If the total mass of a galaxy is M
and the whole galaxy moving in space at speed V (I mean the linear speed not the rotation speed)
than the linear momentum of this galaxy is M*V (M multiply V)

but the M is not constant, it is gradually reducing because M is being converted to energy is all the star (there are 100 billion star in the Milky Way galaxy)

so my thought is, if M is reducing over time and the linear momentum must be constant,
than V will be increase over time.

just wondering any scientist thought of this?

(note: i am not scientist, i study Physics in University but after that never touch Physics again)

M will never change. In no reaction is mass lost or gained. It may be converted to other energy forms which still have mass. I think you are attempting to figure out the potential kinetic energy of the galaxy with that formula

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

That's right energy and mass are the same as far as equivalency is concerned.

An interesting idea...

Although the "M" is unchanging for our universe as a whole despite being converted in many ways, there is one output of energy with respect to individual galaxies or even when considering a region of the universe:

Electromagnetic and gravitational radiation...


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Take and example
The Sun, about 4 million tonnes of mass are converted to energy every second in the Sun.
Once this energy leave the Sun (radiation out), only small part of this energy is absorbed by planets and the surrounding dust/astroid, most of this energy take thousand, million even billion years to reach the target.
While this energy travelling in space, this energy does not has mass (I guess).

If you consider the whole galaxy, there must be huge amount of mass converted to energy every second and huge amount of energy take million or even billion years before reach the target. So, at any moment there are huge amount of energy still in the 'journey' (the process of travelling from source to target)
and the amount of this energy is increasing over time.
So...that's why my thought is - the mass of the galaxy M is gradually reducing over time.

My question is: Does photon has mass? Than what is the mass of a photon?

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. The photon has no rest mass but it does have equivalent mass. Try E=mc^2 and e=h(wavelength) where h is Planck's constant . Solve for m and you will see.

My point is, due to the vastness of space,
most of the energy produced by star in is going into the state of 'journey'. (the process of traveling from source to destination)
And more and more of the energy produced by star are going into the state of 'journey'.

and when energy is in the state of journey, the energy does not has physical mass despite the equation E=MC^2

Once the energy reach the destination (planets, star dust, asteroid...etc)
the destination absorb the energy than only the equation E=MC^2 come into place to calculate the increase of the mass of the destination.

And there is a long delay in time (million, even billion of years) from the point of decrease of Mass of Star when it emit energy to the point of increase of mass of the destinations when the destination absorb the energy.

photon does not has physical body nor physical mass because it is simply a theoretical concept in Physics to describe packet of energy traveling in space (packet of energy in the state of 'journey')

E=mc^2 ...

Does that include momentum and gravitational potential energy? That is, do they exhibit effective gravitational mass?


Could the continued expansion of our universe be a side-effect of shifting (coalescing) gravitational potential energy?...


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Gravity would pull it in. Centrifugal force would push it out. I think the universe is spinning ; about what axis i have no idea.

It is the fact that about 4 million tonnes of matter (mass) are converted to energy every second in the Sun.
That means our Sun is decreasing in mass (of matter) at rate of 4 million tonnes per second.

A Galaxy (example Milky Way) have about 100 billions star, So there must be huge amount of mass (matter) converted to energy every second.
That means the galaxy is decreasing in mass (of matter).

So if you consider only the matter part of mass M.
Momentum of a galaxy is M*V where V is the linear velocity of the galaxy.

If M decrease than V must increase because momentum of any moving body in space is constant.

Maybe this explain why the speed of galaxy is accelerating?

photon is not matter, photon has 0 diameter.
while Diameter of an electron d = 5.635880578916 x 10^-15 m
and diameter of an proton is about 2 x 10^-14.

light can be bent by gravity not because light has weight but it is because massive object causing curvature of space.

Think of a rapidly rotating carnival ride. They used to have the kind that was like a big cereal bowl. You were pushed up against the sides with considerable force. If you were fixed in the center of the "bowl" you would observe objects moving in a curved line towards the boundary wall if they were in a free situation (not in a track). A thrown ball would appear to you as having a wicked curve. The speed would increase due to acceleration if the object were tethered or restrained (Gravity).

This coriolis effect would allow us to estimate the rotational speed. I used to factor in this effect in writing computer programs to aim artillery shells. Even a one minute flight time would require significant correction depending on where you were on the Earth.

So is this an explanation. Is the Universe spinning causing the galaxies to fly apart. Where is the center ?? Where is the axis of rotation. Would the acceleration increase with distance from the center? Is there a slight curvature to the line of acceleration? You tell me; i've done my part. Sort of like a latter-day Fritz Zwicky--or do you prefer Dark Matter or revisions to Newton and Einstein.

So: I suggest a new model that allows for rotation of the entire universe. This would also explain the Milky Way-like structure of pinwheel galaxies. Drop some powdered cream into a cup of black coffee that you are stirring with a swizzle stick and you will see what I mean.

Hmmmmmmm

Galaxys as independent clusters of stars, do indeed spin in spirals, but what is the ratio of clockwise to anti-clockwise as seen from earth? And why do they spin in the first place?

That does not pre-suppose however that the universe, or the observable amount of it that we can see, is also spinning around, causing this effect.

If you look at a time lapse film of an explosion, you will see various bits spinning in the expanding field of debris. In a vacuum they will keep going.

Perhaps the insight into spin can be equated to that of what occurs within the atom. The atom has it's electron/s spinning around it's nucleus without all these electrons the atom can no longer exists, unless of course it can grab some from somewhere else. Since the atom requires spin of some form to exist so perhaps does matter too. We can then go further up the chain and state that perhaps to exist in a fairly stable state that the universe itself requires spin in some form or other.

Think of a rapidly rotating carnival ride. They used to have the kind that was like a big cereal bowl. You were pushed up against the sides with considerable force. If you were fixed in the center of the "bowl" you would observe objects moving in a curved line towards the boundary wall if they were in a free situation (not in a track). A thrown ball would appear to you as having a wicked curve. The speed would increase due to acceleration if the object were tethered or restrained (Gravity).

This coriolis effect would allow us to estimate the rotational speed. I used to factor in this effect in writing computer programs to aim artillery shells. Even a one minute flight time would require significant correction depending on where you were on the Earth.

So is this an explanation. Is the Universe spinning causing the galaxies to fly apart. Where is the center ?? Where is the axis of rotation. Would the acceleration increase with distance from the center? Is there a slight curvature to the line of acceleration? You tell me; i've done my part. Sort of like a latter-day Fritz Zwicky--or do you prefer Dark Matter or revisions to Newton and Einstein.

So: I suggest a new model that allows for rotation of the entire universe. This would also explain the Milky Way-like structure of pinwheel galaxies. Drop some powdered cream into a cup of black coffee that you are stirring with a swizzle stick and you will see what I mean.

Here's the problem: rotating systems tend to flatten out and the universe would end up looking like a super-sized galaxy.

We should see more galaxies clustered in directions 90 degrees from the axis yet space looks pretty much the same whatever direction you look. So it would have to be spinning along an infinite number of spin axes to produce such an even spread of expansion. Sort of like a gyroscope with an infinite number of gimbals.

Also, since galaxies seem to be racing away from us in all directions, a rotating universe theory would have to place us at the exact center, back to a pre-Galileo, earth-centered cosmology. The odds of us just happening to be at the exact center of the universe are remote.

That space itself continues to expand is a simpler explanation. As space expands, stuff moves away. The farther something is from us, the more expanding space exists between us and it, the faster it appears to be moving.

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

Perhaps the insight into spin can be equated to that of what occurs within the atom. The atom has it's electron/s spinning around it's nucleus without all these electrons the atom can no longer exists, unless of course it can grab some from somewhere else. Since the atom requires spin of some form to exist so perhaps does matter too. We can then go further up the chain and state that perhaps to exist in a fairly stable state that the universe itself requires spin in some form or other.

Well, even governments need spin to survive!

The atom is a basic unit of matter that consists of a dense, central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons. The atomic nucleus contains a mix of positively charged protons and electrically neutral neutrons (except in the case of hydrogen-1, which is the only stable nuclide with no neutrons). The electrons of an atom are bound to the nucleus by the electromagnetic force.

So where does this electromagnetic force come from???

Ooooow?..Has to come from within the nucleus itself that I assume too creates
the shell structures around it that the electron orbits within.

Also, since galaxies seem to be racing away from us in all directions, a rotating universe theory would have to place us at the exact center, back to a pre-Galileo, earth-centered cosmology. The odds of us just happening to be at the exact center of the universe are remote.

Now here's an idea on this, Kenzie....what if it is not actually as we see it.
That in reality all bodies not tied together by gravity the space around them is expanding giving rise to the effect that they are racing away from us in all directions where in actual fact it's the space between us that is expanding.

Also, since galaxies seem to be racing away from us in all directions, a rotating universe theory would have to place us at the exact center, back to a pre-Galileo, earth-centered cosmology. The odds of us just happening to be at the exact center of the universe are remote.

Now here's an idea on this, Kenzie....what if it is not actually as we see it.
That in reality all bodies not tied together by gravity the space around them is expanding giving rise to the effect that they are racing away from us in all directions where in actual fact it's the space between us that is expanding.

That is basically what I meant by the last paragraph in my post. Distance galaxies are moving away from us (and us from them) because the space between us and them is expanding. It makes it seem as if we are in the center of the universe but to someone living in a galaxy at the edge of our field of view (13 billion light years away) would also see galaxies racing away in all directions.

I think that this would also apply to things that are gravitationally bound like galaxies themselves or solar systems (or even things like atoms that are bound by nuclear forces) but the distances are too small for the effects to be measurable.

It also bears remembering that the universe is not under any obligation to confirm with the human concept of common sense.

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

Hmmmmmmm

Galaxys as independent clusters of stars, do indeed spin in spirals, but what is the ratio of clockwise to anti-clockwise as seen from earth? ...

There's a controversial survey that suggests there is an imbalance in the noted spins as observed from Earth...


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Yes you are right. Now what causes the expansion ? Where does the energy come form to create the force which causes the acceleration.

I think that no matter where you were in a spinning universe everything would be moving away except those galaxies which are converging due to gravity.

If we looked in the direction of the axis the speed that we are receding from those galaxies would be less than the speed of galaxies receding from us in the out-side of the axis. Standing on a turntable halfway to the edge the outward force would be less than if we were standing at the edge. Yet whatever direction we look, we see galaxies receding at the same speed.

Also, rotating systems flatten. If we looked 'up' from the plane of the rotation should there not be fewer distant galaxies? Yet, whatever direction the telescopes look, it is roughly the same view: nearly countless galaxies speeding away into the distance.

In order for a spinning universe to produce what we see, we would have to be very near the center and the universe would have to be spinning along an infinite number of axes. I dunno, seems kind of unlikely. Good luck with developing the theory, tho. :)

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

We could be rotating in another dimension. Also look at the map of the Coriolis swirls of the weather on earth.

The further out on the turn table the faster the acceleration.

I think rotation would actually tend to cause a parabolic solid shape. We can't see far enough and light would be curved so that this probably can't be verified or examined.