Home Galaxy Formation

The Ball-of-Light Particle Model requires no modification or only minor modifications for most of physics. This is one of its strengths. It works with most classical physics. However, in the astrophysics specialty of Galaxy Formation, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model leads to dramatic changes.

The currently accepted theory of galaxy formation relies on two details:

  1. The Big Bang created small elementary particles -- such as electrons and protons -- which coalesced together due to electrical charge to form gigantic clouds of gases and dust.
  2. Then, these giant clouds of particles collapsed gravitationally to form galaxies.

Behind the scenes in these traditional theories is the "fact" that stars obtain their energy from nuclear fusion. Behind the scenes in these traditional theories is the assumption that the original energy of the Big Bang "appeared" from a singularity.

As a comparison, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts these significant differences:

  1. The Big Bang appeared not from a singularity but from a giant ball-of-light.
  2. When this ball-of-light exploded -- i.e., decayed -- the bulk of the released energy went into making smaller balls-of-light. (A small percentage created the background radiation in the universe.)
  3. These "smaller" balls-of-light later exploded in huge explosions that created the bubbly structure of the universe. (See also, Gamma Ray Bursts and The 6 Major Energy Harmonics)
  4. When these objects exploded, they released billions of smaller balls-of-light that that we now see decaying into galaxies.
  5. Galaxies are decaying into stars.
  6. Stars are decaying into elementary particles.

To summarize: the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts galaxies form from massive decaying balls-of-light.

Problems with the classical theory of galaxy formation

Understanding how galaxies form is one of the most important challenges for astronomy. It has also been one of the most difficult challenges. There have been two main reasons for this. First, up until the Hubble Space Telescope and the Keck telescopes came online, it was difficult for astronomers to see distant galaxies. Second, galaxies take so very long to develop. It is impossible to study one galaxy from birth to death. Therefore astronomers have been faced with the task of studying galaxies by looking at snapshots. In order to do this, astronomers have "lined up" the snapshots, so to speak, from childhood to old age -- guessing all the while what a "child" looks like, and what an "adult" galaxy looks like.

With all of the new data from the new telescopes coming in, old theories about how galaxies formed are simply falling apart. For example, until recently, astronomers believed that all galaxies were formed virtually at the same point in time long ago in the distant past. Now it is obvious that some galaxies formed early in the history of the universe, some formed later -- maybe billions of years later than the early galaxies formed. This is quite a change for astronomical theory.

The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that galaxies form from decaying balls-of-light. Some of these are more stable than others. Therefore, some started decaying early, the more stable galactic cores started becoming galaxies later.

It is an observational fact that galaxies are clumped together in clusters and superclusters. The universe appears "lumpy." Traditional theory for galaxy formation states that the "primordial" cloud of gas and dust that galaxies formed out of had very small imperfections so the cloud was not perfectly smooth. These imperfections allowed gravity to be slightly greater in certain areas and this allowed the galaxies to form. This theory just simply no longer works. It is impossible to reasonably reconcile the idea that galaxies condensed from these localized, early gravitational imperfections and then have galaxies form over so long of a period of time.

One group of astronomers -- Charles Steidel (Palomar Observatory) and colleagues -- has discovered that a large cluster of galaxies -- supposedly -- formed only one billion years after the Big Bang.

"How the universe grew so clumpy so soon after the almost perfectly smooth Big Bang remains one of astronomy's outstanding mysteries."

Sky & Telescope, January 1998, page 22

When scientists examine images from the furthest reaches of space -- like from the Hubble Space Telescope's Deep Field View -- what is seen is not collapsing clouds of gas and dust, but rather, intense exploding -- i.e., decaying -- objects.

The Primordial Cloud

There are many, many problems with the classical theory of galaxy formation. Another problem is these hypothetical primordial clouds. Where are they? It is not possible to simply say they collapsed into stars and no longer are visible. Supposedly, the Hubble Deep Field view looks back into time maybe 80 percent of the way to the Big Bang. This amazing montage of 342 images does not see the primordial clouds. What is shows is relatively small galaxies. If there were massive clouds, they should have blocked the view. Remember, it hardly takes any amount of gas and dust to visually block your view. For example, imagine the thick smoke of a house fire. If your were a firefighter in a smoke-filled room, you would be very aware of how easily the smoke blocks your view. Now imagine how much mass there is in that smoke. Mentally compare its density to the density of a star. To have a "primordial" cloud of gas and dust capable of collapsing and forming the mass of all the stars and galaxies, it must have been huge. The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts it never existed. The Hubble Deep Field view should not have been able to see galaxies at all due to the youth of all of the galaxies in this image. The should have all been still engulfed in the primordial cloud if it ever existed.

Furthermore, the Deep Field view shows many little galaxies, where nowadays there are fewer, but larger galaxies.

"James Lowenthal and David Koo, among others at the University of California at Santa Cruz, went out to the Keck to examine the Deep Field in detail. They saw many of the same galaxies the Steidel has observed but found them to be far more numerous than those seen today. Where did they all go? "Either some of these objects have grown so dim that we cant see them today," suggests Lowenthal, "or they've merged."

Or they just were starting to decay.

To Koo's eyes, the objects appear rather small and blobby, as though they are smaller gaseous building blocks rather than early galaxies in their own right. Perhaps a galaxy does not condense out of a huge gas cloud, fully formed from the start. Instead it might fit together from smaller structures, like some cosmic-size set of Legos."

Or, perhaps, the galaxies formed from single massive balls-of-light that were the decay products of some early larger explosion. It is an observational fact that the structure of the universe appears "bubbly." Where these bubbles create from larger explosions? The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that "Gamma Ray Bursts" are examples of such distant explosions.

There is a lot of talk nowadays about how galaxies "merged" frequently in the early stages of the universe. I have no doubt that this must have occurred. However, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts it was far more likely for a massive ball-of-light to be decaying -- i.e., splitting into smaller pieces -- early in the universe. (See also, Antennae) Therefore, are all of these example images of galactic "mergers" really galaxies merging, or, instead, are they the opposite? The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts they are examples of galaxies splitting. For example, examine this small section of the Deep Field view:

Hubble Deep Field View

Notice all of the "blobby" galaxies. "Blobby" and "Clumpy" have become sort of a joke words for me. I always immediately interpret them as meaning ball-of-light. In the image above, notice how the galaxies are ejecting balls-of-light. There are numerous examples of strings of balls-of-light. Even rings of ejected balls-of-light! To my eye, the galaxy about in the middle of the image vertically and on the right edge looks just like what I imagine the Cartwheel Galaxy would have look like in its early years of ejecting a ring of balls-of-light.

Again, there are so many problems with the traditional view of galaxy formation, it is safe to say the theory is dead. Some of the most distant galaxies seen look like massive "old" elliptical galaxies. How did these old galaxies form so quickly in the history of the universe while others formed later? The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that a particular galaxy's shape is a result of the harmonics of its core. If the core is harmonic, a spherical or elliptical galaxy is formed with "old" appearing stars. If a core is not harmonic, a spiral or irregular galaxy is formed with "young" appearing stars. They could be the same age, they are just decaying at different rates. The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that many of the distant small irregular galaxies viewed in long-range images like the Deep Field view are simply gone. They have decayed. Only the galaxies that were originally bigger have survived and are still decaying.

One explanation that has been proposed to explain why galaxies have formed the way they have involves Black Holes. The idea goes like this: early Black Holes in the primordial cloud quickly condensed material into all of the early "blobby" galaxies. The material falls into the black hole and somehow bounces back out -- or, is deflected back out through the mechanism of a spiraling disk of material. First of all, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that "balls-of-light" are very similar to "Black Holes." Second, if these black holes had so much power, if they were capable of doing such dramatic things, if they were so strong to prevent even light from escaping them, then how did they get so weak later? If they could form so early in the history of the universe, then they should have taken over. There was nothing to stop them. They should have literally consumed all material by now.

The Olbers -- Cheseaux Paradox

When you look at the night sky it is almost completely black. If the traditional view of galaxy formation is correct, then at every point you look at, in the night sky, the point should end at a star. Thus, the sky should be as bright as the average brightness of all stars. Galaxies and stars have not formed according to the traditional view, according to the Ball-of-Light Particle Model. Our current Big Bang -- it may be just one in a series of Big Bangs and Big Crunches -- started from an immense ball-of-light that decayed. Most likely, the original decay mode was the split decay mode, and the 2 balls-of-light that resulted had opposite spin -- just as in the Antennae Galaxies. This would explain something called the "handedness" of the universe. As each half of the universe exploded away from each other in the form of two massive balls-of-light, these balls-of-light decayed further into smaller balls-of-light. How many times this process occurred is uncertain. Working backwards, we know:

  1. traditional elementary particles such as neutrons can decay
  2. cores of stars can decay
  3. cores of galaxies can decay
  4. something decayed to make the bubbly structure of the universe and the galactic cores

Therefore, if the universe had:

  1. an initial ball-of-light that decayed, and
  2. at least one more level after the initial ball-of-light split into two halves

then, there must be at least 6 major harmonics of decay.

This process explains the Olbers -- Cheseaux Paradox because, the further away from earth an object is, the further back in time you see, and the further back in time you see, the less decaying balls-of-light existed.

Classification of Galaxies

There are many types of galaxies. Traditionally, galaxies have been categorized into the following:

The two main types are spiral galaxies and elliptical galaxies. I will first cover spiral galaxies and what the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts about them.

Spiral Galaxies

There are many types of spiral galaxies. They can be categorized by how many arms they have and whether or not the arms appear to have a bar.

Two-Armed Spiral Galaxies

The two-armed type of spiral galaxy is the most common. The central cores of these galaxies are massive balls-of-light. On the surface of these cores are massive electric and magnetic fields. These fields are evenly spaced and quite harmonic except for one or two massive wave(s) that are sweeping back and forth over the core. These electromagnetic fields are intense enough to induce the cores of stars.

High Speed, Massive Stars

The spiral arms are produced by massive waves inducing stars off the poles. As a wave reaches a pole of the core it induces very large balls-of-light. These balls-of-light are sometimes very massive, producing stars equal to fifty to hundreds -- or thousands of times the mass of our sun.

(Note, traditional astrophysical theories do not predict stars this large, but with each passing month new stars are spotted in our galaxy and other galaxies that seem impossibly large compared to traditional theory. See also, Eta Carinae. See also, The Pistol Star.) (See also, R136 in the Tarantula Nebula.) (See also, a large animated GIF (161K) of a generic ball-of-light inducing a smaller ball-of-light from its pole.)

To summarize: the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts massive stars are ejected at high speeds from the cores of spiral galaxies. These massive stars travel out along the arms of the spirals, initially decaying slowly, then decaying rapidly.

OB Associations

Clusters of massive O and B type stars are called OB Associations. Such clusters have been spotted in many locations of our galaxy and other galaxies. I theorize such clusters are examples of a rapidly decaying massive stars -- rapidly decaying massive balls-of-light ejected from a galactic core. If this theory the is correct, then these clusters would have an unnaturally large amount of x-ray and gamma-ray radiation. Indeed, high x-ray radiation is found from OB Associations. If this theory the is correct, then these clusters would be spotted more frequently in the bars of barred galaxies. Indeed, OB Associations are usually found in the arms of barred galaxies.

I believe the well-known Orion Cluster is an example of OB Association and is a result of a massive, decaying ball-of-light.

I believe the star cluster NGC 3603 is also an example of an OB Association


I will discuss this cluster more on a special page at a later time.

Forces affecting a star being ejected from a Galactic Core

Stars induced by galactic cores are affected by three fundamental forces:

Thus, if the Ball-of-Light Particle Model is correct, it should be possible to see streams of stars being ejected from the cores of spiral galaxies. This is visible in almost every spiral or barred galaxy. As an example, look at the core of M100.

Note in this image the streams of stars being ejected from the core. As the stars stream from the core they leave a trail of dust. Traditional theory states that galaxies form by having stars stream into the core via these arms. But why would dust be funneled into the core of a galaxy in two symmetrical streams with portions of the dust streams thousands or millions of light-years apart? If the streams flow in rather than out, then how do the streams communicate with each other in order to keep so symmetrical? They can not do this of course!

I ask you -- even if you believe in the traditional theory of galaxy formation -- does this image look like an explosion or a collapsing cloud?

Personally, I love watching fireworks explode. Galaxies are just like fireworks -- but far more beautiful and impressive. The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts they are explosions, not collapsing clouds of gas and dust.

It should be quite easy to decide which theory is correct by measuring which way the stars are moving! In? Or, out? I know of no examples where it has been proven that matter is streaming into the core. There are many examples where it has been proven that matter is rotating around a core or streaming out of the core.

Zones of Instability

There is another easy way to compare the classical theory to the Ball-of-Light Particle Model. The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that the gravitational attraction of the ejected stars to the core will gradually slow the star's motion relative to the core. The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts a fast moving star is inherently more stable than a slow moving star. This leads to the prediction that galaxies will have "zones of instability" where stars decay more frequently -- a prediction the classical models of galaxy formation do not make.

Why is a fast moving star more stable? The reason is simple. The fast moving star induces a higher center-pointing gravitational force. The star weighs more. In essence, it is as if this holds the star together better. Specifically, the electromagnetic fields on the surface of the core induce a greater center-pointing gravitational field when the star is moving fast. If an individual star had nonharmonic waves on its core -- that would tend to make the star decay rapidly or explode -- it would decay less rapidly or be less likely to explode when it is moving faster. (See also, Decay Modes, The Lifetime of Muons, and Induction of Gravity) (This is the part of the Ball-of-Light Particle Model that replaces the portion of General Relativity that states: objects moving faster will experience "longer lives.")

To summarize, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts stars become less stable as they slow down after being ejected from the core of the galaxy.

Do spiral galaxies exhibit this phenomena? Yes! Every single spiral galaxy has one or more areas -- depending on the number of arms -- which I refer to as the "zone(s) of instability" or, "instability zone(s)." These are areas where large stars that are slowing down, on the average, decay faster and explode more frequently. This process creates: ionized HII regions; clouds of gas and dust; nova; supernova; nebula like the famous Orion and Tarantula nebulae; planetary nebulae like the famous Eta Carinae, Hourglass, and Cat's Eye; and new smaller stars.

As examples of "zones of instability" note the areas in M100's core above that are outlined with white. In these areas, the stars are slowing down and, in general, decaying more.

Zones of instability are especially evident in barred spiral galaxies, as in the following examples.

Barred Galaxies

Barred Galaxies are an extremely interesting version of the spiral galaxy. They have a characteristic central "bar" leading out both sides of the core that gives them their name. An example is NGC 1365.

The Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts the bars are "straight" partly because of the high speed at which the stars are ejected from the core. (The bars usually have some arc and are not perfectly "straight.") Also, these bars are straight partly because the ejected stars travel so fast they have a large mutual gravitational attraction within the bar. The stars along the bar attract each other with more gravitational force than elsewhere in the galaxy. This helps keep them aligned in a straight line and thus keeps the bar straight. Note -- always -- at the ends of the bars are zones of instability, where the slowing stars become less stable decay faster and explode more often.

An enlargement of NGC 1365's core looks like...

As the stars stream from the core, they start decaying, leaving behind a stream of dust. This is indicated by the arrow pointing down and to the right. As the stars' motion slow, relative to the core, they become less stable and decay more rapidly and explode more frequently. This area is indicated by the arrow pointing up and to the left. When the large stars from the core explode, they can create smaller stars that are ejected from the location of where the explosion takes place. Most of the stars move to the rear of the spiral arm -- however, some are ejected forward -- kind of like how the hand of a bat sticks forward from its lead wing.

(Additionally, the Ball-of-Light Particle Model predicts that the bars should have a significant magnetic field -- similar to that produced by electrons flowing through a wire. This would likely keep the ejected balls-of-light aligned as they flow along the bar. If this is the case, then this polarization would be a factor that helps determine the direction of secondary stars ejected from the zones of instability. Ins essence, many of the stars will have their poles aimed in the same direction when they split or explode.)

The parts of a Barred Galaxy are illustrated in the following diagram.

To summarize, the central core of the galaxy is a decaying ball-of-light. Most of the waves on the core induce small, harmonic stars in a spherical decay zone around the core. One or more massive waves sweep from pole to pole ejecting stars -- potentially very massive in size -- in the high velocity ejection zone. As these stars slow, they begin to decay in the zone of instability. Large stars that split into smaller stars will eject most of the smaller decay stars from the zone of instability to the rear of the arm with relatively slow velocity. Some secondary stars are ejected forward with a medium velocity. Both forward and backward moving stars in the outer arms slow and then create more decaying in these outer-arm decay zones.

This is process is not a fluke. It is found in all barred galaxies.

NGC 1530

NGC 1530 is another example:

An enlargement of its core, inner arms, and zones of instability looks like:

Again, note: how the stars are ejected from the core; how they leave behind a trail of dust; how they explode in the zone of instability; and how the secondary stars are ejected from the zone of instability both forward and rearward.

Next Page in Galaxy Formation