Galactic Jets
from super massive black holes

recent post I made on TVF's site got me interested in this phenomena. There maybe something fundamentally wrong with the standard black hole model. Let me show you what I mean.

Here are two lobes of emitted electrons coming off a black hole (supposed). I believe the billowing clouds on the ends are what is hit by those electrons. How many electrons? Don't know. Are there accompanying protons to balance the charge deficit? Don't know. Do black holes have an observable resultant charge? Don't know. Do black holes have an observabe angular momentum? Don't know. This means that I don't know ... maybe somebody else does ... I don't. Also, what the internal structure of a black hole is ... is unknown ... to me ... and ... to everyone else. All is conjecture on the inside. So, that's what this page deals with.

jet2.gif - 19kb

Here is a good link which gives the present standard model explanation of the phenomena:

The explanation is difficult to follow and seems a little "forced". It still may be basically correct ... but I want to put forth something different, else there would be no point in making "yet another web page".

My explanation will be gravitational rather than electromagnetic

I am going to propose that the jet is the "outgassing" of material from within the black hole where the gravitational field has been weakened by the influx of material from an accretion disk. I'm not proposing this mechanism as the only one possible ... only as one candidate for some examples of jets.

The insides of black holes

It has long been supposed that inside the black hole there is a singularity ... a point mass where all the matter involved has inevitably gone toward. And ... further, the center of the black hole is not resolvable by present theory because of this singularity.

My view here is that after a black hole has been established with its accompanying Swarzchild radius, no further condensation of matter is physically possible. That is, within that radius, matter can no longer reside placidly within any very small space and certainly not as a point source.

My reasoning is based on the sound principle of physics that when a particle goes down a gradient, it acquires energy and must "rebound" out of that gradient unless it expels that energy (or a sufficient part of it) out from that gradient and into, typically, free space.

An example is warranted here.

If all the photons and neutrinos and other particles that have been expelled into "rural space" by the condensation of stars and galaxies since the beginning of time ... were all returned to their sources ... the result would be the disintegration of everything into a homogenous and isotropic soup of particles. For, the energy this return represents is that required for the other particles to take up residence as stars and galaxies.

This is the energy that cannot be given up in a black hole ... because ... nothing can get out of a black hole ... supposedly. Of course, as I have pointed out in another page, if nothing can get out of a black hole ... then ... a motion picture of an object falling into a black hole, run in reverse, represents an impossible situation ... which in turn violates time-reversal symmetry ... which gravity (in the Standard Model) is supposed to obey. But that's another story.

What I am asserting is that the interior of a black hole is composed of some finite ball in the center which was there before the hole fully formed ... and ... a whole lot of particles, very hot, all swirling about and all unable to fall into the hole any further ... because ... as they fall, they acquire energy and rebound out again for the above reason. The alternative is that there is a very small ball in the center and a shell of photons just under the Swarzchild radius which just stays there never going back into the hole. Such a shell of photons is unlikely. I believe that any photon would go up and fall back into the center and heat up the central ball thereby preventing it from collapsing.

Here are a few facts

Let's say a proton falls into a black hole and it was orbiting at the Swarzchild radius and a reasonable fraction of light velocity ... say, 1/100c. What happens when it falls in? Well, to conserve angular momentum, that proton must double its velocity every time it halves the distance to the "goal line". So, if the hole is one kilometer in diameter, at half or one quarter kilometer, the proton's velocity would have to go over light speed. If we say that this is impossible inside the black hole (which is unwarranted by any concrete evidence), then the alternative would be that its mass double at every halving of the distance (perhaps relativistically?).

To get down to an "atomic size" hole (about 10-10 meters) from 1000 meters would take about 40 doublings, i.e. it would have to increase in mass 40 fold. That's a whopping amount of energy ... and that's just one proton. For the proton to take up residence in that tiny diameter, it would have to eject 40 protons worth of energy ... or ... if it stayed there anyway would the proposed black hole appear forty times as massive as all its components? Would it appear as more massive than the original star? Apparently not by present astronomical observations.

This leaves one to contemplate a ball of hot gases occupying a very much finite volume even long after the hole has formed, (in fact, indefinitely).

Our initial gravitational field will be a straightforward spherical field as shown.

jet3.gif - 5kb

Now, let's accrete ...

As more mass goes into the black hole, it forms into an accretion disk due to tidal forces and angular momentum of whatever it has encountered (planet, another star, etc.). Now, as this stuff goes into the hole, it runs into the other stuff which can't stay in the central glob for the stated reasons ... and ... takes up residence preferentially around the equator of the rotating hole material. This is probable because everything in the center of a galaxy is going round and round in the same direction (mostly). It therefore resides in a central bulge predominantly ... in a sort of ring shape.

jet4.gif - 4kb

The gravitational field of a ring is unusual in that the field strength is zero in the middle. As we move upward that strength increases until ... several diameters further out ... it begins to resemble a standard spherical field.

jet5.gif - 4kb The salient point here is that the overall composite field is weakened at the poles where they intersect the Swarzchild radius. And ... most importantly ... the overall pressure of the incompressible gas within the black hole is increased so that ... it can be "forced" out of the hole at the weakest place ... the poles.

We know from time reversal symmetry that matter can be ejected from a black hole ... for if not, gravity would show T-variance which all physicists presently reject. The Standard Model has gravity as T-invariant. Thus, if an object falls into a black hole, a film of the event, in reverse, shows matter being ejected. Hence, it must be a real possibility.

Why electrons ?

In the sun, the surface plasma is roughly at an equilibrium temperature, i.e. loose protons and loose electrons have the same temperature. Consequently, the electrons have a velocity around 43 times greater than the protons (the square root of the electron-proton mass ratio).

MeVe2 = MpVp2

Therefore, the sun boils off electrons which acquire escape velocity with greater frequency. This can't go on indefinitely so ... after 11 years or so ... here come the sunspots which eject primarily the oppositely charged protons ... and the situation is balanced again (though this may not be directly, causally related to the sunspot cycle).

We can therefore expect the black hole to "let fly" with electrons first. If no protons are ever seen to get out, it would mean that a positive charge was developing within the hole. But ... if this theoretical model is at all valid ... somewhere ... sometime ... there must be jets consisting of baryonic material.
It's a "prediction" ;o)

And that is my take on the matter in question.

Ebtx Home Page