Star Formation: Vortex Builds Stars, Planets
Star formation is thought to be driven by gravity-induced accretion of material distributed in space. A recent article on space.com titled Jets Spiral in 'Reverse Whirlpool' from Star illustrates this widely accepted but mistaken concept of the formation of heavenly bodies. Space.com's Jeanna Bryner reports that
"Astronomers have observed for the first time a jet of matter spiraling outward from an infant star, as if a lengthy strand of curly pasta. The enormous jet, which shoots out in two directions, is rocketing material away from the so-called protostar and into interstellar space at more than 'supersonic speeds'."
Artist's concept of protostar HH 211, believed to be accreting material from a surrounding disk. - Credit: Change Tsai (ASIAA)
For a dynamic view, see the video animation "Black Hole Blazar Jets" at
I cannot help but thinking that what are called "jets" are in fact the black hole's incoming vortices. What appears as matter being expelled at near light velocity (those blobs of lighter color moving outward from the black hole) is really incoming matter lit up by powerful time-limited flashes of light escaping from the black hole's center. Matter is inward directed in the jet-cum-vortex and it encounters in its path flashes of light, giving the impression of matter exiting at near light velocity.
"Stars are thought to form at the center of rotating disks of hydrogen gas and dust", continues the article, describing the theory according to which gravitation is the principal star-forming mechanism. However, there is a problem: "The gas can't fall inward toward the star until it sheds excess spin power called angular momentum". As far as official theory goes, the vortices astronomers observed in HH 211, are thought to dissipate some of the energy of rotation which, it is argued, counter-acts accretion by giving rise to centrifugal forces.
That is the official theory, but this explanation of star formation has several problems.
One obvious question: where does the spin come from, that now needs to be dissipated and more importantly, what use does that spin have in star formation?
Secondly, the "jets" observed to accompany the formation of both stars and galaxies and which are described in this instance as "reverse whirlpools" would seem be a very inefficient mechanism if not entirely counter-productive in the formation of a star. Instead of accreting material, they are said to be dissipating both matter and spin.
Thirdly, where there is no accumulation of matter, gravity cannot accumulate more matter. Also, when mathematically modeled, gravitation-induced accretion does not resolve into an accretion disk but works in a spherically symmetric way.
So what are we overlooking here?
In my view, this is one of the important areas where physics has gone down the wrong path in its insistence that gravity "obviously" must be the force that holds everything together, and that thus it is the sole force responsible for the accumulation of any kind of concentration of matter in the universe.
- - -
Vortex as an 'accretion' force
I am proposing a different, more or less diametrically opposed view of star and galaxy formation to the theory held today. Stars are formed by vortex action. It is the spin that initiates a vortex that is the seed for star formation, not gravity.
What is today called an "accretion disk" is actually a sign of dissipation. The work of accretion in star formation is done by the concentrating forces of a double vortex. That vortex accretes interstellar gases like a giant whirlpool and it is vortex action that is causing the accumulation of matter - not gravity as generally assumed.
Spin is the causative force in forming any agglomeration of matter. It is the seed for the formation of galaxies, stars and planets. Spin forms a double vortex, which is responsible for concentrating matter that is finely distributed in the universe. Spin is also a telltale signature of the energy of life.
Spin stresses and distorts the fabric of space forming a helixactually a pair of vortices. Those vortices, like two huge whirlpools, induce a flow of space and the matter contained in it, towards the center point of torsion, the star seed. At the point of impact of the two opposing in-flowing vortices, incoming matter collides and, in an explosive fireworks display that forms a plasma ball, is thrown outwards in roughly spherical symmetry.
At a certain distance out from this central point of impact - how far depends on the rotational strength of the star seed - the outward motion of the particles accreted by the vortices is now stopped by growing gravitational influence. The matter so collected starts to form a hollow shell of first gaseous and later solid matter. That shell is roughly spherical - with openings at the poles where the vortices are free to bring in further material.
What is generally called an "accretion disk" today is formed by matter that escapes along the shell's equator due to overwhelming centrifugal forces. In the case of a star, this becomes a protoplanetary disk, a flat equatorial disk of rotating matter that provides the material needed for the formation of planets. Planets coagulate around their own planetary seeds of spin, in a similar manner as the original star. A planetary vortex pair attracts matter from the protoplanetary disk to form a planetary shell. This hollow planetary structure coagulates around the point of equilibrium between centrifugal forces and gravity.
Instead of only gravitation, we have several forces at work in star and planet formation: the centripetal (concentrating and accelerating) action of vortex, the explosive, expanding action resulting from two opposing streams of matter violently impacting at the central point, gravitation which tends to stop and compact matter that tries to escape from the exploding center and finally centrifugal force which provides a counter to gravitation, and which is responsible for the formation of any "accretion disk" which is really a disk of matter that escaped gravity through overwhelming centrifugal force.
The firework at the point of impact of the two opposing vortices is a permanent feature, a source of light and other radiation located inside both planets and stars. In planets, it remains a hidden feature only occasionally giving rise to a halo of light we see as an aurora around the polar openings. In stars, that firework is what determines a star's luminosity.
The postulated fusion reaction of hydrogen into helium is not what drives heat and luminosity of stars. It may be a secondary reaction to the real source of the star's luminosity, which is the violent impact of two vortices at the center of the star.
The concept of a "hollow earth" has been around for centuries. Today, it is debunked as a mere scientific curiosity, as in this article by John H. Lienhard, from which also comes the following illustration by William Reed published in 1906.
Is there any evidence for this and why haven't we seen it?
If this line of thought is to turn out correct, we should be finding evidence that planets and stars are hollow shells that possess polar openings and a luminous point at the center. There are some strong indications that this may indeed be so, but it seems that data is not freely released. Where some evidence does become available, it is explained away or simply not discussed - it does not fit the prevailing view.
We should see polar openings leading to the hollow interior of our own and other planets, only we don't - at least normally. Very few published images actually show the poles directly. Many of those present signs of having been manipulated. Try and find images that show the earth's north pole. You will see a blob of "white-out" or the electronic equivalent of it - a white spot that has been airbrushed into the picture.
Here is an example of an image of the north pole, where a large portion of the polar area is covered by ... ice you might say, but it really isn't ice as you can see by comparing the completely white area of the polar ice with the much more structured and darker color ice on adjacent Greenland.
I realize that there will be strong feelings both for and against, but I am bringing this forth as a matter for consideration, and in the firm expectation that time will prove that I am not out on a limb here.
If my theory about the formation of stars and planets is correct, we should find evidence of polar "anomalies" on planets and moons, as our instruments get better and as more space probes scout our solar system.
Let me go on record here with some predictions:
We should find that
1) both planets and stars show variously sized openings at the poles
2) a central luminous feature will be visible when looking straight at the polar opening of a planet and reflections of this "internal light source" will cause luminous phenomena visible under certain conditions to observers who are not aligned with the planet's axis.
3) Planets are habitable (hospitable for life) not only on the outside but also on the inside of their "shell".
4) More heat is radiated by planets than is received from the outside.
5) As the planetary vortex continually collects and brings in more particles of matter, planetary shells will be found to be slowly expanding.
Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA (Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara)
A confirmation (of sorts) for my model of primary influence of vortex action in star and planet formation comes from Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara, who in "Dark Mission" argue that the heat evolved by stellar and planetary objects is in direct proportion to their angular momentum.
"If the ultimate source of planetary (or stellar) energy is this vorticular (rotating) spatial stress between dimensions (a la Maxwell), then the constantly changing pattern (both gravitationally and dimensionally) of interacting satellites in orbit around a major planet/star coupled with its equally changing geometric configuration vis-à-vis the other major planets of the system must modulate that stress pattern as a constantly changing, geometrically twisted "aether". In Hoagland's hyperdimensional model, it is this constantly changing hyperspatial geometry that is capable of extracting energy from this underlying, rotating vorticular aether and then releasing it inside material. rotating objects."
Here is a collection of images from satellites and spaceships that tend to confirm the presence of openings and unexplained luminous phenomena at the poles of several planets and moons.
An image of the earth's north pole where a large area appears "airbrushed" in pristine white - to cover up ... what?
Unexplained halo on one of Jupiter's moons
Jupiter's poles displaying a strange luminous phenomenon
Cloud formations on earth's north pole analyzed by NASA, leaving an unexplained dark hole...
Mars pictured with South pole either cut off (first four images) or covered by a large circular black patch in the last image
Another image of Mars showing a polar feature that is said to be ice, but may well be a polar opening...
Despite more than a decade of winter darkness, Saturn's north pole is home to an unexpected hot spot remarkably similar to one at the planet's sunny south pole. The source of its heat is a mystery. Source: Phys.org
Instruments on the Cassini spacecraft revealed a gigantic plume of gas, water vapor and ice particles erupting from Enceladus' south pole. Here an enhanded colorized image from NASA, published on Science Daily.
What CIRS (the Composite Infrared Spectrometer) saw at Enceladus was a stunner. The team expected to see a relatively homogeneous temperature map, warmest where the Sun's rays strike the moon most directly, and coolest in the night side and at the poles. But CIRS found a whopping hot spot at the south pole of Enceladus. (from planetary.org)
These are only a few images I came across without trying very hard. There certainly will be more evidence out there for the hollow configuration of stars and planets and the postulated heat and light source that should be at the center of each. If you have come across similar unexplained anomalies, please send any links or images you may find.
March 2008: A reader wrote about this article and in some way I felt I should explain more. Here is the exchange, which perhaps crystallizes more clearly what my thoughts are.
Re: Planet Vortex question
First of all I would just like to say how refreshing it is to find a site like yours that deals openly with subjects and ideas which are normally dismissed by others as being nothing more than "Hocus Pocus". After reading your article entitled "Star Formation: Vortex Builds Stars, Planets" I started thinking about our planet and the idea mentioned in the article concerning the Earth generating a Vortex. If possible I would be very grateful if you could perhaps shed some light on a query I have?
Let's just say for a minute that a Vortex is indeed being created by our Earth... It is my understanding that when a Vortex is created Centripetal and Centrifugal forces are created. If we consider the Centripetal or suctional forces to be gravity, then could you help me identify where the Centrifugal or pushing force may be? I guess what I am trying to ask is is there any point inside or outside of our atmosphere where we are exposed to a pushing force? If I am way off base here then please say, or indeed if my incredibly basic understanding of a Vortex is nonsense.
Once again I just wanted to say what a breath of fresh air it is to have discovered somebody like yourself that acknowledges some of the greatest (yet unknown) inventors/engineers of our time including Tesla and Viktor Schauberger.
In my answer, I try to make the picture of planet (and star) formation more clear...
here is how I imagine the formation of a planet or a star.
While it is true that rotation creates centrifugal forces, a vortex creates a strong centripetal force, which overcomes the centrifugal outward directed vector created by rotation. A vortex tends to concentrate whatever is in its reach, and the faster the rotation gets, the stronger the centripetal force and the narrower the spiral path that everything must follow.
In a planetary and stellar context, I see two vortices that enter at the poles, one from the north, the other from the south. Looking at these vortices from "outside" - like you would look into a funnel from the broad end - one of them is seen as left turning, the other as right turning.
Where the two vortices meet, figuratively speaking, "all heall breaks loose". There is a clash of huge forces, and the cosmic particles which the vortex pair brings together (mainly hydrogen) are undergoing very high acceleration/deceleration forces, some of them transforming through fusion events, and they eventually "explode" out resulting in a roughly spheric and rotating "cloud" of planetary or stellar matter. This is matter is largely gaseous in the beginning.
Now centrifugal force starts to play a role. The vortex force and centripetal action nullifies itself at the central point in a great display of "fireworks", but it leaves a rotational component of force intact. The resulting cloud of gaseous matter is spinning. There are centrifugal forces driving particles of matter outwards.
Gravity, which is different from the vortex itself, now starts to play a role. The cloud of matter generated by the twin vortex is a seed for gravitational action, i.e. the accumulated particles of matter start to generate gravitation and they start to attract other particles of matter in the vicinity.
The four forces - two of them inward directed and two outward directed - that now work together, start to form what eventually will become a planet or a star. The vortex pair continues to "bring in" ever more cosmic particles, accelerating them to the central point. The explosive force of the clash is outward directed and seeks to distribute those particles. The centrifugal force that results from the rotation of the cloud thus formed is also outward directed. The gravitational force that is a consequence of the presence of matter (the cloud) is inward directed.
What is formed is a relatively slowly rotating, roughly spherical "shell" of matter with two openings at the poles. This new planetary or stellar body will, with time, become more and more solidified, provided with new particles both from the inside by the vortex and from the outside by gravitational accumulation.
The central point of impact of the double vortex provides a source of radiation (light of all frequencies and heat) which, in the case of planets is not visible for anyone located outside the shell. The accumulated matter shields that source and keeps the light and heat inside.
In the case of larger bodies, the impact of the double vortex is so violent that the radiation cannot be shielded by accumulated matter. The light and heat radiates out into the universe. Se say we see a "star" or a "sun".
By the way, there is no need to postulate a nuclear furnace fusing hydrogen as the source of heat and radiation in stars, although some hydrogen fusion is certainly taking place at the place of impact of the stellar double vortex, accounting for the spectral signature of hydrogen in starlight.
Strange as it might seem, some say that planets are habitable not only on the outside of their solid shell, but also on the inside. This is a somewhat foreign concept for us, as we were raised with the idea that planets are solid and have a molten iron core. But indeed, the shell formed by the four forces I described could very well provide a gravitational force that acts from both sides, that is, things are attracted to the shell both from the inside and from the outside. Consequently, bodies of water exist both on the inside of the shell and on the outside, atmosphere exists both inside and out. And finally, there is a source of light and heat both on the inside of a planet and on the outside.
April 2008: Powerful Black Hole Jet Explained
A recent article on Space.com which references a video of what are called powerful jets, but which seem more like a giant vortex entering the black hole at the poles. The sequence shows huge blobs or clouds of luminosity moving outwards. These are apparently what gives the name "jets" to the phenomenon. But given the astronomical distances and the near light speed with which these phenomena propagate indicates that these outward-moving clouds are not particles but pulses of light moving outwards along the vortex that brings in matter. The pulses of light illuminate sequentially ever more distant parts of the particles contained in the vortex. The fast movement of luminosity outward is misinterpreted as matter moving outward at close to light speed.
Here is a series of snapshots from that video:
The "vortex" nature of the jet is clearly visible here
A double "pulse" of light moving outward along the path of the vortex
Another "pulse" moving outward. The vortex is showing a "node" as in a standing wave
- - -
This is an image mapping 125,000 galaxies (from the recent 6DF Galaxy Survey). The distribution of galaxies in the universe mapped by this survey suggests a question:
Is the Universe itself a giant vortex?
- - -
Recent pictures of a polar vortex on Venus.
more on this in an article in Wired: Venus' Polar Vortex Is Surprisingly Wild
Physicists Mull Whether Inorganic Dust Formations Could Be Alive
Intriguing new evidence of life-like double-helix structures formed from inorganic substances in space has been reported in the New Journal of Physics. The physicists behind the discovery are now pondering whether extraterrestrial life could be composed of corkscrew shaped formations of interstellar dust.
These Images Now Show a Circular Opening at the North Pole! ... Apollo 8 photos have been out since 1967 but up until now we haven't had any colored photos for the public to view.
Two unusual older stars giving birth to second wave of planets
These two stars have many characteristics of very young stars, Melis said, including rapid accretion of gas, extended orbiting disks of dust and gas, a large infrared excess emission and, in the case of BP Piscium, jets of gas that are being shot into space. Planetesimals, like comets and asteroids, along with planets, form from the gas and dust particles that orbit young stars; planetesimals are small masses of rock or ice that merge to form larger bodies.
Mercury polar anomaly
(from an article about a new NASA mission to explore our smallest planet)
On the closest planet to the sun, where temperatures can reach more than 800 degrees Fahrenheit (425 degrees Celsius), there might surprisingly be ice. Ice is highly reflective to radar, and Earth-based radar suggests deposits of frozen water might be hidden in deep, dark craters at Mercury's poles that have never seen sunlight. This water might have come gassing up from within the planet or from meteorite impacts. MESSENGER will search for hydrogen at the permanently shadowed floors of polar craters.
A Scaling Law for Organized Matter in The Universe (PDF)
Nassim Haramein et al show that a scaling law can be written for all organized matter utilizing the Schwarzschild condition of a black hole, describing structures from cosmological to sub-atomic scale. Black holes are postulated to exist at the center of all such structures, surrounded by a concentric "white hole" accumulation of matter. Spin and vorticity, not gravitation, are the principal drivers of organization. More research papers at http://www.theresonanceproject.org/
Black holes 'preceded galaxies'
Most if not all galaxies, including our own Milky Way, are believed to have massive black holes at their cores. It was unclear whether black holes came first, helping create galaxies by pulling matter towards them, or whether they arose in already formed galaxies. "It looks like the black holes came first," said Dr Chris Carilli, from the US National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Socorro, New Mexico, who took part in the study. "The evidence is piling up."
"The galaxy is analogous to a hurricane in composition, shares the same principle of their movement as a vortex with velocity accelerates from its edge to its center."
Black Hole Creates Spectacular Light Show
Many supermassive black holes have jets of material that spray out perpendicularly from the donut-shaped ring of matter falling onto the black hole. These beams of hot gas are thought to result from magnetic field lines that are twisted by the black hole's mass, and propel charged particles outward.
But most rays do not appear to blaze up with such extreme intensity as HST-1. Scientists aren't sure if it is an exceptional case, or if it represents a normal event for black hole jets, which are still not very well understood.
I am linking this article just to show that officially, we're in the dark about what drives black hole "jets".
Giant space tornadoes create Earth's auroras
One vortex in the pair sends particles spiralling along Earth's magnetic field lines until they hit molecules of the ionosphere 400 km above the surface. The energy released by the collisions creates the auroral glow, like the gas in a neon light.
Charged particles return up through the other vortex, completing the electrical circuit. The vortices channel around 100,000 amps of electrical current to and from Earth's ionosphere every three hours or so.
An electromagnetic phenomenon on the fringes of galaxy NGC 7793 is confounding astronomers because they insist on seeing it as a gravitational superforce.
Explaining the jets of ionized particles often seen erupting from various objects in space ranks as one of the most difficult tasks facing modern astronomers. What force can create highly energetic particle emissions that span distances measured in light-years? What confines them into narrow beams?
Video: The Mystery Hexagon on SATURN
As mentioned in a comment, there is an unexplained but rather permanent hexagonal feature on Saturn's north pole. Here is a short video about it.
November 2010: Galaxy is found to have high energy 'bubbles' corresponding with rotational axis
New York Times: Bubbles of Energy Are Found in Galaxy
Something big is going on at the center of the galaxy, and astronomers are happy to say they don't know what it is.
A group of scientists working with data from NASA's Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope said Tuesday that they had discovered two bubbles of energy erupting from the center of the Milky Way galaxy. The bubbles, they said at a news conference and in a paper to be published Wednesday in The Astrophysical Journal, extend 25,000 light years up and down from each side of the galaxy and contain the energy equivalent to 100,000 supernova explosions.
"And we think we know a lot about our own galaxy," Dr. Spergel added, noting that the bubbles were almost as big as the galaxy and yet unsuspected until now.
Jon Morse, head of astrophysics at NASA headquarters, said, "This shows again that the universe is full of surprises."
Here is the illustration that accompanies the NYT article.
My view is - you may have guessed - that we are getting a glimpse of the galactic vortex sustaining and continuously building our Milky Way.
ESA's Goce satellite has measured gravity over the earth's surface, and has constructed a map, linked in a short video clip in this BBC article.
The explanation given is that the Earth is formed like an irregular potato, rather than a sphere, but this does not really make any sense.
Viewing the earth's solid part like a shell, it would make sense that local variations in the thickness of the shell would determine similar variations in the gravity we experience at the surface.
Here are some screen grabs from the video. Gravity is strongest in yellow areas; it is weakest in blue ones.
There is also a flat map view of the Goce gravity data, which was part of this article:
Goce satellite views Earth's gravity in high definition
(Click on image to enlarge)
New analysis of images taken by ESA's Venus Express orbiter has revealed surprising details about the remarkable, shape-shifting collar of clouds that swirls around the planet's South Pole.
Several planets in the Solar System, including Earth, have been found to possess hurricane-like polar vortices, where clouds and winds rotate rapidly around the poles. Some of these take on strange shapes, such as the hexagonal structure on Saturn, but none of them are as variable or unstable as the southern polar vortex on Venus.
Scientists have known about the presence of swirling clouds around the poles of Venus since they were first imaged by Mariner 10 in 1974. At the same time, it was discovered that Venus' upper winds sweep westwards around the planet in only four days, 60 times faster than the rotation of the solid surface of the planet - a phenomenon known as superrotation.
Thermal infrared imagery from the Pioneer Venus spacecraft subsequently revealed an enormous depression in the cloud blanket at the North Pole. This relatively warm polar 'hole' was thought to be caused by downward movement of gases, rather like water flowing down a drain. However, detailed examination of the thick clouds and dense atmosphere over the South Pole had to wait until the arrival of Venus Express in April 2006.
During its first orbit around the planet, multi-wavelength observations confirmed for the first time the presence of a huge 'double-eye' atmospheric vortex at the planet's South Pole. Some 2000 km across, it was comparable to the structure that had previously been detected at the North Pole.
Gravity Probe B has returned from its seven year adventure in orbit, and it has brought some rather mind-blowing news: A space-time vortex exists around the Earth, just like Einstein theorized.
Video: Fibonacci's Fractals
(of fractals and spirals...)
A new star develops by accreting material from a circumstellar disk; both in turn are embedded in a much larger, more nearly spherical envelope of in-falling dust and gas.
X-ray observations suggest that strong magnetic fields in the innermost region around the young star power intense shocks.
The young protostar rotates, and one consequence of its spin is that the star ejects bipolar jets of ionized and molecular gas. These outflows can be readily seen, and are important markers of stellar youth. However the mechanism(s) that drive these protostellar outflows - including the acceleration and the collimation processes - are poorly understood.
Could it be that our scientists are trying to fit the observed facts to a wrong model - gravitational accretion - when most of the evidence points to rotation and vortex action being the driving force of star formation?