Stellar Aberration effects on the identification of rotation directions of spiral galaxies

Stellar Aberration effects on the identification of rotation directions of spiral galaxies

Abstract

In this paper the well documented non-relativistic classical effects of stellar aberration (1) are applied to light arriving to the earth observer from external spiral galaxies with possible implications for spiral galaxy rotation direction identifications. It is proposed here in this paper that the range of rotational velocities of stars within any external galaxy(4) must exert a blurring effect on that galaxies total emitted light incident at any earth observers image plane. In that the different internal velocities of all the stars in a spiral galaxy that rotates in the same direction as our Milky Way should effect more blurring of the spiral galaxy at the earth observers image plane due to stellar aberration, than the blurring of light at the image plane will be for light coming from all the stars in a galaxy that rotates in the opposite direction to our Milky Way. This proposed non-relativistic classical effect of stellar aberration(1) could make it harder to identify a co rotating spiral galaxy’s rotation direction than it would for a counter rotating galaxy’s rotation direction at any similar redshift distance from earth.

Introduction

The basis for this papers’ proposed Stellar Aberration effect on light arriving from spiral galaxies is based on the assumption that if light from any stellar object is displaced at an observer’s image plane via stellar aberration (1) then the magnitude of that displacement will be dictated by the earth observer’s relative transverse velocity to that particular stellar source. The accepted rule for stellar aberration (1) being that a higher transverse velocity of a star relative to the earth observers will result in a larger displacement of the star at the observers’ image plane. And that the scale of any additional displacement with any subsequent additional increases in relative transverse velocities will always be observed to increase (1) by smaller displacement amounts at the image plane with any subsequent increases in relative transverse velocities between the source and observer. For example, using only the pre relativistic classical theory of stellar aberration (1), the difference in the lateral displacement of a stars position at the image plane due to a difference in relative transverse velocities of between 0 to 25km/s between source and observer is assumed here to be larger than the difference in displacement of a stars light with a relative transverse velocity difference between the source and observer of between 25-50km/s. As also illustrated below in Fig 1 & 2 and summarised as follows:

For an increase in differences of velocity v in relative transverse velocities between source and observer a displacement d at the observers’ image plane will be observed. For any additional velocity increase of velocity v in relative transverse velocity between source and observer the observed additional increase in displacement at the image plane will be <d

This paper then proposes here that this same classical stellar aberration effect noted for stars in the Milky Way (1) should also be visible in any light coming from any individual star within any observed external spiral galaxy. And thus, that this range in velocities of rotational motions of all the stars in any external spiral galaxy must also effect a visible range of displacements of light from the observed spiral Galaxy as its light arrives at the earth observers image plane.

Current estimates based on observations (2,3) of stellar rotational velocities around the Milky Way core are between 200 - 250km/s. Although rotational velocities may vary greatly across spiral galaxies this cited 200-250km/s velocity range (2,3) for stars in the Milky Way is assumed here for the purposes of this paper to be also an average rotational velocity range for all stars in all spiral galaxies. Thus, it is assumed here in this paper that the internal stellar rotational velocities in all galaxies

around their respective cores can be on average approximated to be in the range of around 200- 250km/s. And that it follows that the average range of stellar velocities around a spiral Galaxy core can be assumed to be approximately 50km/s between the slowest and the fastest stellar velocities. It should be noted here that this assumption is roughly in line with the published analysis of observed data of various spiral galaxy types (4). The conclusion based on this above cited data and reached here in this paper is that the average velocity range of all stars in any spiral Galaxy can be considered here for the purposes of this paper to be equivalent to up to 1/5 of the total average rotational velocity of its host spiral galaxy. This insinuates that all light coming from any spiral galaxy will have a range of transverse velocities relative to the earth observer of approximately 1/5 more or less than its average galactic rotational velocity.

It is important to point out here that although both the James Bradley classical and the later Relativistic theories of Stellar aberration predict similar displacements of light at the earth observers image plane (1). It is considered here for the purposes of this paper necessary only for one to invoke Bradley’s Classical theory of stellar aberration to fully explain not only the displacement of light but the predicted blurring of spiral Galaxies light at the earth observers image plane.

Displacement and blurring mechanism

Taking into account classical stellar aberration effects, it is proposed here in this paper that this assumed average velocity range of stars within galaxies (1,2,3,4) could have a significant measurable effect on light arriving from galaxies to the earth observer. In that the range of displacements from stellar aberration alone (1) at the image plane of light from any spiral galaxy should create an optical blurring of the galaxy at the earth observers image plane. And that it is predicted here in this paper that the images of spiral galaxies will more or less blurred depending on whether or not the observed spiral galaxy is rotating with or oppositely to our own Milky Way. To summarise, displacements of stellar positions within images of spiral galaxies due to the classical theory of stellar aberration will create a proposed range of blurring of spiral galaxies at the earth observers image plane that is straightforward and can be summarised as follows:

A) The relative transverse velocity between any stellar source and earth observer effects a lateral displacement of that light on the image plane due to stellar aberration (1). And that this displacement is then assumed here to occur to light from stars within our Milky Way and from stars located in any other external spiral galaxies.

B) The theory of stellar aberration based on centuries of observation (1) tells us that the higher the relative transverse velocity the greater the displacement at the image plane from stellar aberration will be. And also that any subsequent increase in relative velocity will create a subsequently smaller amount of further lateral displacement on the image plane. (Fig1&2)

C) It is assumed in this paper (3,4) that the average rotation velocity of spiral galaxies will be in a mid range of 225km/s.

D) Based on the above cited averages it assumed here that spiral galaxies rotating oppositely to our Milky Way will have internal stellar transverse rotation velocities of on average between 200- 250km/s relative to an earth observer, and that stars orbiting in spiral galaxies that are rotating with our Milky Way will have an internal transverse velocity range of approximately +-25km/s relative to the earth observer. Both ranges being on average consisting of a velocity difference of 50km/s.

E) Lateral displacements at the image plane due to Stellar aberration always are observed to increase with increases in relative velocities between source and observer (1). But successive lateral displacements increase less so in magnitude between successively larger increases in relative velocities between source and observer (1). As also illustrated in Fig 1 & 2 below.

With all these points taken into consideration it becomes obvious, particularly from point E) above, that the total difference in magnitude of lateral displacements of all light from a set of a galaxy’s stellar sources with a relative transverse motions of 200-250 km/s relative to an earth observer will always be less than the total difference in magnitude of lateral displacements of all light from a set of a galaxy’s stellar sources with relative transverse motions of only +-25km/s relative to the earth observer (Fig1). In other words, this paper proposes here that light incident on the earth observers image plane from a galaxy that rotates with our Milky Way should always be more distorted and blurred due to a greater magnitude of lateral displacements at the image plane due to stellar aberration. Than light incident on the image plane from any spiral galaxy that rotates oppositely to our Milky Way at any similar redshift distance.

Fig 1) A is earth observer and V is relative transverse velocity axis between stellar source and earth observer. Angle x is larger than angle y. Angle x represents range of incident angles of light from galaxies that rotate with the Milky Way and angle y represents range of incident angles of light from galaxies that rotate in opposite directions to the Milky Way. Due to the effects of stellar aberration, light from a galaxy rotating with the Milky Way will arrive with a greater range of incident angles x than the range of incident angles y of light arriving from a galaxy that rotates in the opposite direction to the Milky Way (1). This difference in the range of incident angles between x and y will result in smaller lateral displacements of the galaxy light incident for y at the image plane than the greater range of lateral displacements of light for x at the image plane. And result in this papers’ predicted increased blurring for light arriving at x, than for light arriving at y. The size in arc seconds of any galaxy at the earth observer’s camera image plane becomes proportionately smaller for progressively higher redshifts (taking up less pixels at image plane for higher redshift galaxies). But the 2 relative transverse velocity ranges between any spiral galaxy and the earth observer will always be the same between any redshift galaxy and the earth observer (-+25km/s for co rotating, 200-250km/s for counter rotating*). It follows then that these 2 ratios of image size decreasing with increased redshift vs constant relative transverse velocity between earth and any spiral galaxy at any redshift; will result in a progressively apparent (but not real) increase of blurring of galaxy images at higher redshifts due to stellar aberration. And additionally, should effect a greater amount of blurring of co rotating galaxies than counter rotating galaxies at higher redshifts due to the relative velocity differences between the 2 ratios*. This increased blurring effect for higher redshifts will therefore make it harder to identify co rotating galaxy rotation directions than counter rotating galaxies at progressively higher redshifts.

Fig 2) Three illustrations showing how stellar aberration can displace light from individual stars in a spiral galaxy’s arm to effectively “blur” the galaxies image. Showing different amounts of blurring for different directions of relative galactic rotation between a galaxy and the earth observer. Left is a starfield with no aberration from no relative transverse velocities between all the stars in the galaxy and earth observer. Centre is with a small range of Stellar Aberration from a galaxy that rotates oppositely to the earth observer. Right is with the larger range of Stellar aberration from a galaxy that rotates with the Milky Way. Notice how the co rotating galaxy’s starfield illustrated on the right is more spread out and diffuse due to a larger range of displacements of each stars position within the galaxy due to stellar aberration.

Conclusion

Classical non-relativistic Stellar aberration theory (1), when applied to light from external galaxies, should effect different ranges of displacement of stellar light coming from spiral galaxies as it arrives at the earth observers image plane due to the observed range of different rotational velocities of stars around galaxy cores (1,2,3,4). As a consequence, it is proposed here in this paper that the predicted range of displacements at the earth observers image plane should be greater for all stellar light coming from galaxies that rotate with our Milky Way than for all stellar light coming from spiral galaxies that rotate in an opposite direction to our Milky Way. And further to this it is proposed here that this stellar aberration effect should manifest itself as different amounts of blurring of images of spiral galaxies. And that this blurring effect should be greater for galaxies that have relatively lower transverse rotational velocities relative to an earth observer. And therefore, light arriving at the earth observers image plane from a galaxy that rotates in the same direction as our own Milky Way should appear to be more blurred than a galaxy that rotates in an opposite direction to our Milky Way for spiral galaxies at similar redshifts. And as a conclusion it is proposed here that this purely classical effect of stellar aberration is predicted to make the rotation direction of a galaxy that rotates in the same direction as the milky way harder to identify than any galaxy that rotates oppositely to our own Milky Way at any similar redshift.

Reference

1)Aberration (astronomy) page at Wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_Astronomy

2) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rotation_curve_(Milky_Way).svg

3) Median Statistics Estimate of the Galactic Rotational Velocity.Tia Camarillo et al 

4)Comparison of Rotation Curves of different Galaxy Types. Roberts & Rots, 1973

 

Fast radio bursts: bright FRB 20190203 detected at 111 MHz

Mystery remains for GRB theorists as to why no gamma ray transients can be found for non repeating FRB’s. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.13561

This lack of a gamma transient for this FRB is easily accounted for in my proposed theoretical model Here which describes the physical mechanisms responsible for the observed GRB  and FRB transients. An FRB in my model, is proposed to be simply a very fast, very short timescale GRB. 

FRB’s are just very short Gammaraybursts. Their observed activity in all frequencies are compressed proportionally on the timescale compared to their larger relative, the GRB. As an FRB has at most a second long transient in radio, it will have a proportionally much smaller transient time length in gamma. The observed total luminosity in each frequency would also in turn be proportionally less the shorter the observed transient length.

My model predicts here and on other pages of this blog that instead of the usually observed; seconds for gamma, minutes to hours for optical and days for radio transients normally seen in GRB’s, single FRB’s should have all their frequency transients durations on  much shorter timescales length. Notice that the entire observed radio transient for FRB20190203 was only in fractions of seconds. One only has to see that if a fast radio burst is only seconds long in radio frequencies, not for days as observed in the GRB radio transient, then it is clear that under my model, outlined in the link above, an FRB optical transient is predicted to be only on the order of a thousands of a second long. And in turn this model predicts that the FRB Gamma transient must  last for even shorter timescales in many order smaller than a thousandth of a second timescale. 

No wonder they can’t find optical or gamma transients for FRB’s. They are far too short to be recorded with our current technology

Quantum interference in atom-exchange reactions

As usual the quantum theorists just can’t bring themselves to admit QT is nonsense. The Bohr model was a failure and QT should never have been let loose in theoretical physics. All atoms and EMR are wave only. They are not made of particles like photons, electrons neutrons etc. Essentially the atom is a wave only superposition of EMR interfering at a single central nodal point. As the wave only classical theoretical model at these links explain:

Hydrogen Spectral Series as Harmonic Overtones of a Single Fundamental Wavelength

Photoelectric effect described by a classical model

Wave only atom

CERN ‘particle paths’ modelled as overlapping waves

This wave only atom model, by virtue of the atom being a nodal point in space and made up only of standing waves of EMR, will have a dipole N-S magnetic field associated with this nodal point. As described in the above link ‘Wave only atom’. And when this wave only atom moves relative to any other reference frame it will itself also produce wave only magnetic radiation. A circular model described in the above link ‘CERN Particle paths modelled as overlapping waves’.

In a wave only classical model, oscillating magnetic fields of EMR will interfere with each other to create the atom as a nodal point with an associated dipole magnetic field. Which then itself generates new EMR when it moves relative to any other atom in any other reference frame.

This classical model is continually confirmed by so called Quantum “research” . It seems that every time QT theorists look ever closer at the atomic scale with ever more sophisticated technology ...they always find that the atom ( and EMR) has only wave like properties. With those  properties well described by a wave only classical atomic model. As my quote below from an article on the latest Quantum research shows :

(Notice in the article on the paper, quote cited below, that the quantum researchers were surprised to find the atoms in their experiment were acting classically. As if the atoms resonant frequencies were being synchronised. They just ‘discovered’ a well documented classical effect which has been known for centuries. And called it a quantum effect!!)

 “If you zoom in on a chemical reaction to the quantum level, you'll notice that particles behave like waves that can ripple and collide. Scientists have long sought to understand quantum coherence, the ability of particles to maintain phase relationships and exist in multiple states simultaneously; this is akin to all parts of a wave being synchronized”

https://phys.org/news/2024-05-scientists-survival-quantum-coherence-chemical.html

This synchronisation phenomena does not need to resort to a quantum magic explanation. A simple wave only classical model using sympathetic resonance between two wave only resonant systems will suffice.

When will these QT theorists admit that the standard model and Quantum physics should be scrapped? And replaced with a wave only model of the universe where there is no Big Bang. No QT. No Relativity. And No standard model Particles.

When? Who knows. It’s amazing they haven’t realised this yet. It must because they studied too much maths. And not enough classical physics.

CMBR explained in a non expanding universe

 CMBR explained using the model of a non expanding universe

In previous posts on this blog I have offered an alternative explanation to the observed temp and wavelength of the CMBR for a non expanding model of the universe, in that the source of the CMBR isn’t the hot soup of an early Big Bang. But rather the conglomerate output of stars and galaxies at certain great cosmological distances. What causes redshift in a non expanding universeAnd secondly in recent posts on this blog I have outlined how redshift itself in a non expanding model can be modelled by basing it on similar phenomena observed in emission and absorption spectra of atoms. Where the emitted light is redshifted slightly from the absorbed light. Offset between absorption and emission spectra

To test this model describing CMBR in a non expanding universe I have used the following data:

The CMBR peaks at 1.023 mm=1023000nm. 

With a measured temperature of 2.7260±0.0013 K. 

The Suns surface temp is 5778 K

The energy peak of its blackbody spectra is at approximately 500nm. 

And also assuming the following rule of wavelength to energy via Planks energy wavelength inverse relationship. (In that the energy halves with each doubling of the wavelength.)

As I have outlined in recent previous posts on this blog cited above, I have already suggested that blackbody radiation emitted from distant stars/galaxies at and around z=1023 could be the source of the observed CMBR in a non expanding model of the universe.

The following calculations use the above data:

First I test to see if rest frame blackbody radiation from 500nm (solar spectra is used as an example) from these distant Galaxies (at z=1023) could, when redshifted in a non expanding model match to that observed at 1023000nm in the CMBR. 

And the fit is very good.

To stretch the wavelength of emitted blackbody radiation from 500nm rest frame to that observed in CMBR in the microwave region of 1023000 nm I have provided the calculations below:

(Notice that blackbody emission spectrum peaking at 500nm when redshifted to observers on earth from a distance of z=1023 has a wavelength exactly 11 times longer than the initial emission peak of 500nm. Which is 1023000nm in the microwave region.)

Divide 1023000/2=511500

Repeat this 10 more times ( for a total of 11 times) to get approx 500nm

Which is equivelent to the average peak of a rest frame blackbody emmission spectrum of a star.

This gives the relationship between redshift z to distance in a non expanding universe. Which is that in a non expanding universe the CMBR is defined as the rest frame blackbody emission spectrum of star/galaxy sources redshifted over great cosmological distances to the microwave region. Or in other words: the average rest frame peak of the blackbody emission spectrum of 500nm (visible light) from distant galaxies at z=1023 in a non expanding model of the universe will be stretched, via cosmological redshifting, to 1023000 nm (microwave).

The interesting thing is that this also gives a close match to the observed temperature 2.72K of the CMBR using the inverse relationship between wavelength and energy of light. In that when the temperature of the emitted rest frame radiation from distant galaxies ( using 5770 K, the proxy spectra of the Sun as an example) is redshifted to us on earth by z= 1023 it becomes 2.81 K. 

That is 5770k is divided by 2 (11 times). This uses the same method as when calculating the stretch of wavelengths from visible light rest frame emission to microwave.

Indicating that the average stellar spectra at z=1023, and locally, must be approximately 5600 K. Seeing as 5600K redshifted from z=1023 is 2.73 K. ( CMBR being 2.72.6 K)