Posts Tagged ‘Astronomy’

ASTRONOMY: They are seeing an explosion where I am seeing the blossom up of a flower

Friday, August 13th, 2010

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.”

New Victory for Matrix Theory and new data against the Standard Model

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009
See the article: 

A “Hot Saturn” That’s Not So Odd

By Phil Berardelli
ScienceNOW Daily News
1 April 2009
http://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?