest of the 
galactic milk gets to the nearest event horizon, and then 
onto the main accreting goodfellow mass, the masters of 
unlight?

Or, last but not least, to go 'round and 'round in an ever 
slowing and decaying orbit to finally become one with our 
local red hot just wait until it comes for us.

This appears to be a no-win situation for our little 
scrabble brained incredible chewy-up the planet species.  

oh well, we were created in God's image, and not as God  

What can you reasonable hope to expect...



                   One more minor detail

Notice how spiral galaxies look like long playing records?

why?  not so hard to understand if it is a centrifugal 
distribution, but a pancake accretion?  Seems to me that the 
stuff would come in and be accreted from all angles and not 
be flattened all out.  go figure...

Notice how the rings of our local planets look like long 
playing records?  what's going on here?  some unknown field 
playing equatorial trickery?

why?

Notice how in orbit, all, well most, of the planets all 
circle in a near flat plane?

why?

Are the three whys related? 
If not, how are they different?
Why are they different if it is just an accreting process?



               Other minor notes and thoughts

4)        Precipitation precipitates precariously

Gravitational accreting events come out of the blue, or 
actually black, they come.  For the most part, unannounced.  
They come through the door whether you want them or not at 
anytime of day or night.  If they hit the indifferent seas 
or oceans, there could be a 1,400 foot tidal wave.  If the 
hit the land, your brick stone house practical pig, becomes 
your tomb.



5) now what are details?



6)              all solar orbits decaying?

It would seem, as an intuitive joseph_sixpackian guess, that 
all orbits would suffer entropy under the warped rubber 
sheet syndrome.  Eventually the mass accrets. Eventually, 
all mass accrets.  As much as it can.



7)                  Jupiter goes critical

Jupiter, our biggest planetary mass fish in our little pond 
might even probably accret enough mass to increase internal 
pressures to enable itself to fire up its internal engines 
and go critical.  Sun number two for a few billion years.  

That is, if Jupiter wasn't itself accreted into the sun by 
its own decaying orbit.



8)            solar evidence of accretion rates

As discussed earlier, most visible planets, moons, 
planetoids, planetesimals show grim evidence of having the 
ability to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.



9)              11.1 year sunspot activity
    evidence of orbiting mass ala decaying orbit?

Every 11.1 years, sunspot activities peak and the opposite 
is true at half time on the alternating current chart when 
every 11.1 years sunspot activities are at their lowest.

What causes this 11.1 year 5.55 year peak, to 5.55 year low, 
cycle?  Is it some sort of internal clock of metabolism that 
the sun has developed?  Or is it that the Sun runs into a 
wave of celestial garbage as it travels at its posted 
1,000,000 miles per hour.  Is it hitting the tops of waves 
of garbage?  And in so doing accrets more mass to consume or 
dispose of in giant eruptions?



10)      Gradual red shift as mass ---> c escape velocity

Well, this is yet another hypothesis that is almost self 
evident, but as these solitary star masses keep accreting 
over the millions and billions of years the emitting light 
due to the increasing underlying mass keeps getting subject 
to more and more gravity as the mass keeps accreting.

That is, it keeps red shifting more and more, until the mass 
achieves radiation retaining status by increasing its escape 
velocity until it approaches the "speed of light" or 'c' as 
the scientists say.  Voila!  then we have a 'black hole'. 



11)          Where did all the dirt come from?

That's a good question, and perhaps, the main question.  
Where did all the dirt come from in the first place?

Well, we know that at first, that it might have been plasma 
(super-dirt) that when cooled, turned to mass (dirt).

But, before it was plasma, it was dirt (mass) that turned to 
super-dirt (plasma).

Can we conceive of a cosmos with nothing but radiation?  
Which when cooled (loses energy) turned to mass after 
billions and billions of years.  Entropy then is still 
functioning as a hypothesis.



12)          do all members of the galaxy accret?

My best guess is that the answer is yes.  everything even a 
rock in space accrets.  everything, seen and unseen.  if 
it's mass, it accrets.



13)        Is accretion occurring at center?

At the center of what?  well..., yes. why wouldn't it?



14)         If zero gravity port, why no squirt?

If spiral or bar galactic formation is caused by binary 
system closure, wouldn't it have a high energy zero gravity 
port squirting out radiation?

Yeah, and i guess a lot do.  But some have had their port 
closed off due to unequal mass between the two closing 
masses.  plus some of these systems seem to have, for some 
strange reason, a lot of top covering mass which may 
interdict outgoing radiation.



15)      If accretion, why sombrero mass at edges?

What is all the mass doing at the edge of the sombrero 
galaxy?  It doesn't look like this would occur on a straight 
binary distribution.  It looks more like the type of a 
single gravitational accretion of Sir Isaac Newton style 
that he suggested in 1692.  Could the mass have accreted 
there after the distribution?  And why is the spiral galaxy 
so flat anyway if it was a single mass gravitational 
accretion.  This stuff is  weird.



16)  if mass at our edges, how does it accret there
     if not a distribution?

17)  Another look at m100 edges for accretion or/and
     distribution.

18)  a look at single star formation and accretion to
     black hole status.



19)                  Black Hole Clusters
20)              What happens that is unseen?

If there is a high number of substantially single black 
holes in space that are close to one another, it seems quite 
possible that they would gravitationally cluster as well, 
albeit invisibly.

What would happen at each of their final closing, collision 
or distribution is anyone's guess.

The Norma Cluster give evidence that hidden mergers are 
possible, since no 'fireworks' seem to be sourced in the 
area.

Assuming each black hole has a radiation retaining 
gravitational field, each small numbered black hole cluster 
of say five or so masses, we end up with something in the 
2,500 solar mass number, depending on the actually real 
number of solar masses that make up the critical escape 
velocity of c threshold value.
 
Of course tiny little visible suns can be accreted as well 
into the much larger mass.

Proxima Centauri, a very dim red star needs to be reexamined for 
real total mass.  It is too close (4.22 lightyears) for comfort if 
it turns out that it is a heavyweight just about to approach 'c' 
as an escape velocity.  



(21)         Our resultant Galaxy down the Road.

Naturally, if our galaxy keeps accreting mass over its 
entire physical form and IF there is not too much residual 
distribution at the center IF the binary theory is correct, 
it would eventually cluster up and accret as it would if 
there was only a single black hole at the center.

 

22)  what then is out there?

23)  a few speculations on earth's mass and not humanities

24)  another 'goodfellow' big bang.

25)  another look at entropy and 'expansion'.

26)  'the consciousness' of the universe.
      what does it want to know about itself?
      for what purpose(s)?