Announcement

**llynch** · 12-11-2009, 03:00 PM

re: Why galaxy is flat (2D not 3D)?

Very interesting.

I would have to agree. To explain a little further, this is the way I see the creation of matter.

It begins with a single string/vibration/??. If this single entity encounters itself or something else, a second entity will be be created which it's frequency will be different as the result of the encounter. This goes on and on and pretty soon there are all different kinds of frequencies.

Then I take into consideration harmonics and sympathetic resonance. To me this would cause a gathering of like 'strings/vibrations' and at some point the density would be so great as to create matter itself.

At the opposite end, enharmonic or dissonant 'strings/vibrations' would have a tendency to separate from each other.

So the swirling you mentioned works pretty well in the way I see it. Maybe this occurs prior to the creation of matter? It may be that there is a massive pull of all resonant strings at the 'event horizon' of when matter is created?

Definitely lets loose all sorts of possibilities to ponder on a late cold evening.

**aljhoa** · 12-11-2009, 07:32 PM

I am saying that gravity is not the one responsible for holding moon orbit to earth or earth orbit to sun or sun orbit in galaxy or galaxy orbit in something big.

The proof is in both Magellanic and Earth clouds.

: A Puzzle of Galactic Evolution is Solved ? Massive Gas Clouds Seed the Galaxy with the Stuff of Stars

Report of the Galactic Molecular Clouds and Astrochemistry Working Group

climate4you ClimateAndClouds

Al

**Iotayodi** · 12-11-2009, 10:28 PM

2D? Where? They all have lwh. Scientists believe now that every Galaxy has a black hole at its center. The Milky way has one.
Nice pic of the colliding Galaxys.

**Aromaz** · 12-11-2009, 11:58 PM

Ahh, but there are so many interesting things. Recently I saw something written in words which for the first time really explain how I often look at things. The reason why I am asking stupid questions like how exactly a transformer coil is working It was called (Tesla ???) secret code of invention.

1) You have to look.
2) Then you have to look at yourself looking.
3) Then you have to move away and look again
- from far, at yourself looking at yourself looking
- and the complete environment.

You have to be objective - meaning also you have to be able to look from
at least THREE sides at any subject. Failing to look from three directions
will mean you only have a two dimentional picture - and you failed to look.

Now about the galaxy: @sucahyo, there is still one connection you did not make!

Keep an image of the galaxies in your mind and have another look at various photos of Nikola Tesla in his famous lab. In particular where he is sitting in the midst of electric streamers - reading a book.

? ? ?

**dambit** · 12-12-2009, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by sucahyo View Post

Notice this picture:
GL-2002-001059

Direct link to image:
http://library01.gsfc.nasa.gov/nix/n...002-001059.jpg

The image show various galaxy. All of them look flat.

I maybe wrong so if anyone has ball shaped galaxy please post it. All I have seen is the flat on any orientation.

Anyone has other opinion? I am saying that gravity is not the one responsible for holding moon orbit to earth or earth orbit to sun or sun orbit in galaxy or galaxy orbit in something big.

Hi Mate,

Read the works of Walter Russell. IMO his theories make the most sense. His book titled "The Universal One" is fantastic, although as it was written in the 1920's he uses a lot of his own terminology for things. Once you figure out what he is refering to it becomes very profound.

Cheers,

Steve.

**elias** · 12-12-2009, 05:24 AM

Spinning?

Maybe because Galaxies are spinning with a huge amount of mass? Galaxies are like huge gyroscopes and the Centrifugal force makes the Galaxies get flat? This also causes the Galaxies get stable on a plane.

**ANTIQUER** · 12-12-2009, 08:46 AM

Galaxy shapes

Hi sucahyo;

I maybe wrong so if anyone has ball shaped galaxy please post it. All I have seen is the flat on any orientation.

Hubble sequence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Galaxy formation and evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Galaxy Formation Theory Proposed

The last link and the two comments at the end are particularly interesting. Enjoy.

Al

**Inquorate** · 12-12-2009, 10:42 AM

Flat galaxy

A galaxy is flat because it spins on one axis, making the centrifugal force act on 90 degree plane to the direction of spin.

Better questions would be, 'why does a galaxy or planet have one axis of rotation while our sun has 7 ?' and 'why does the centrifugal force act at 90 degrees to the axis of rotation?'

Both of which I cannot answer other than to suspect it has to do with fundamental properties of the aether, as to when aether is flowing, or terminating at a final point (in a sun and perhaps a galactic centre)

Love and light

**ANTIQUER** · 12-12-2009, 10:08 PM

Hi Inquorate;

A galaxy is flat because it spins on one axis, making the centrifugal force act on 90 degree plane to the direction of spin.

I think an even more fundamental question is why are they spinning; and not all in the same direction? And what started the rotation?

Al

**Iotayodi** · 12-13-2009, 02:02 AM

I think an even more fundamental question is why are they spinning; and not all in the same direction? And what started the rotation?

Some force had to be applied. The direction makes me think of a cue ball and the opposite spin it imparts to the next ball. If you have 2 balls in a row and use the cue ball with left hand spin (clockwise) the second ball will be clockwise and the first ball hit will be counter clockwise.

An even bigger question is where did the original matter or energy that caused the big bang come from.

**Aromaz** · 12-13-2009, 02:35 AM

Not same direction?

Depends from which angle you are looking.
I would rather think they are all spinning in the same direction,
but the complete galaxy is tumbling head-over-heels.

So then why do you find some planets within a solar system (Like our Venus)
spinning in the opposite direction? Personally I do not support the idea of collision but rather than such planets were 'captured' from a weaker galaxy/solar system. It is already possible that our milky way galaxy might have absorbed another galaxy(s) and such might have been 'up-side-down'.

When you add this variable into the math, suddenly there is clear results indicating another sun binary to our own; the possibility off Nibiru as well as many other questions gets answers.

**sucahyo** · 12-14-2009, 02:45 AM

Thank you all.

Sorry for this long post.

Originally posted by llynch View Post

It begins with a single string/vibration/??.

It might. A spin can be detected as vibration too.

Originally posted by aljhoa View Post

I am saying that gravity is not the one responsible for holding moon orbit to earth or earth orbit to sun or sun orbit in galaxy or galaxy orbit in something big.

The proof is in both Magellanic and Earth clouds.

Thanks for the scientific link. But, I don't get whether you agree or disagree? And I think earth gravity has strong influence in clouds. I think it is more than the swirl.

Originally posted by Iotayodi View Post

2D? Where? They all have lwh. Scientists believe now that every Galaxy has a black hole at its center. The Milky way has one.
Nice pic of the colliding Galaxys.

I mean that galaxy do not shape like a ball. I mean galaxy has shape close to a whirpool. A whirpool also have lenght width and thickness. I mean galaxy is like two whirpool of up side down to each other on top of each other. Gravity has less power to change the flow of whirpool. So while moon is capable of changing the sea level, it can not exceed the power of earth centered whirpool.

And I don't think both galaxies are colliding. Just like water flow can create double whirpool at the same time, I think those galaxy happen to created at the same time and starting to SEPARATE. I don't know for sure though.....

Originally posted by Aromaz View Post

Keep an image of the galaxies in your mind and have another look at various photos of Nikola Tesla in his famous lab. In particular where he is sitting in the midst of electric streamers - reading a book.

Do you mean electricity is the one that shaped the galaxy? I don't agree. Tesla mention that elecric stream create lighting orb sometime. Orb or ball is not the shape of the galaxy. If galaxy is created from electricity then it should shape like a ball, while galaxy do not look like a ball at all. Also electricity has much less power when can not conduct, and vacuum is a good insulation.

Originally posted by dambit View Post

Read the works of Walter Russell. IMO his theories make the most sense. His book titled "The Universal One" is fantastic, although as it was written in the 1920's he uses a lot of his own terminology for things. Once you figure out what he is refering to it becomes very profound

Thanks. I don't have The Universal One, Walter Russell The Secret of Light explain about galaxy creation, moon, planet and sun relation.

Regarding moon:
From The secret of light, page 35:
"Newton, for example, confessedly did not know what gravitation was, yet wrote laws concerning it based upon his observation as to what gravitation did to an apple. Also, he concluded that the moon would fall upon he earth if it were not for its motion. He even proved his mathematically, not being aware of the fact that those same mathematical formulae would apply to every satellite, planet and star in the heavens, as well as to every electron in every atom, none of which are falling into their primaries.

Observers in natural phenomena are still calculating the age of the universe and weight of the earth. The universe is ageless. It had no beginning. Likewise the earth has no weight in respect to anything else in the universe. Every orb in the heavens is in perfect balance with every other orb."

Comment:
My take on this is earth is happen to be at the center of small whirpool/swirl where moon is at earts's outer whirpool. Just like earh is in a sun whirpool. Before the whirpool stop, it must suck all the surrounding object first. This is just like a prediction about how the doomsday look like. Earth become very white bright where sun and moon are closing to earth.

page 137:
"Jupiter is even now developing belts which will be thrown off as rings, to become moons. These moons will become comets and eventually plunge into the sun as all things in this solar system likewise do."

I don't agree. Besides, this is contadicting what Walter Russell mention about Newton Moon And also from page 102:
"The moon is not falling upon the earth, as generally supposed, for it is in balance with its environment and cannot fall. Its contracted mass is equal to the expanded mass it displaces in its wave field."

I think object that will be affected by gravity are object that is not affected by whirpool. Once they stuck in a whirpool, they may never escape again if they do no have high momentum.

Regarding the creation of stars, Page 85:
"Large scale examples of this process can be seen in any of the spiral nebulae, notably Nebula 74 Piscium. Two fiery spiral arms of radiating mother-light reach out from the equator of its central sun to born its countless other suns and earths by unfolding them from its centering seed. (Figs. 35 and 37, pg. 242)

Two black arms of gravitating father-light pull spirally inward from the heavens toward the poles of the centering giant sun to generate the sun in incandescent one ness of all form.' The father-light of gravity refolds all unfolding forms from Creation's seed in formless light of suns and gives them growing bodies.

Gravitation is the male principle of Creation. Gravity refolds toward the seed.
Radiation is the female principle of Creation. Radiation unfolds from the seed."
I do not agree that all start form center. According to previous Jupiter moon theory, the stars may change to comet and fall toward the center of the galaxy. It isn't like that.

"Walter Russell states that Newton's mathematical formulae, written to prove that the moon would fall into the earth if its motion were stopped, applies to every satellite, planet and star in the heavens as well as to every electron in every atom, none of which are falling into their primaries. Walter Russell implies that Newton s laws of gravitation were incomplete: It is obvious from the Russell cosmogony that the moon can never stop Its motion, nor can any of the other bodies that move around their primaries stop moving. They do not fall because they are always seeking and finding, losing and refinding their potential positions in their movements. If they were to stop their motion, they and all the Universe would disappear. If they were to stop their orbital motion and move inward or outward, to or from their primary, there would be a counterbalancmg movement from their primary to balance this change of pattern unto the furthermost reaches of the Universe."
I do not agree. One dying solar whirpool where all it's moon and planet are sucked to the center many not means the dying of other whirpool.

There are inconsistency on The Secret of Light. However there are things that I agree. The current atomic model that I believe from occult chemistry is partly mentioned in some of late chapter. Walter Russell periodic element has similarity to what mentioned in occult chemistry. The periodic table is made from swing movement. However, in occult chemistry it is mentioned that periodic table should be in 3D, not 2D.

Originally posted by elias View Post

Maybe because Galaxies are spinning with a huge amount of mass? Galaxies are like huge gyroscopes and the Centrifugal force makes the Galaxies get flat? This also causes the Galaxies get stable on a plane.

Do you mean centrifugal forces change the gravity power shape? I don't agree. If it is, then a slower rotating star will have more planet orbiting in ball shape orbit.

In earth, gravity is relatively even across the globe. If gravity is responsible for holding all thing together then galaxy should shape like a ball. I do not think that moon and sun rise from east is a coincidence. Why the moon do not rise from north and fall at south?

If magnetic field is said to be responsible for holding all together, isn't earth do not rotate at magnetic field axis? Even sun has it's pole randomize.

Originally posted by ANTIQUER View Post

Hubble sequence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Galaxy formation and evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Galaxy Formation Theory Proposed

The last link and the two comments at the end are particularly interesting. Enjoy.

Thanks for the link. I found the last link have explained whirpool effect better:
The Nature of Space
"When the distribution of stars in galaxies is modelled using a computer model, the galaxy shapes are not stable. The rotation of galaxies and the effect of gravitation should lead to a galaxy falling apart within one rotation. The idea of dark matter was introduced to suggest that there was something invisible that was making up 96% of the universe.

Observations indicate that stars in the outer region of a galaxy are moving just as fast as stars closer to the centre of a galaxy. In effect the galaxy arms are moving like a bicycle wheel and the whole galaxy moves as if it were a solid or interconnected single object.

A third problem lies in the creation and persistence of particular galaxy shapes such as a spiral galaxy. Even with dark matter, it would be very difficult to contrive a computer model which imitates the creation of spiral galaxies and allows them to persist over time. It is implausible to suppose that the combination of rotation and gravitation forces exactly combine so that each and every star stays in its place in every spiral galaxy. Even the elliptical galaxy shapes are difficult to explain as a real physical distribution of stars. In any process which operates from a starting point of a homogeneous distribution of gas acting under gravity we would expect to find spherical distributions of material. With our new model we can instead view elliptical galaxies as a spherical distribution of stars whose image is changed to an ellipse by the curvature of spacetime on the path taken by the light to our point of observation."

It still show the confusion about why the galaxy is flat.

Originally posted by Inquorate View Post

A galaxy is flat because it spins on one axis, making the centrifugal force act on 90 degree plane to the direction of spin.

Why centrifugal force make every planet aligned flat orbit? I don't think planet orbit sun in 90 degrees of sun rotation. Do moon orbitting at exacty 90 degree of earth rotation axis? Correct me if I am wrong, I just saying what I remember from school...

Originally posted by ANTIQUER View Post

I think an even more fundamental question is why are they spinning; and not all in the same direction? And what started the rotation?

What happen if a couple of cow being caught in a big tornado? Would they rotate or stationary? If they rotate, would they rotate the same way? Sorry, this is really a question since I never observe it carefully.

**sucahyo** · 08-18-2010, 02:25 AM

Theory from freezing water experiment

Based from freezing water observation:

Planets and stars will form near the existence of energy turbulance, and most will form around the center.

This picture from electric universe also show some illustration of it:

**gasman** · 08-18-2010, 07:20 AM

To answer you in short, sucahyo, nobody knows. There aren't even any models that come close to explaining it. ANTIQUER's links pretty much sum it up. There are many great minds working on it, though.

I should point out a few things, though. You seem to be making a common false assumption. I understand that you just meant "relatively flat" and not "absolutely flat" (even though you did say 2D). Still, the assumption that I have issue with is that the current state of things is the end. The fact is, the entire universe didn't exist solely to get to where it is now, it is constantly changing. We are not at the end, what we see at any point in time is a snapshot of the changing universe.

It is like evolution in animals. We, as humans, have certain qualities and traits. But, we must understand that we are still evolving. We will always be evolving. Just like the universe, our 'shape' just fits into what is true right now. As things change, we will change. It is a constant battle, and we (along with galaxies) will never be perfectly adapted to anything. As another example I will use orbits. As we all know, we cannot orbit the sun forever-- all orbits deteriorate. For large bodies with much speed, like planets, it would take so long to deteriorate to the point of being swallowed up by the sun that it is actually a moot point (because the sun will become a red giant and explode before that could happen). SO, again, it seems like things are stable and will remain at "status quo, ad infinitum," but such is just not the case.

Along those same lines, while I'm close to the subject, chaos is relative. There is just as much "order" in "chaos" as there is "chaos" in "order" as they are both the same thing. What we call "order" is just stuff we can understand (generalize) easier.

PS: quit using the term "centrifugal force." It simply doesn't exist. There are few forces, and "centrifugal" is not one of them.

Also, I think you should be a little more specific in the type of answer you want. Do you want a scientific answer, or religious answer? You've gotten a mixture of both so far. I went to science (as I am not religious), but some chose to answer with religion (using religious terms like "Aether"). I'm just curious.