Please note that the original file produced and sent to the individuals listed on the original press release has images that I cannot upload. I have sent Universe Today a PDF of the original and ask them to see if they can add the supernova image and the two further illustrations to this post for me.

I start with part of the recent press release:

HEIC0704: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 19:00 (CET)/10:00 PM EST 22 February, 2007
http://www.spacetelescope.org/news/html/heic0704.html

News release: The NASA/ESA Hubble Telescope Celebrates Supernova 1987A’s 20th Anniversary

22-February-2007 Twenty years ago, astronomers witnessed one of the brightest stellar explosions in more than 400 years. The titanic supernova, called SN 1987A, blazed with the power of 100 million suns for several months following its discovery on 23 Feb., 1987.

The Hubble studies have revealed the following details about the supernova:

• A glowing ring, about a light-year in diameter, around the supernova. The ring was there at least 20,000 years before the star exploded. X-rays from the explosion energized the gas in the ring, making it glow for two decades.
• Two outer loops of glowing gas that had only been hinted at in ground-based telescope images.
• A dumbbell-shaped central structure that has now grown to one-tenth of a light-year long. The structure consists of two blobs of debris in the centre of the supernova racing away from each other at roughly 30 million kilometres an hour.
• The onrushing stellar shock wave from the stellar explosion is slamming into, heating up, and illuminating the inner regions of the narrow ring surrounding the doomed star.

Hubble continues to watch as the blast debris moves through the ring. The light show makes the glowing ring look like a pearl necklace. Astronomers think the whole ring will be illuminated in a few years.

The glowing ring is expected to become bright enough to illuminate the star’s surroundings, which will provide astronomers with new information on how the star ejected material before the explosion.

+++++++++++++
Supernova 1987A


A new model for the events leading up to supernova itself and
The subsequent evolution of the object


In my book The Universe is a Cloud, I wrote about how the inner structure of any object must have internal effects caused by balanced gravity. 1987A shows these effects to perfection and from that starting point I can now describe the evolution of 1987A from birth to what we see today, and which is not the end of the story by a long way. But first we need to look very closely at what we see today and how the object has stayed stable since the supernova.

The immediate thing to notice is that the diameter of the ring of what astronomers have called pearls has not moved at all. None of the images taken during the phase since the supernova twenty years ago show any sign of an expansion of that ring of mass. The energy from the supernova explosion has made no impact upon the size of that ring. Again, looking at the ring in general, it looks as though it were a ring of distinct pieces. Not in any way as though a string of round pearls, much more as though it comprises many individual pieces of a broken ring. Looking even closer, you will see that at the top right there is a clear indication that there is one piece of the ring that has a small but significant tilt upwards from the line of the rest. Indeed, I think it looks as though the ring has a distinct break, one on each side in the same way I described the initial break of the outer ring of M51. (Chapter 26, The Whirlpool Galaxy in a new light, pages 159 to 168, The Universe is a Cloud, Some Raw Food for Thought, second edition, The Leonard R. Sugerman Press, 2005). But here, instead of the whole ring then flinging out to form two arms as with M51, with 1987A we can see there is just the slightest indication of being out of line.

You will see that there is a small break on opposing sides of the ring of mass. The ring of mass lies much further from the inner core than with M51 and from this illustration we can get some sense of how this object formed in the first place, how it developed and why we see what we have in front of us today.

Now, I want you all to turn to the videos that have also been made available on the various web sites both with EASA and the HUBBLE site. Take another look at the ring of pearls and again at the top of the ring, particularly I suggest that you take the medium videos and run them repeatedly. This is the link to one of the medium videos:

http://www.spacetelescope.org/videos...heic0704a.html

By so doing you will see that it is possible to determine that the upper pieces that form the pearls are curved from the front right - towards the back - and to the left, as though several individual curved pieces of a large tyre viewed from an angle. I believe this outer ring exhibits a form exactly as I describe as the early stages of the evolution of a black hole becoming like a huge lorry tyre with an outer layer that is curved over an inner chamber.

That as this object at first formed, zero balanced gravity effects occured within the whole structure such that this Super Dense Inert, (SDI), mass outer layer lays inside an event horizon, (out beyond the surface of the whole object). Then, below this first SDI outer layer there will be another, second event horizon forming a band within which you get a central ring of zero balanced gravity within which the energy of the object is collected between the two event horizons; the second of which forms the inner boundary of the balanced gravity ring. And beyond that, another ring of mass, forming another SDI mass inner core, and again, beyond, right at the centre, the empty core where the original black hole having been pulled by gravity into the main mass has left a totally empty hole at the centre. You will need to read the full description of this evolution in the second edition to get a clearer understanding. This is a brief account for this note only.

However, in the case of 1987A, which has not been seen as a quasar, I believe we will discover that the object is much older than 20,000 years. In my opinion, it may be many billions of years old. It is certainly a very old object indeed.

I believe 1987A is an example of what I have previously described as a Multiple Annular Ringed Depleting Object, (MARDO) that has further evolved from that earlier stage, perhaps as a moderate sized black hole which became depleted of its energy and then, over time, the structure has further evolved with the loss of the energy to slowly permit an increase in the diameter of the outer ring of mass.

That that mass ring has fractured, perhaps in two places at first and then slowly expanded while fracturing even more into perhaps thirty or so pieces. What we see here.

Yet, even with this expansion the outer ring is still locked in place by the gravitational mass of the inner object where we see it today.

That the outer ring is still held in place relative to the inner mass object by balanced gravity, which is why it cannot move when the supernova occured. Indeed, I do not believe that either the outer ring nor the inner object can move relative to each other for that reason.

That the inner object, (as the outer ring evolved to where we see it), in turn evolved to allow the energy left behind, (after the depletion of the greatest part of the energy expansion from the ends of the whole object, either as a Planetary Nebula or as a small quasar), to become trapped in a new balanced gravity ring within the mass of the inner object.

As with Earth, where we see that the greatest mass has formed a high density inner core. I believe that this is the same thing that happens with a MARDO? The inner core object has much greater density mass, and, as such, the evolution of the movement of the balanced gravity within that mass will take a long time to stabilise. The energy will migrate slowly.

Now we bring into this discussion the two unexplained and larger diameter rings of energy that are seen at each end of the image of the ring of pearls. I believe that these can only have formed by the sudden expression of energy, perhaps for no more than a second or two, as the supernova occured; from an annular ringed orifice at each end of the object.

I believe that if we extrapolate the movement of those rings back on a time line to the supernova, we will find that they describe an annular ringed orifice at each end of the inner object and we should be able to quite accurately describe the diameter of those orifaces.

From that, we will be able to describe the size and shape of the inner object.

That exercise will show that the old inner empty space, (where the original black hole had been before the object increased in size which in turn then emptied the centre of the object through gravity being towards the mass causing massive balanced gravity effects), collapsed and formed a new, smaller diameter mass object. Not unlike where we explode a nuclear device by suddenly increasing the mass to promote a nuclear reaction.

The inner empty core of the inner object collapsed.

There was still a small amount of energy trapped inside a balanced gravity ring inside the inner object that had evolved as the whole object expanded through old age.

When the inner empty core suddenly collapsed the shock wave from the collapse caused a supernova, which in turn caused a sudden, but very short term loss of energy from each end of the inner object through the annular ringed orifaces formed by the balanced gravity ring in the object. That the supernova has caused two red rings of energy to expand from annular orifices at each end the inner object like two thin smoke rings speeding out into space.

As the inner object has returned to a more stable state, it has ceased to glow like a star. (I am not talking about the X-Rays that are being emitted from the debris surrounding the supernova). Instead, I believe that the mass left after the supernova is just sufficient to form a new black hole inside the debris, which will, of course, form new zero balanced gravity effects within itself where all the energy of the supernova will collect until it once again starts to evolve to the point where that energy too will start to deplete, becoming another period of what I call a MARDO depletion.

Now, finally, when we again look carefully at the video of the sequence, we also can see that the inner object has not of itself moved. Instead, what we see moving is in fact a sudden downward moving cloud of debris from the supernova.

I believe that that debris will hit the bottom inner edge of the outer ring of mass relatively soon. In turn, giving us more detail about the structure of the outer ring of mass.

1987A has evolved from a black hole and then onwards by further mass deposits over time to become a fair sized object with internal zero balanced gravity effects that in turn, over more time again, permitted the depletion of the energy from annular ringed orifices at each end of the structure. After that phase of depletion the object evolved so that the outer ring of mass started to expand and crack into thirty or so pieces and eventually expanded out to the stable position where we see it today. The inner core of the object slowly evolved such that the energy left within the mass when the first depletion stage finished will have been trapped into a similar annular ringed zero balanced gravity effect within the inner core. The original empty space where the original black hole had first formed suddenly collapsed, causing a supernova that in turn caused a sudden but short term release of energy from two annular ring orifices at each end of the inner object. The debris heated by the supernova has heated up the inner edges of the outer ring of mass which has not moved in the supernova explosion. The pearls in turn may have sufficient mass to become a ring of stars and the temperature of those stars will in turn confirm the mass that created them.

Some time in the future, the inner object will once again start to deplete energy as though a planetary nebula. That should be quite a sight, a planetary nebula within a ring of stars.

The downward moving debris may finally break through the outer ring of mass causing the balanced gravity effects holding the two in harmony to collapse and destabilise the outer ring.

Eventually all the mass will become redistributed throughout the local region to complete the cycle as depleted energy and dust clouds.


Chris Coles
Saturday March 10, 2007

This note will be combined into a third edition which will also combine further work being produced as a part of a thesis on the subject of gravity. The third edition should be finished by end summer 2007.

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

Of course this makes no sense. We are now seeing structure inside an event horizon? This is a major violation of rationality.

__________________
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

The event horizon is a mathematical point, nothing more. It marks the point where the mass has reached a sufficient level that light cannot escape from the surface of the object. Inside any object there are balanced gravity effects. You will need to read the second edition e-book to get an understanding. But I will try and give you an idea of balanced gravity here.

Imagine you are standing in a small room right at the centre of Earth. Where is all the mass? You will be standing on the surface of a mass of the same mass as Earth, but with your feet towards what we today call the surface. (The outer surface of Earth).

But you will be able to do that on any wall or ceiling of this small room at the centre of Earth, with your feet towards the surface. In that case, gravity, (we will call it that), as a force, is coming to a single point in that room where it must balance as a force. In every direction from that central balance point outwards, towards the surface, there must be gravity, towards the surface.

OK, now, you are in a lift at the centre of Earth and you press the button for the surface. Ding ding. off you go. So now, you have come up say a thousand miles and you are beginning to feel some gravity under your feet from the mass below you. How come you cannot feel gravity from the mass above you? In fact, of course, you will indeed feel gravity from that mass above you and you will reach a point where the gravity of the mass below you will again, (just as we had balanced forces at the centre point of the mass, now we feel gravity within the mass, from wherever that mass might be in direct relationship to the location of the mass. Thus as we come up from the centre of Earth, or for that matter any body of mass, we will come across points on our travels where that gravity balances. The mass below, balances the mass above.

That is why we have a clear deliniation between the central inner core and the outer core of Earth. It is caused by a spherical ring of balanced zero gravity.

Thus every body must have these effects inside them, from the smallest particle of mass to the largest. (Relative to their internal mass).

No one gave any thought to what would be the case inside a body of mass. As a result, you have all been relying upon unsound thinking for decades.

Read the book.

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

so how do we see anything inside the event horizon? how does this answer the question Cougar asked?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

I'm afraid it appears that it is your thinking that is unsound. Isaac Newton did give this considerable thought back in the 1600s, and remarkably, he came up with the correct answer.

Inside a solid sphere, the gravitational force varies linearly with distance from the center, becoming zero at the center of mass.

I think you might want to check out this article, which spells out the details, including....

Many sufficiently large celestial bodies are a good approximation of spherically symmetrical solids. However, the density function ρ(R) is generally not constant, but tends to be inversely related to R. This can cause some counterintuitive behaviors. For example, one might expect gravity to decrease when descending into a deep mineshaft on Earth. However, since density increases with depth, the gravity initially increases slightly. This effect would be even more pronounced on a gas giant planet such as Jupiter.

There do happen to be points of "balanced gravity" -- at LaGrange points, for example -- but the sense of "balanced gravity" that you speak of does not seem to be demonstrable in this universe.

__________________
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

So, someone wrote an opinion of what they thought was the case inside a spherical mass object. If you are going to go through life assuming that if it was written it is the final definition of the reality, then you are denying yourself the pleasure of being able to think for yourself.

When I first presented the original manuscript of first edition of The Universe is a Cloud to Stephen Mauntner, Publisher for the Johns Hopkins Press, his initial reaction was, "I cannot publish that, you destroy everything". The last time I spoke to him he was kind enough to admit that he may one day kick himself for not publishing it.

What you see here is but a very small part of a very detailed argument in the second edition. That edition in turn will be updated as I have been able to expand my own thinking while experiments are undertaken to see if we can start to prove my thinking one way or another. But please, try and think for yourselves.

Who says you can see inside the Sun?

You cannot. You have to imagine (devise) a theory and see if it matches what you have in front of you.

Who says that you cannot possibly imagine what is happening inside a black hole? Who told you not to think about that?

A star shines. It is a ball of mass. so the star grows until its mass is sufficient that the gravity is high enough that the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light. At that point it is called a black hole. But it is still a star shining, it is just that now you cannot see the radiation from the star beyond what is called an event horizon.

But that event horizon is simply the mathematical point where the mass creates an escape velocity beyond the speed of light. It is not some mythical "G" Clamp enclosing the mass of the star. It is simply a mathematical point. The scale has tipped slightly beyond that needed to prevent all that energy from that shining star from escaping.

So, go back to 1987A. Why is there a ring of mass surrounding the inner object?

Why have you right there in front of you, (I did not take the photograph), two red rings of energy expanding from each side of the whole object?

No one else has given you an explanation.

If you read the second edition you will find that the VBLA, Very Long Baseline Array, has recently gone back and looked in detail at a quasar jet and reported back that it has a difuse central zone and that that was not what they expected.

Your world of certainty is about to come to an end. Not because Newton wrote something centuries ago. Not because existing mathematics has not been based upon logical thought, but because someone decided to sit down and think about the reality inside a spherical mass object and came up with some new ideas.

Read the book.

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

I must add that Newton did not know what caused what he described as gravity.

No one has given a detailed and totally accepted explanation of what is described as gravity.

So how does anyone come up with: Quote: "the correct answer"?

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

Quote: "I think you might want to check out this article, which spells out the details, including.... "

As difficult as this is going to be to understand; Shell Theorum and Calculus have fundamental flaws related to a lack of logical thought underpinning their reasoning. When Stephen Mauntner said "you destroy everything" he meant it.

Everything you have as a basis for your argument stands on the idea that you can only visualise the reality of the interior of a spherical mass object by dividing it into thin shells.

Wrong!, No, more than wrong!

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

What are these "fundamental flaws" in Calculus and the Shell Theorem? What alternative to thin shells do you propose for treating interiors of astronomical objects?

Please be aware that there are at least three centuries of proven results in physics, astronomy, and engineering all due to use of this "fundamentally flawed" calculus. I await the logical thought underpinning your reasoning.

Edited to add: Oh, and don't forget electrodynamics and electrical engineering! Couldn't be typing this without these things!

__________________
Microsoft is over if you want it.

The bar has been lowered for the promotion of ATM ideas; the bar for the acceptance of ATM ideas must remain high.

Three centuries of proven results and still no one understands gravity.

When I talked about calculus, I meant that where it is used to try and describe the shell theorem and that theorum's relationship to a description of the interior of the planet, it does not produce an answer that relates to what is the reality.

__________________
Keep seeking whatever it is that sparks the mind. There is more of it there than most people can ever know exists and the effort pays dividends infinitely higher than anything Wall Street deals in.

Well, certainly the effect of gravity is very well understood. It appears that your musings on the subject are seriously at odds with those effects that are well understood and meticulously confirmed by observations.

__________________
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

In what way does reality differ from the shell predictions?

Chris,
The x-ray luminosity of the central source was much weaker than the ring.
Refer : http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2000/sn1987a/

Since there was less x-rays from the central star which exploded than from the ring itself, I don't think you can say that the x-rays from the central star that exploded caused the ring to glow.

X-rays are produced in the lab by high speed collision of particles. A SN explosion produces high speed particles. If these particles expand without colliding with other particles, I don't think x-rays would be formed.

Click here for my explanation how a Supernova ring is formed.