But it is consistent with cold massive non stellar objects in the disk. The rotation curves are not consistent with that. ![]() Its distribution is not consistent with massive cold halo objects. The mass is not consistent with dust or gas broadly distributed in the disk. ![]() That the mass is distributed in a disk shape, even though we cant see it, is counter to the non interacting matter model of the mass we can’t see. In fact modeling a “roughly spherical” mass of uniform density will show an up slope in rotation calculations from the center to the periphery steeper than for a disk with little bulge. This is counter to any model of any significant mass in a “halo” outside (above and below) of the disk. One can model idealizations of disks and find that the smaller the central bulge mass relative to the mass of the disk finds expected rotation curve that slopes up (this is what we find in low surface brightness galaxies, small bulge and up slope rotation curve in the disk), and as the relative mass of the bulge increases the rotation curve slopes down to where, in a structure with a bulge and disk we get a horizotal slope, and in a structure like the solar system, with most mass in the center and little in the “disk” the rotation curve slopes down to a Keplerian curve. That shows the mass per unit area in the range of the flat rotation curve to be distributed as would be expected for a disk. That gives the mass of the rings per unit area. Calculate the area of that ring and divide the mass of that ring by that area. ![]() Subtracting the mass inside a given ring from the total minus outer rings if any gives the mass of a given ring. I calculated the mass inside a series of concentric rings. Simply put the distribution of mass in the disk is consistent with a disk. I find a consistency for rotation curves with disk shapes in calculations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |