What came first in spiral galaxy?

[Strange]

Why they do not try to find if that process is feasible?

 

What on Earth makes you think they don't?

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=black+hole+merger

http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+merger+AND+black+hole/0/1/0/all/0/1

 

 

Is it feasible that a crash between two cars can create a new truck?

 

Do you really think that is a sensible question? Really?

 

That is as stupid as Creationist arguments against evolution. There is clearly no point discussing science with someone who can ask a question like that.

 

 

Sorry, but so far I didn't get a real answer if two smalls galaxies with two small black holes can set a bigger galaxy with merged black hole and merged stars.

 

Yes you did. You just chose to ignore it.

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=galaxy+merger

http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND+galaxy+merger/0/1/0/all/0/1

[David Levy]

Strange, on 06 Jan 2016 - 8:01 PM, said:

By chance, I came across this: Composite image shows two black holes orbiting each other - phys.org

"The hot accretion regions surrounding the black holes clearly show their locations, and each black hole shows jets in radio".

So, yes we can see the jets, but where is the whole mass of the two galaxies???

Don't you think that it proves that collision actually destroy the whole body of the two collided galaxies?

So how can we claim that: "the most massive galaxies in the universe and the suppermassive black holes at their hearts grew together over time" (by collision), if we see now a real proof that the galaxies had been destroyed completely due to the collision?

 

Also, what about spiral galaxies?

How can we claim that they can grew by collision, if we know by 100% that collision should destroy their shape?

Edited January 7, 2016 by David Levy

[Ophiolite]

David, Any chance you will get around to answering my questions in post #48 any time?

[David Levy]

1. I am sure you are aware that science does not have all the answers. That, indeed, is why science exists: to develop more answers.

2. You seem to imply that there is something negative about as not having an accurate number. Do you have negative feelings about this and if so why?

3. You are aware, that if reasonable numbers exist, you could find these out by judicious literature searches. Yes? Have you done so? If not, why not?

 

1. Yes, fully agree.

2. No negative.

3. Yes. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the requested no. at the web.

 

However, with regards to the collision rate:

Based on the following article -

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2011/30/full/

 

"It is a little bit like trying to count car crashes by taking snapshots. If you look for cars on a collision course, you will only see a few of them."

If I understand that message correctly - They actually claim that it is very rare to find collided galaxies.

Therefore, it's quite clear that they might have the knowledge about the percentage of those collisions. In this case, I would expect them to let us know what they had been discovered, and then offer an explanation for their discovery.

 

Based the following articale -

http://www.universetoday.com/90447/determining-the-galaxy-collision-rate/

 

"When it comes to galaxy evolution, the collision rate is an indicator of how individual galaxies accumulated mass over time."

Perfect – fully agree. Unfortunately, they do not offer the no. of the collision rate, as they continue with the following:

"While it’s pretty much a standard measurement, there’s a large margin with no information of how often it might have occurred in the very distant past. By taking a look at in deep-field surveys made by NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope, astronomers were able to get a general look – one that showed a merger rate of anywhere from 5 percent to 25 percent of those studied."

So, instead of giving us the collision rate which they have just claimed that it is so important, they offer their understanding/solution by merger rate.

Somehow, it is almost impossible mission to verify the real percentage of the collided galaxies with regards to all the galaxies in the Universe.

Actually, we could focus on just one cluster – as an example let's use our cluster. We could try to find collided galaxies in our cluster and compare it to the total galaxies no. in the whole cluster.

Again – even now, I have no idea what is the real percentage of the collided galaxies (that we can see clearly) in the Universe.

Edited January 8, 2016 by David Levy