Galactic Disc as Baryon Charge Disc

We should expect galactic clusters to organize much like noble gases or other stable molecules, especially older clusters. We can liken a galactic disc to the charge disc in Mathis nuclear diagrams. (Of course the behavior will be impacted by the different scale but first let's focus on how they might be similar.) In fact I'd say we already have evidence of this:
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/imagelist/2011-33

 
These red galaxies seem arranged as vertices of a pyramid or even a tetrahedron if we also take the white ones.
 
That's not the only galactic cluster that looks like a giant molecule to me:
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/news/su201805 and http://hubblesite.org/image/120/news_release/1993-23
And of course the post here: https://milesmathis.forumotion.com/t183-bizarre-group-of-distant-black-holes-are-mysteriously-aligned
 
They often seem to have a lot of order. As per usual feels off that physicists always talk up chaos.
 
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/gal_lss.html
"A particularly exciting recent development in the study of large-scale structure has been the advent of very deep galaxy surveys, notably those currently being made by the Hubble Space Telescope. These images show galaxies just a couple of billions years after the Big Bang. One of the remarkable puzzles presented by this work is that galaxies appear to form earlier than predicted in most theoretical models."
 
If we discard the big bang and with it the mainstream timeline we can look at this and come to my conclusion: This data from 'old and far away' light is showing us just how well structured and self-similar the universe is. Of course we can't see it that way unless it's coming from far enough away, that's why all the information on these galaxy clusters is always labeled as some primordial event but maybe some of the data is just how those things prefer to be arranged.
.

Perhaps this finding is well-know and it's being buried? When I was exploring this idea I quickly found this:
https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/news/2018-01

 
The text doesn't say much, but that image of giant molecules practically superimposed over a star field screamed exactly what I was thinking already. That little red line appears as quite an afterthought to me. Mathis alludes to us having more allies in science than it would seem. And the phrase "interstellar chemistry" also called to me, I'm just taking it from a different scale.
 
I guess the question to me is: Do I assume that faraway clusters of galaxies in the shape of a molecule of benzonitrile should be detected by us as simply benzonitrile? I already said yes to that in my opening. All it would require the same ratios in its construction. We already have many types of galaxies so given the right grouping and distance, yes.
 
From the last link: "Astronomers had a mystery on their hands. No matter where they looked, from inside the Milky Way to distant galaxies, they observed a puzzling glow of infrared light. This faint cosmic light, which presents itself as a series of spikes in the infrared spectrum, had no easily identifiable source. It seemed unrelated to any recognizable cosmic feature, like giant interstellar clouds, star-forming regions, or supernova remnants. It was ubiquitous and a bit baffling."
 
So why might this be such a common detection from earth? Well I'd say, this ubiquitous infrared generation is likely telling us about the super-structure that contains our part of the universe. Could be another "level up" from the first galactic molecules I mentioned.
 
{As this large scale structure is studied maybe we can find evidence of "the spin of the [local] universe" and get closer to verifying that gravity model. Which I now take as given since it's spin-based.}

.
Hi David. I enjoy the subject matter, I must reply.

Recently, in his Halton Arp paper, Miles said photons interact as photons-baryons in dense charge fields, but as photons-photons in dense matter fields. I interpret that to mean baryons are larger than an electron but smaller than a proton? Is a proton a baryon? Now I need to ask, what is a lepton?
 
Unfortunately, your first sentence is garbled, please edit it. May I suggest “Galactic clusters should organize much like noble gases or other stable molecules”? Given the obvious beginner’s error, I’ve spared you my usual merciless review.

The galactic cluster scale is tremendous in size and time. Treating galaxies like protons ties both ends together - my mind can’t quite hold it – always snaping back one way or the other. In the 15 billion year current lifetime of the Universe – I believe Miles agrees – how could old galaxy clusters possibly have formed galactic molecules within the first billion years? Clearly, gravity alone cannot explain the organizing principles displayed.

My favorite,
"Astronomers had a mystery on their hands. No matter where they looked, from inside the Milky Way to distant galaxies, they observed a puzzling glow of infrared light”.
Irrefutable evidence of the photonic charge field.  

Thanks for posting.
.

Thanks for the tip! First sentence changed.

I didn't use the word "baryon" when I emailed this idea to Miles, so I hope I didn't stumble myself by doing so here. The "charge disc" in the atomic diagrams is often an alpha particle so perhaps I should have used a term that included that as well. I'll have to review the Lepton later, a gloss of the wikipedia article isn't that helpful. (NB: Sometime while reading MM papers on this topic I realized the quantum zoo is evidence of physicists switching from examining mechanics to stamp collecting.)

LongtimeAirman wrote:
In the 15 billion year current lifetime of the Universe – I believe Miles agrees – how could old galaxy clusters possibly have formed galactic molecules within the first billion years?

For my purposes I've decided that this time-line of cosmology isn't helpful. We really only know that certain light is from sources further away than others. Combined with the assumption that the light we are observing travels at the constant c, we can deduce that some light is "older" than other light. But maybe large areas dense with charge slow it down for significant distances? If gravity is caused by some "spinning of the [local] universe", maybe the speed of light is different depending on one's distance from the center of that spin? Mostly, I am just trying to move well beyond the air of "oh what a surprise, we didn't think this sort of galactic development would happen way back then," since it seems to be apart of every other report places like CfA publishes.

I think you can simply talk about the Proton, instead of a generic baryon.
Also consider that at the galaxy scale charge repulsion is much stronger than gravity, while at the baryon scale the opposite is true.

My personal thought on this matter is that there is no true “orbit” around a galaxy core. The charge repulsion of a galaxy core is so strong that there are beams of objects that travel away from it, and these beams are what we call spiral arms.

Ciaolo wrote:I think you can simply talk about the Proton, instead of a generic baryon.

Agreed.

Ciaolo wrote:The charge repulsion of a galaxy core is so strong that there are beams of objects that travel away from it, and these beams are what we call spiral arms.

Also agreed, these arms are certainly evidence of the charge repulsion. The spiral shape is formed by the spin of the galaxy and this radial emission. But I also think that at this scale eventually some of this emission can get caught back into the charge recycling flows.

I can't locate it right now but there is a discovery that I remember reading my on old computer (which was recently stolen, or I'd just comb my history). It was sold as residual energy from a galaxy forming. It was another surprising galactic structure. This one was pictured as a giant orange bubble of energy centered on a galaxy. It was a sphere shape centered about the core, but the arms/disc extended well past this particular energy detection, intersecting with it. Now, because I am ignoring the time-line provided: upon seeing that, it occurred to me that the shape of the galaxy is as much dependent on how much matter/energy it has as well as overall and relative composition. I'm just assuming that if this galaxy had a higher ratio of the particles that created this orange bubble that it would appear more spherical. Of course it'd help to review the claim I'm unable to cite. If this rings a bell or you know of something similar I'd certainly be interested.

DavidBehlman wrote:I can't locate it right now but there is a discovery that I remember reading my on old computer (which was recently stolen, or I'd just comb my history). It was sold as residual energy from a galaxy forming. It was another surprising galactic structure. This one was pictured as a giant orange bubble of energy centered on a galaxy. It was a sphere shape centered about the core, but the arms/disc extended well past this particular energy detection, intersecting with it. Now, because I am ignoring the time-line provided: upon seeing that, it occurred to me that the shape of the galaxy is as much dependent on how much matter/energy it has as well as overall and relative composition. I'm just assuming that if this galaxy had a higher ratio of the particles that created this orange bubble that it would appear more spherical. Of course it'd help to review the claim I'm unable to cite. If this rings a bell or you know of something similar I'd certainly be interested.

You know, this sounds very familiar to me but I can't seem to find the image that triggers my memory of your description just yet.

I did however find a few other "galactic infrared" images that might help. Here's the galaxy NGC 1291, shown in false color of course but the outer ring-arms are allegedly showing in infrared.


https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2014-367

Not quite what you had in mind though, seems like? Perhaps the Sombrero Galaxy is more like what you meant?


http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2007/sombrero/more.html

A composite of the Xray/Optical/Infrared:

.

David wrote. For my purposes I've decided that this time-line of cosmology isn't helpful. We really only know that certain light is from sources further away than others. Combined with the assumption that the light we are observing travels at the constant c, we can deduce that some light is "older" than other light. But maybe large areas dense with charge slow it down for significant distances? If gravity is caused by some "spinning of the [local] universe", maybe the speed of light is different depending on one's distance from the center of that spin? Mostly, I am just trying to move well beyond the air of "oh what a surprise, we didn't think this sort of galactic development would happen way back then," since it seems to be apart of every other report places like CfA publishes.

As a posting courtesy, please do not hyperlink web addresses in your text, as https://scitechdaily.com/the-possible-first-signs-of-self-interacting-dark-matter/ is linked with the text “large areas dense with charge” in one of your previous posts. This site has a habit of embedding links which I've learned to ignore, and so I initially missed your link. Instead, please provide the link html address explicitly for complete clarity and attention.

David wrote. But maybe large areas dense with charge (https://scitechdaily.com/the-possible-first-signs-of-self-interacting-dark-matter/) slow it down for significant distances?

I disagree with one item. Light doesn’t slow down. As Miles said in the Halton Arp paper (thanks again), areas with higher charge experience side-to-side collisions, affecting the photon spin, not the photon’s velocity. Light doesn’t slow down in matter either, refraction is only an appearance of a slowdown. Uneven universal expansion doesn’t seem very likely to me.

The universe is very big and time is very long - I can't bring myself to say infinite. I suppose we can only know a small part of it.
.

With respect to links, I have found that if you are not logged in to the site then you don't get a hyperlink, just the text of it. This has led me to create hyperlinks but to use the URL for both the href and the text. Users who aren't logged in can still copy/paste the link into a browser and logged in users get the benefit of the hyperlink.

I've seen these strange hyperlinks that Airman is talking about when viewing on my phone. It seems to take some of the text and apply it as a URL, even though it doesn't make any sense. I thought it was my phone doing it but it may be the site doing it when a request comes from a small device like a phone or tablet. I don't remember seeing it on a PC.

Ah, all this hyperlink business noted. I only hid those in the regular text because they were asides, but I'll just paste full links going forward.

LongtimeAirman wrote:
I disagree with one item. Light doesn’t slow down. As Miles said in the Halton Arp paper (thanks again), areas with higher charge experience side-to-side collisions, affecting the photon spin, not the photon’s velocity. Light doesn’t slow down in matter either, refraction is only an appearance of a slowdown. Uneven universal expansion doesn’t seem very likely to me.

"An appearance of a slow down" I wouldn't expect light to slow down. I would expect photons colliding over and over until some continue on their path toward us to appear slower. I was bringing this out as it will "age" the light, and become a kink in theorizing especially for those working without the Charge Field.

Jared Magneson wrote:
You know, this sounds very familiar to me but I can't seem to find the image that triggers my memory of your description just yet.

It can't stay hidden forever! We'll find it! The image had a very distinctively a thin bubble of orange.

Those are some good lookin' galaxies you presented. I'd have to compare this detection with these others to check on how they relate. Even if it's not the same energy being represented by orange it still looks like this galaxy is less of a disc.

I'm on the look out for the most spherical galaxy.

Any luck in finding that image, David? It's been a bit but I thought I'd refresh the topic.