The Origin of Galaxy types by a "Local A-Symmetrical oscillating vacuum Frames" (LASOF) in the form of "Multiple Conical Vacuum Cleaning Areas".

It is supposed that Galaxy formation in the early universe, need to start with a minimal set of TWO distant Galaxy Anchor Black Holes (GABHs) (see "(Big) Bang Fractal Evaporation" text before). This is the base for a simple so called "Lenticular Galaxy". It is assumed that the two Galaxy Anchor black holes influence the oscillation symmetry and direction into a so called "Local A-Symmetrical Oscillating Vacuum Frame" (LASOF), which will form a "vacuum cleaning area" for the primordial gas in the form of a "LASOF double cone". The "LASOF double cones" are supposed to be mirror symmetric at both sides of the common basic circle. As a consequence they have their basic circle and main axis in common and a black hole at each summit. The common basic circle will coincide with the Galaxy disk of all disk Galaxies.

If there are Three or more GABHs, then extra "LASOF double cones" are introduced and the configuration of the resulting Galaxy will be more complex, due to the existence of a triple/quadruple combination of "conical vacuum cleaning areas". These configurations are supposed to be responsible for several non complex Spiral Galaxies. At the same time, in the evolution of "simple Galaxies" (Lenticular and Simple Spirals) the GABHs are supposed to be accompanied by the first "Massive" and later less Massive Super Nova Black Holes made within the early Galaxy. As a result it is assumed that in between the original GABHs (left over from the (Big) Bang process, each Galaxy will more or less build a network of "Secondary GABHs", which make the LASOF double cones more complex. As a consequence the number and mass content of "Secondary GABHs" will determine the complexity of a Galaxy.

Thus "Disk Galaxies" are supposed to have one or more GABHs located at both sides of the Galaxy disk. However, if there are more distant GABHs located at "the same side" of the Galaxy disk, then there will be room for the creation of one or more "Dwarf Galaxy" located in between these two or more GABHs, if there is enough gas left in the surrounding space. It is a causal step to propose that if disk Galaxies group together in clusters, the distant GABHs of different disk Galaxies could become a GABH group with a Globular configuration. This is supposed to be the origin of Elliptic Galaxies. As a consequence, Elliptic Galaxies must have at least 6 distant GABHs with a globular distribution around the Galaxy to originate the elliptic shape.

Shouldn't these anchor black holes be readily detectable in galaxies? Can you point to observational evidence for their existence?

See: http://home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/

The black hole types are supposed to come in different sizes to play different roles in the universe.
It is supposed that there are five main Black Hole types based on the size of (Higgs-virgin) nuclear black hole particle content:

1, Big Bang Galaxy seeds: left over from the Big Bang, called Galaxy seeds or Galaxy Anchor Black Holes (GABHs) (app.p.40-41), ranging from huge Galaxy Anchor Black Holes (GABHs) of Galaxy clusters (see: app.p.18-19 ) down to multiple Galaxy Anchor Black Holes of single Galaxies (p.26).

2, Stellar Anchor Black Holes (SABHs) positioned on either polar side of the planetary disk of Planet Bearing Stars, like our own Sun (app.p. 36-40 ). These Black Holes are supposed to originate in super/hypernova explosions, as single black holes, able to migrate and find a companion black hole to form a tandem dual system. The first Stellar Anchor black holes in a young Galaxy are supposed grow by "eating" the vacuum and become so called Galaxy Halo Black Holes (GHBHs), forming a 3-D Globular network of Black Holes (the origin of dark matter) in- and outside the galaxy.

3, Galaxy Halo Black Holes. Each GHBH is able to catch "run away" stars produced by Binary (Supernova) breakups and Open Star Clusters. It is supposed that runaway stars are accelerated by the Local 3-D GHBH structure in what we could call "black hole sling shots" but they must also to be "captured" by one of the GHBH acting as the center of a Globular Cluster, or become captured by the recently discovered Milky Way stellar ring, found at the outside of the Galaxy disk. These runaway stars will run away from the open cluster in the form of a double cone, due to the "sling shot" attraction of the nearby dual "Stellar Anchor Black Holes" (SABHs). See: ( http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/cycle1/0054/index.html )

4, Sunspot Black Holes; smaller micro Black Holes positioned in an X or double coned configuration inside Stars, or even inside so called "failed Stars" (like Jupiter, see the vortex and red spots in the two cloud bands of Jupiter) or even inside our own Earth. These Black Holes are supposed to originate by Stellar magnetic storms. Another origin for sunspots is supposed to be the impact of Comets from outside. Sunspots often reveal a very clear "Triple lobed linear structures" like quasars and other so called "double lobed dumbbell" structures in the universe, which is seen as a support for this black hole hypothesis. See: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020718.html . As a consequence it is postulated that all triple or double lobed "Dumbbell Structures" on every scale in the universe are based on the cooperation of two smaller or bigger "new quantum Black Holes". We can find these structures within the universe from small to big as: double lobed Sunspots, double lobed Herbig Haro objects, Double Lobed Planetary Nebula, double lobed Young Stars, double lobed Quasars, double lobed Young Galaxies, and double lobed Galaxy clusters (like Abell Cluster A754 and Centaurus Cluster). Droplet-like condensations in nearby planetary nebula: such as the Helix nebula see; http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020512.html are thought to represent ejected Sunspot Black Holes.

5, Comets , These phenomena are not supposed to be rocklike entities covered by a crust of ice, but contrary they are supposed to originate in the same way as :"Sunspot Black Holes" probably by intergalactic magnetic storms. Some Comets tend to split into smaller parts and evaporate.

The description of this photograph clearly states that the central star is to the upper right of the photograph. But this is exactly the direction the condensations appear to be moving. Shouldn't the condensations be moving to the lower left of photo if they are ejected?

levu, your paper is impressive in its scope. I find many of the ideas interesting. But I'm curious about the observational tests that might support your ideas.

Is this consistent with the observed 22 year solar magnetic activity cycle and the observed changes in both numbers and solar latitude of sunspots on ll year cycles?

You wrote:
The description of this photograph clearly states that the central star is to the upper right of the photograph. But this is exactly the direction the condensations appear to be moving. Shouldn't the condensations be moving to the lower left of photo if they are ejected?

The condensations (the former sunspot black holes) are not supposed to be moving into the upper right direction.
They are supposed (by me) to move slowly in the opposite direction because they are supposed to be spitted out by the Star.
At the same time it is supposed that these black hole generate gas formation around their light horizon. This gas is movong faster away from the star then the condensations.

Answer to your last question:
I quote my model partly:

11. that black hole nuclei tend to explode if they are not stabilized by enough vacuum pressure, originated by the vacuum oscillations. All black holes (young or old) "eat" or absorb the vacuum particles which originate space frame curvation and is supposed to be also responsible for the Hubble redshift.

12, that Cosmological time is supposed to be originated by the absorption of the vacuum by black holes, which create pulsating effects within long periods. For the Sun (11 years: sunspot black hole rhythm), for our Galaxy (about 13.000 years by Galaxy center explosions, suggested by P. LaViolette) and finally for the pulsation of the universal Big Bang- Big Crunch system, (by all black holes together).

The result of this model is that a "mechanistic but wholistic" "Oscillating Quantum Vacuum" lattice is able to mimic the Relativity rules, with one exception, it mimics only partly the universal constancy of the Light speed. However, the lightspeed constancy is mimicked by the vacuum and "dragged" within so called LASOF "double cone" boundaries located on both sides (in front and at the backside) of massive objects in motion through the Solar vacuum lattice reference frame. (LASOF: Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillating vacuum Frames). It was a challenge to find evidences for this, and it was found by so called "Subtle Historical misinterpretations of the experiments" made by K. Brecher, Babcock and Bergman and Sagnac.

But if you look at the morphology of the condensations, the most reasonable interpretation is that they are moving to the upper right. Aren't the condensations compressed on the upper right (in the direction of the central star)? Don't they also show thin trails of gases behind them? If they are actually moving to the lower right, then you have the bizzare situation in which they are compressed from behind and I guess ejecting thin trails of gas in front of them. Is this expected in your model - perhaps from the black holes "eating" the vacuum as you describe?

Ok, I have to correct myself, the APOD picture you refer to links to an earlier picture (highlighted words "cometary knots" which suggests the following:

"Hot, fast moving shells of nebular gas overrunning cooler, denser, slower shells ejected by the star during an earlier expansion may produce these droplet-like condensations as the two shells intermix and fragment. An intriguing possibility is that instead of dissipating over time, these objects, could collapse and form pluto-like bodies. If so, these icy worlds created near the end of a star's life, would be numerous in our galaxy."

Obviously that makes more sense than the condensations falling into the star. So you are suggesting that these objects are actually black holes ejecting gas in front of them?

Degruss, That is correct.

<a name="JD2452675.S_d"> page JD2452675.S_d aka Speed of Darkness
this whole conversation reminds me to ask?
physical Astrolnomers about the speed of darkness
If for ever action theres an equal and opposite reaction
then for every C = sqrt (E/m) {the speed of light}
should there not also be a (E/m) = C^2
speed of darkness
i mean like something moving twards the hole
& not away from the HOT surface as Light does
why nothing about this {Hmm?}

If there is always an opposite mirror reaction in the opposite anti-mirror universe
Then the total energy of the whole system is ZERO energy.