Whirlpool Galaxy Genesis - M51a

This Physics Simulation tries to find out the M51-a Galaxy Evolution. One big Black Hole in the center of NGC 5194 holds the spiral dynamics while another lighter black hole flies near the big one and is captured in a circular orbit. On the way nearby stars form the satellite galaxy NGC 5195.

This video has been crunched with Computer Physics Lab using inexact Particle-to-Black-Hole algorithm. Rendered in 3 minutes on a PC notebook.

Black Hole Tidal Force transform the original shape of NGC 5194. This simulation render 1 million particles.

Keywords: NGC5194 NGC5195 Tidal Gravitational Force Gravity Physics Simulation 2D Computer Galaxy Core Arms Astronomy Newtonian Black Hole Interaction Dynamics Science Astrophysics

• Category

  Science & Technology

[Richard E. Burnette]

fantastic

[CumputerPhysiscsLab]

Thanks!

[aimoon]

are the two black holes the only source of gravity?

[CumputerPhysiscsLab]

Yes, that's right.

[Robert Cheshire]

p.p.s Remember that our Sun would be a pinpoint on this image. What makes the traces visible is where the tiny masses or clumps of mass have collided with, or disturbed more "orbit settled" masses such that form the spiral arms or other denser areas. Sun-sized masses are too far away to be distinguished in freer space. e.g. no gas or stellar cloud = no visible "jetstream". Check the tangential angles of the globular clusters in the brownish spiral arms and see matches in the outer reaches.

[Robert Cheshire]

p.s. Tilting the image into circular helps in this process (Photoshop tilts as good as any). If you tilt back to normal with your "overlay" now superimposed, the image and radial trajectories can be seen in original elliptic state. You may need to look hard at first but then, once familiar, you'll see tens more of these tracks and even follow "Y" shaped collision resultant tracks. All emanating from the core and ploughing through the spiral arms. Blotting the bright core can help at first.

[Robert Cheshire]

Couple just that, with the fact that in a hundred years or so, Theoretical Physics has produced next to no results other than ardent confirmations of the "theoretical". Any irate, or even High Rate taxpayer will confirm that. Today we have wild guesses with complicated or convoluted science, and still no results. What "qualifications" are required? I'm constantly told that I wouldn't understand the "science". I know resultant progress when I see it, just as the tractor replaced the plough horse.

[Robert Cheshire]

Thank you flowerbower. I had hoped that I would be very far from the point where opinion starts to take precedence over established fact. From you, that is praise indeed. You point out that Black Holes, Dark Matters, Higgs Bosons, Big Bangs etc etc are all matters of opinion since they have no evidence of any nature. If schoolchildren are now pointing this out, then my opinion is, once again, a request for review and revision of the science behind them. No offence intended.

[flowerbower]

You have got that right; the point in physics where 'opinion' starts to take precedence over established fact is so far from where you are that it might as well be in a different galaxy.

[Robert Cheshire]

Since flowerbower appears to be the only one "qualified" to pass opinion..His comments allow me to rest my case.

[flowerbower]

Personal attack is all that you deserve; keep your ignorant opinions out of science - you are not qualified. Perhaps I should not have called you arty: an arty person would have known the full saying, "the world, his wife and his dog". Then again, perhaps you were too lazy to mention the dog.

[Robert Cheshire]

I see flowerbower, that in a few places I join or raise question, you are there with insult and personal attack. It is apparent to the world and his wife that your many comments are based on pure vitriol. Denigration and attempted ridicule are not normally the practices of those who are sure of their knowledge. I will not rejoin with personal attack but point readers to your almost entirely negative slant on that which you deem as "lowly" or "lazy" in most professions.