where? I don't see any planets being ejected... and certainly nothing in the method that you describe.

Those star systems are spinning very fast, and objects ejected have a high velocity. The core in that first photo, would be of a sun sized object (or bigger).

the one that says:

 

'The Radio Galaxy Cygnus A' underneath it?

Yes, the core is ejected by the jet. Below that are some pic of the same core but broken down into smaller time intervals, until you just have a picture of the ejected core.

 

This core material, is massive in size, and it is ejected from the nuclei of the mother body's gas mass , because the nuclei of the mother body becomes too positively charged, due to the continued loss of radiated electrons. The mother body ejects matter (positive charge) to become stable again.

 

Our Sun goes through this process to make planets, except it is not so highly spinning, so the planets do not move so far out so quickly.

 

But those are amazing pictures, of stellar bodies millions of light years away from Earth

 

Also on that site is the pic of a stylistic depiction of the ether of magnetism's lines of force and how charged particles interact with it.

you're supposed to sit on your arse, not talk out of it.

Sound like you got something up it !

Amusing as this is ....

I don't think that elementary particles can seriously be counted as complete planets.

Particles = small

Planet = big

 

The only thing that gives birth to a planet is a large accretion disk.

Originally posted by Zarkov

Sound like you got something up it !

 

I was making a point. you aren't.

At such high energies it is hard to assume the expulsions would be more than gaseous until they lost enough energy to finally start to aggregate. At such distances it would make sense that the particles would probably disperse instead.

Just aman

No Aman, it is actual core material that is ejected.

 

With a radiating body (spherical pressure system) it is loosing electrons....in space, an insulated condition!

 

As the build up of charge in the bodies nucleus increases it becomes unstable and deforms against the forces of spin, Once deformed the spin aids in expulsion of positively charged excess CORE.

 

With the Earth, we RECEIVE electrons from the Sun. Our system of ejection is similar but we are a spherical density system, so we accumulate negative charge, and given time we eject most probably mantle.

Do you mean it takes planet sized dumps?:toilet:

I still wouldn't call it a planet until it fixes in an orbit.

Just aman

Zarkov, there are many problems with that method you have proposed. I can't even be bothered to go into them. sorry.

That little dot of a core could have been as big as a number of our solar systems! just a few megaparsecs across of positively charged matter.

 

Ejections from high spin objects generally move a long way out and slowly form an orbit.

 

Ejections from a low speed spin become orbital quickly. The lower the spin, the closer the stabolised orbit is

Zarkov, there still are many problems with that method you have proposed. I still can't even be bothered to go into them. sorry.

No, RadE , I can't be bothered with General Relativity, or classical cosmology, either

There is evidence of a pushing force in nature. I read of an experiment near the White Cliffs of Dover. A reasearch team on a ship calculated the gravitational pull of this enormous mass on one side of them and it stayed constant as they approached but when they reached a certain threshold the pull decreased by a measurable level.

They theorized they were seeing evidence of Einsteins lambda force which repels as masses reach a certain limit of proximity. It keeps everything from collapsing into black holes

So we see masses pulling with gravity and repelling with lambda force up close.

Just my two bits.

Just aman

Aman, I am now starting to realise gravity is 3 forces

 

(a) magnetic

(b) electric

© spin gravity, which is an interaction of the obove and spin

 

 

The only one left out of this is matter, and this is the vehicle that all of the above affect

The forces of nature we count on are all knit together except in the cosoms where there may be a singular explanation.

We are learning a lot through experimation and observation and the forces follow rules in our relative existance. I agree that gravity may be a combination or effect of other microcosom forces but it seems to always exhibit the property of attraction.

Just aman

Yea, mate, gravity is attraction, it's obvious, just as obvious as the Sun goes around the Earth, everyday... Oh yea you say, but I see it everyday.....IT GOES around the EARTH, damn it !!!

 

:)

http://www.ufonasa.com/tether.htm

 

Look at this site. Back in 1996 the astronauts let out a long conducting tether, so that it would cut the magnetic lines of force and generate electricity. Well it worked, but burnt out!

 

Three days later, with the tether miles away, "flying saucers" were seen around the tethers !!

 

These weren't flying saucers, they were induced spin gravity vorticies!!

Actually if you explore that site you will see ignorant references to "spiral gravity waves", and UFO's.

 

These can all be explained by spin gravity, even the "crop circles / spirals"

 

:) good stuff!

It's been proven about fifty different ways that 'spin gravity' can't explain anything, because it doesn't follow the observed universe in any way whatsoever at any point.

there still isn't any maths.

A spin gravity vortice should be easily producable here on Earth considering the fields they were working with in space. I don't see it happening or else we would have flying discs all around us.

Just aman

Remember it was viewed from above, and it was in the UV range of emissions.

 

Rad E I have worked out the maths! they all obey the 1/r^2 rule as observed!!