Dark Light Does Not Endanger Grandfather

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />How can the major part of the total mass be be located at the center of the disk?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The densest concentration of stars is located at the geometric center of the galaxy disk, so a significant fraction of the total mass is located there. But by no means is it the majority of the mass.

I no longer see where I think your questions are headed. What is it you are trying to understand? -|Tom|-

I'm trying to understand why so much faith is devoted to topics in science without any data of any kind. I'll ask you one why do you believe there are lots of stars at the center of galaxies if you don't observe any?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />I'm trying to understand why so much faith is devoted to topics in science without any data of any kind. I'll ask you one why do you believe there are lots of stars at the center of galaxies if you don't observe any?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Because we do observe lots of stars at the centers of galaxies. Whatever made you think we didn't? -|Tom|-

The centers of galaxies are too bright to see any detail in pictures and according to models the center is dark because a blackhole lurks there. Also, its just not logical for any mass could be located at that area if a structure forced by gravity into a disk shape. I know not all galaxies are disks and maybe if a new perspective could be considered some new insights would develop as to why different kinds of galaxies are observed. I have wondered why galatic centers are so bright in photos for example. And then the center of our galaxy is fogged in. The areas of the spectrum other than visible don't do much but give theorists some tea leaves to read.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />The centers of galaxies are too bright to see any detail in pictures<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">True at visual wavelengths. But the Galaxy is all pretty transparent at radio wavelengths, where we see many specific sources and considerable detail about the masses at the center.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">and according to models the center is dark because a blackhole lurks there.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">We've never <i>seen</i> a black hole there, but we have seen x-rays and nearby objects orbiting at high speeds indicating considerable mass at that location.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Also, its just not logical for any mass could be located at that area if a structure forced by gravity into a disk shape.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The solar system is disk-shaped, just sparser than the Galaxy. What's not logical about a central mass supporting a disk shape around it?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have wondered why galatic centers are so bright in photos for example.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The density of stars is highest in the center, and drops off gradually as far out as we can observe. We've never detected an edge to any galaxy. But at some distance, the density of stars becomes indistinguishable from the background.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The areas of the spectrum other than visible don't do much but give theorists some tea leaves to read.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Speaking for myself, I'm continually amazed at how different galaxies look at every different wavelength, and how much new and unique knowledge we acquire from each new view. -|Tom|-

Yes I agree galaxies look very different in radio and x-ray then in red/green/blue light. But, why dismiss what is seen for what can be made from whatever information might found elsewhere when the data is just going to be filtered through theories? I know there is data coming in from other than vision but its distorted by models that are way over rated. There is a lot wrong in assuming a galatic structure is anything like the solar system. This has been kicked around before. To review, the mass of the solar system is 99.8% located at the sun and the galaxy has all its mass spread all over the disk. Its a totally different dynamics when the mass location is no where near the geometric center even if the barycenter is located at the geometric center. What happens when two or more stars are attracting each other and moving in the same direction at the same time? Its not orbiting as in the solar system model but it is the same force in a very different environment. There is no force in the disk structure pointing to the barycenter. All the force is pointing to all the stars all over the disks.