The CMB "Axis of Evil".

[Polymath257]

Gravity is most accurately described by the general theory of relativity (proposed by Albert Einstein in 1915), which describes gravity not as a force, but as a consequence of masses moving along geodesic lines in a curved spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass".

Yes. And?That doesn't change the statement I made.

Newtonian gravity is a good approximation to Einsteinian gravity. So use of the term 'force' is reasonable even if not precisely accurate in GR.

 

[Polymath257]

This STILL doesn´t explain why galaxies rotate in different directions.

Off center initial velocities will tend to produce rotation. Given a random initial setting, the direction of rotation will be random.

 

[Native]

it is very unlikely that all initial velocities will be radial. That means that rotation will naturally arise.

WHICH initial velocities and HOW?

 

[Native]

Yes. And?That doesn't change the statement I made.

Newtonian gravity is a good approximation to Einsteinian gravity. So use of the term 'force' is reasonable even if not precisely accurate in GR.

The fact is that Newton is bunkers on the galactic scales so he is out regarding different rotations of galaxies.

 

[Polymath257]

WHICH initial velocities and HOW?

Take two things (stars, planets, whatever). They will be in motion originally. That motion is NOT likely to be directly towards each other.

In such a case, gravity will bring *both* into an orbit around the center of mass. That is rotational motion.

If you want to learn specifics, you will need to learn some basic physics (force, acceleration) and some basic math (derivatives). You can look at volume I of the Feynman lectures for a good example of how it works.

 

[Polymath257]

The fact is that Newton is bunkers on the galactic scales so he is out regarding different rotations of galaxies.

And using Einstein's equations, it seems we regain agreement.

And, again, the amount that Newton is 'bunkers' doesn't change the overall conclusion.

 

[Native]

If you want to learn specifics, you will need to learn some basic physics (force, acceleration) and some basic math (derivatives). You can look at volume I of the Feynman lectures for a good example of how it works.

There you go again with your besserwissen and dovngrading patronizings.

If you wich to learn some real cosmological physics connected to this OP, then read and study how something can cause different directions of rotation:

A Left Hand Rule for Faraday's Law. The sign of ΔΦB, the change in flux, is found based on the relationship between the magnetic field B, the area of the loop A, and the normal n to that area, as represented by the fingers of the left hand. If ΔΦB is positive, the direction of the EMF is the same as that of the curved fingers (yellow arrowheads). If ΔΦB is negative, the direction of the EMF is against the arrowheads.

Shift the direction of the electric current and you´ll have different rotations - even on the galactic scale.

More here:
Faraday's law of induction (briefly, Faraday's law) is a basic law of electromagnetism predicting how a magnetic field will interact with an electric circuit to produce an electromotive force (EMF)—a phenomenon known as electromagnetic induction. It is the fundamental operating principle of transformers, inductors, and many types of electrical motors, generators and solenoids.[2][3]

The Maxwell–Faraday equation (listed as one of Maxwell's equations) describes the fact that a spatially varying (and also possibly time-varying, depending on how a magnetic field varies in time) electric field always accompanies a time-varying magnetic field, while Faraday's law states that there is EMF (electromotive force, defined as electromagnetic work done on a unit charge when it has traveled one round of a conductive loop) on the conductive loop when the magnetic flux through the surface enclosed by the loop varies in time.

Faraday's law had been discovered and one aspect of it (transformer EMF) was formulated as the Maxwell–Faraday equation later. The equation of Faraday's law can be derived by the Maxwell–Faraday equation (describing transformer EMF) and the Lorentz force (describing motional EMF). The integral form of the Maxwell–Faraday equation describes only the transformer EMF, while the equation of Faraday's law describes both the transformer EMF and the motional EMF.

Contents

• 1History
• 2Faraday's law
  • 2.1Mathematical statement
  • 2.2Maxwell–Faraday equation
• 3Proof
• 4EMF for non-thin-wire circuits
• 5Faraday's law and relativity
  • 5.1Two phenomena
  • 5.2Einstein's view

 

[Polymath257]

There you go again with your besserwissen and dovngrading patronizings.

If you wich to learn some real cosmological physics connected to this OP, then read and study how something can cause different directions of rotation:

A Left Hand Rule for Faraday's Law. The sign of ΔΦB, the change in flux, is found based on the relationship between the magnetic field B, the area of the loop A, and the normal n to that area, as represented by the fingers of the left hand. If ΔΦB is positive, the direction of the EMF is the same as that of the curved fingers (yellow arrowheads). If ΔΦB is negative, the direction of the EMF is against the arrowheads.

Shift the direction of the electric current and you´ll have different rotations - even on the galactic scale.

More here:
Faraday's law of induction (briefly, Faraday's law) is a basic law of electromagnetism predicting how a magnetic field will interact with an electric circuit to produce an electromotive force (EMF)—a phenomenon known as electromagnetic induction. It is the fundamental operating principle of transformers, inductors, and many types of electrical motors, generators and solenoids.[2][3]

The Maxwell–Faraday equation (listed as one of Maxwell's equations) describes the fact that a spatially varying (and also possibly time-varying, depending on how a magnetic field varies in time) electric field always accompanies a time-varying magnetic field, while Faraday's law states that there is EMF (electromotive force, defined as electromagnetic work done on a unit charge when it has traveled one round of a conductive loop) on the conductive loop when the magnetic flux through the surface enclosed by the loop varies in time.

Faraday's law had been discovered and one aspect of it (transformer EMF) was formulated as the Maxwell–Faraday equation later. The equation of Faraday's law can be derived by the Maxwell–Faraday equation (describing transformer EMF) and the Lorentz force (describing motional EMF). The integral form of the Maxwell–Faraday equation describes only the transformer EMF, while the equation of Faraday's law describes both the transformer EMF and the motional EMF.

Contents

• 1History
• 2Faraday's law
  • 2.1Mathematical statement
  • 2.2Maxwell–Faraday equation
• 3Proof
• 4EMF for non-thin-wire circuits
• 5Faraday's law and relativity
  • 5.1Two phenomena
  • 5.2Einstein's view

Do you really think I don't know this?

This is basic material on E&M. It is covered in the undergraduate classes on E&M. I have passed the graduate classes *and* taken the PhD qualifying exam (and passed it the first time) on this material.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Native said: ↑
Groups of clockwise and anticlockwise spinning galaxies in the Universe?

Note the term GROUPS of both.

Why is it that galaxies rotate both ways at all?

As a thought experiment, hover high above the north pole of Earth, looking down upon it. Which direction does the planet seem to spin?

Now, travel through space to the same point above the south pole, and observe the spin. Which direction does it seem to spin?

What you should observe: from the north, the earth spins anti-clockwise; from the south, clockwise. It has to do with perspective and nomenclature.

You can do the same thing with a top or a frisbee...or frankly anything else that you can get spinning.

 

[Native]

Do you really think I don't know this?
This is basic material on E&M. It is covered in the undergraduate classes on E&M. I have passed the graduate classes *and* taken the PhD qualifying exam (and passed it the first time) on this material.

Congratulation. Then use your knowledge in order to understand everything in cosmos according to these notes from the video:

Notions:
1) A spinning Universe?
2) The Universe having poles?
3) Changes of constants?
4) A multipole alignment?
5) Groups of clockwise and anticlockwise spinning galaxies in the Universe? >
6) > and more significant and ordered in the hypothesized early Universe?
7) A Cosmic Web with interconnected strands of light and "luminous knots" of galactic formation?

 

[ChristineM]

Congratulation. Then use your knowledge in order to understand everything in cosmos according to these notes from the video:

Notions:
1) A spinning Universe?
2) The Universe having poles?
3) Changes of constants?
4) A multipole alignment?
5) Groups of clockwise and anticlockwise spinning galaxies in the Universe? >
6) > and more significant and ordered in the hypothesized early Universe?
7) A Cosmic Web with interconnected strands of light and "luminous knots" of galactic formation?

I wonder who wrote these words

There you go again with your besserwissen and dovngrading patronizings.

Bet you cant guess

 

[Native]

As a thought experiment, hover high above the north pole of Earth, looking down upon it. Which direction does the planet seem to spin?

I know - But this analogy don´t explain WHY galaxies de facto spins in opposite directions.

 

[Native]

I wonder who wrote these words

Sancta Claus, I presume?

 

[ChristineM]

Sancta Claus, I presume?

Guess again, i made it easy, the one who said it is actually identified in the quote

 

[Polymath257]

Congratulation. Then use your knowledge in order to understand everything in cosmos according to these notes from the video:

Notions:
1) A spinning Universe?
2) The Universe having poles?
3) Changes of constants?
4) A multipole alignment?
5) Groups of clockwise and anticlockwise spinning galaxies in the Universe? >
6) > and more significant and ordered in the hypothesized early Universe?
7) A Cosmic Web with interconnected strands of light and "luminous knots" of galactic formation?

The video is based on a paper by Lior Shamir. The paper used computers to determine direction of rotation of galaxies. A later paper by the same author showed an inherent bias in the method of determining that rotation direction that nullifies the previous paper.

 

[Polymath257]

I know - But this analogy don´t explain WHY galaxies de facto spins in opposite directions.

Because we are looking 'from the top' of some and 'from the bottom' of others.

If we look at a galaxy and it spins clockwise for us, then it will spin counter-clockwise for someone on the opposite side of that galaxy.

So the opposite spins are random, based on which side we are looking at.

 

[Native]

The video is based on a paper by Lior Shamir. The paper used computers to determine direction of rotation of galaxies.

So what now? Don´t you trust on PC calculations and data animations anymore?

A later paper by the same author showed an inherent bias in the method of determining that rotation direction that nullifies the previous paper.

Show me where, please. (I otherwise could be biased to believe in your own biases)

 

[Native]

Because we are looking 'from the top' of some and 'from the bottom' of others.

If we look at a galaxy and it spins clockwise for us, then it will spin counter-clockwise for someone on the opposite side of that galaxy.

So the opposite spins are random, based on which side we are looking at.

We are dealng with several galaxies here rotating differently from each other.

 

[ChristineM]

We are dealng with several galaxies here rotating differently from each other.

So?

 

[Polymath257]

So what now? Don´t you trust on PC calculations and data animations anymore?

Show me where, please. (I otherwise could be biased to believe in your own biases)

I gave a link to the followup paper above.