See the article:

Fermi Detects ‘Shocking’ Surprise from Supernova’s Little Cousin

08.12.10

at: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/shocking-nova.html

It is not a explosion: the white dwarf is a pulsar, an old and giant planet,  the nuclear reactions from its core has reached the last geological layer, and then, there is a collapse, when the remnant matter of the surface is a new strong nutriment of food to the germ of a star being developed through the nucleus. It is like the birth of a flower.

Why human beings trends to project themselves to unknown phenomena in the sky? We are product from a biosphere in state of chaos, but, in the sky, the astronomic organization of matter is in the state of order. There are no violence, no explosions. See in the article how many details on this event are against the current Nebular Theory, as recognized by the authors.

Comments about the article:

1)      Article: “The discovery overturns the notion that novae explosions lack the power to emit such high-energy radiation.”

The Matrix: The explosion of novae is an error of nebular Theory models. The models of Matrix/DNA Theory were not affected by this discovery.

2)      Article: “The outburst occurs when a white dwarf in a binary system erupts in an enormous thermonuclear explosion.”

The Matrix: The outburst occurs when a pulsar, which always is in a binary system, is transformed into a new star.

3)      Art: “The system is a so-called symbiotic binary containing a compact white dwarf and a red giant star about 500 times the size of the sun.”

Ther Matrix: “Yes, the transformation of a pulsar indicates that the system is old, then, must there is a red giant star.”

4)      Art: “”The red giant is so swollen that its outermost atmosphere is just leaking away into space. The white dwarf intercepts and captures some of this gas, which accumulates on its surface. As the gas piles on for decades to centuries, it eventually becomes hot and dense enough to fuse into helium. This energy-producing process triggers a runaway reaction that explodes the accumulated gas. The white dwarf itself, however, remains intact..”

The Matrix: “That’s a new fact that I never thought about. Indeed, before the pulsar’s transformation, it must be reached by the first degraded matter from the giant star. But, the next step is to broken the binary system because the supernova falls away out of the star’s gravitation force. Then, the degraded matter will build a vortex, called black hole. The nebular Theory is saying that the gas creates suddenly the hell at the white dwarf atmosphere. Ok: maybe the whole process really happens, then, the event was not the transformation of the pulsar. Maybe this kind of event is normal, happening before the transformation. But, let’s see now if the white dwarf will go back to the same. I don’t think so”

5)      Art: “It takes thousands of years for supernova remnants to evolve, but with this nova we’ve watched the same kinds of changes over just a few days,” he said. “We’ve gone from a photo album to a time-lapse movie.”

The Matrix: “Then you must to re-think your theoretical models.”

Newton’s theory of gravitation may have to be modified after a team of astrophysicists discovered that satellite galaxies bordering the Milky Way are breaking the laws of physics.

The researchers, including Dr Helmut Jerjen of the ANU Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics, studied dwarf galaxy companions to the Milky Way and found a number of problems with conventional explanations of their behaviour. The issues they found; the relative scarcity of the satellite galaxies, the distribution, rotation and make up of the systems, suggest that in space, the fundamental principles of physics have been misunderstood.

Photograph by Mischa Schirmer, University of Bonn.

“Our studies of satellite galaxies have revealed some astonishing phenomena,” said Dr Jerjen. “First of all, there is something wrong about their distribution. Standard Cold Dark Matter theory tells us the satellites should be uniformly arranged around their mother galaxy, but this is not what we see. In fact, they all lie more or less in the same plane – they are forming some sort of disc in the sky.”

The research team has also been able to show that the satellite galaxies rotate in the same direction around the Milky Way – like the planets revolve around the sun. The researchers say this can only be explained if the satellites were created a long time ago through collisions between younger galaxies.

“But there is a catch to this picture. Theoretical calculations tell us that such tidal satellites created cannot contain any dark matter. This stands in contradiction to another observation – that the stars in these satellites are moving much faster than predicted by Gravitational Law. If classical physics holds it must be attributed to the presence of dark matter,” said Dr Jerjen.

 This contradiction has lead the research team of astrophysicists from ANU and the Universities of Bonn and Vienna to the conclusion that when it comes to satellite galaxies the fundamental principles of physics have been misunderstood.

“A possible solution to this contradiction would be to reject Newton’s classical theory of gravitation. We might live in a non-Newton universe. And if this is true, then our observations could be explained without dark matter. This conclusion has far-reaching consequences for fundamental physics and for cosmological theories,” he said. “The Stromlo Missing Satellites Survey project at ANU will perform crucial tests to verify this subtle hint nature threw at us.”

It would not be the first time that Newton’s theory of gravitation has needed to be modified over the last century. It has previously happened three times; when high velocities are involved (Special Theory of Relativity), in the proximity of large masses (theory of General Relativity) and on sub-atomic scales (through quantum mechanics). The research team’s findings have been published in two papers this month in The Astrophysical Journal and the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Contact: Dr Helmut Jerjen – (02) 6125 8038 Martyn Pearce, ANU Media Office – (02) 6125 5575 / 0416 249 245

Source: The Australian National University

( ok, now we need to check these informations facing our models)

Earth is LUCA, in his/her young times. It is like a human being ten years old. Earth still has no sexual activity, its volcanoes are too weak and the nucleus is far from the external surface. But, for proving that Earth is LUCA we should be able to show the past, since its birth, and the future till its death. It is impossible. The confirmation of LUCA’s existence is coming by another way: spatial observation.

Every day our telescopes are discovering new astronomics bodies, which does not fit the description of the known bodies. Sometimes the list of new names for those bodies are increasing, Today there are supernova, brown dwarf, white dwarf, etc. We remember the recent episode about Pluto: it seems a planet but is not a planet… Then this list will increase, we will have hundreds, thousands of differents types, each one with a different age. Like the human body, we can see millions or billions of different types of a unique body, since that every minute our body is changing something, be it a cell, etc. But the evidences that a kind of body 10 years old is merely a development or transformation from a its shape when was 9 years old will be accumulated, till we have no more doubts: Luis Morello was right - all bodies in the sky are transformations of a unique kind or evolutionary specie. If not, I will pay the beer.

See the article: 

A “Hot Saturn” That’s Not So Odd

By Phil Berardelli
ScienceNOW Daily News
1 April 2009http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/401/2#comment-blockAnd see the coment below posted under that article:ALERT ! This is not Scientific Journalism!The author, Mr. Phil Berardelli is doing a bad service to Science Institution.The error is here: “… Each system basically starts out from a diffuse cloud of gas and dust, called a protoplanetary disk, within which gravity begins to clump material together. When the parent star ignites,..”.  And here: “ giant, gaseous planet to migrate toward the star, as have gas giants in other solar systems”.  Never, but, never, nobody and nowhere have seen, or documented, the event of formation of a solar system. Never, anybody has watched a giant gaseous planet travelling toward a star.  We have no scientific theories, the standard model of solar system formation is only a hypothesis, since that the last ones planets saw showed too many contradictions. So, the student and layman when reading something like that (… each system basically starts out from…) will believe that it is thru, scientifically approved and confirmed. It is not, it is merely an individual supposition from people of a given epoch. Mr. Berardelli never saw any solar system formation, like nobody saw God creating life, so, the two affirmations is about religion, no Science.The right thing to write should be: “Accordingly whit the theoretical models, they suppose that each system…”, or something like that in a better English. And this: “ … as we suppose that there are such kind of migration…” If you are a scientific thinker, passionate, and advocate of scientific method, you must be alert and correct such mistakes. See what is happening with Neo-Darwinian Evolution Theory, being attacked from every side and being banished from some schools: they did the mistake of selling a theory as it being the ultimate truth.There are other models, even hypothesis, about cosmology and astronomic bodies’ formation where the last discoveries fill better. For instance, the models of The Universal Matrix Theory: it previews the existence of astronomic bodies like HD 149026b. Who has the authority to choose “the standard model”? The models of Matrix Theory do not deal with solar system formation, like cell molecular biology does not deal with atom formation. The models deal with cosmic bodies’ formation, like Biology deals with cellular organelles formation. Those models have no problem with the quantities of iron and nickel, neither has with bodies with giant rocky core and thick envelope of gas. The models suggest it must happen when a old planet is becoming a new pulsar. The models suggestions is that the hot gas envelope is due increasing volcanoes activity (  then, we will looking for volcano activity in HD 149026b).  The models suggest that only younger planets, without volcano activity migrate toward stars          The standard model must be investigated serious because it has a lot of problems. Here is a sample: “The most plausible explanation was that it resulted from a primordial collision between two or more gas giant planets.”. Never nobody saw collisions between astronomic bodies. What we have seeing about the sky it is suggesting that, there, reigns the natural state of order, not chaos, like in the biosphere. But the standard model, because it is basically based in the believe of events like “origins of something (as life, astronomical bodies and systems) by absolute chance”, or accident, leads normally the believer to suppose cosmic accidents like collisions. So we have “cannibals black holes”, supernova explosions, etc. Never any event like that has saw, but the student is forced and reinforced to believe in it, and when the student becomes astronomer, he/she will be ferocious advocate of a myth! The fact is that the standard model of solar formation has no link with the scientifically proved event which happened inside a solar system: the development of biological systems (mistakenly called “life”). Where is the forces, the elements, the ingredients used for the formation of a system that is the ancestral of the biological systems? Nobody even asked this question, the human rationality is not working, because astronomy became a matter of faith.

The method and instruments used here (they examined HD 149026b’s parent star and found that it contains twice the concentration of heavy elements, such as iron and nickel…) is totally proved? When we got real material from a distant body which previous analyze by the same method confirmed the prevision? Standard models with a Cosmo vision that offers no rational think for life origins and a health hope in human existence must not be sell to our children before a rigorous scientific examination. The problem of too many controversies around Evolution Theory is due the scholar texts making the same error here: they begins talking that it is a theory, but, at a given moment ahead, in the same text, it is no more a theory, they are catching doing strong affirmations as it were scientific approved… We must avoid the same happening with Cosmology and Astronomy… . But… I could be wrong… or not?