STUMBLING UPON A GRAND UNIFIED THEORY
Copyright 2005 George William Kelly


The idea of using Einstein Kelly as a pseudonym occurred to me after reading New York Times advertisements by a carpet dealer named "Einstein Moomjy." The rhythmic sound of "Einstein Moomjy" appealed to me. Why not rename myself "Einstein Kelly?"

In his carpet ads Einstein Moomjy never compares himself with Albert Einstein. As Einstein Kelly, I feel the comparison is appropriate because I, a non-scientist amateur, claim to have stumbled upon the grand unified theory that Einstein unsuccessfully sought.

Einstein was a young man of 26 when, in 1905, he published his Special Theory of Relativity and immortalized the formula E=mc². I am an old man of 78, who, one hundred years after E=mc², stumbled upon the Bivortex Theory of Everything and naively presents it to be just as earthshaking as Einstein's theory.

Before Einstein's historic 1905 papers he worked for years in the patent office in Berne, Switzerland. He mulled over his ideas about light, energy, and mass while earning a living through the examining of patent applications. Before I hit upon the "Apple" Bivortex Theory of Everything (described below) I worked for years as researcher-editor for a real estate publisher in New York City. I put together my ideas about the universe by spending lunch hours reading popular scientific journals at the NYPL Science Industry Business Library at 34th St. and Madison Ave., near my office. I extended my lunch-hour hobby by borrowing books from the SIBL library, reading New York Times science articles, and Googling the internet.

Einstein liked "thought experiments." One of his best-known thought experiments involved the free-falling elevator, in which a passenger on the elevator does not feel the force of gravity unless the elevator slows, accelerates, or stops. I not only like thought experiments--I use them exclusively. My favorite thought experiment involves ordinary apples--rotating them, turning them upside down or downside up, and imagining them composed of tiny subparticles constantly recirculating to maintain the apple shape. (I made a habit over these years of eating apples along with my quick lunches.)

About ten years after his Special Theory, the then renowned Einstein published his General Theory of Relativity. He spent the remainder of his life, much of it at Princeton University, not far from New York City, searching for a grand unified theory. He never found it. After watching the greater part of my life quietly pass by, I unexpectedly stumbled upon the "Apple" Bivortex Theory of Everything--the very goal, to my mind, of Einstein's long search. However, I fear that in the remainder of my lifetime I may never find anyone to notice it. Most people will consider it a "crackpot idea."

Because Einstein was a trained scientist--a physicist and a mathematician--he published his findings in scientific journals with review by his peers. Because I am a layman without scientific training or institutional affiliation, I have no access to publication in scientific journals. I must try to put my ideas into simple terms that can find publication for the average reader. If I can do this, I may pique curious scientists to translate the Bivortex Theory into scientific language for scientific journals and test it with scientific experiments.


The Bivortex Model

The word bivortex does not appear in the dictionary. I created the word myself. My everyday dictionary does, however, define a simple vortex as a "a spiral motion of fluid within a limited area, especially a whirling mass of water or air that sucks everything near it toward its center." Commonly observed vortexes include whirlpools, whirlwinds, tornadoes, hurricanes, dust devils, and waterspouts. We see a vortex every time we see a fluid spiraling into a drain or a funnel.

Two conjoined vortexes make a bivortex. To illustrate, take a funnel with a cone leading into a tubular spout. Let it channel a single vortex of fluid. Next touch the funnel's tubular spout to the tubular spout of a matching funnel that is channeling a second vortex of fluid. The two fluids will meet in the middle where the two spouts touch each other. The two funnels in this thought experiment constitute the skeleton of the bivortex. The cones are opposite vortexes, the conjoined spouts are the bivortex tube, and the spout junction is the bivortex center point (or core, or radiant focus, or collider or black hole, as you wish).

By the time the two vortexes of fluid particles reach the center point they have become highly concentrated and accelerated. The collision of the two fluid streams from the opposing vortexes results in an out-spraying (radiation) of particles from the center point. The out-spraying particles radiate to various distances from the center point before they divide along the equatorial plane and flow back in successive arched pathways toward the rapidly spinning bivortex tube and its opposite vortexes. (Remember the dictionary definition that a vortex "sucks everything near it toward its center.")

Half of the particles arch from the equatorial plane in the direction of one vortex (Funnel No. 1) and half in the direction of the other vortex (Funnel No. 2). As a whole these moving particles create a dynamic sphere with two hemispheres. This overall sphere of moving particles equals one bivortex (one apple). The tube through its center serves as the bivortex axis. The particle movements throughout the bivortex represent the field lines of the bivortex field. The out-spraying particles from the center point divide along the bivortex equatorial plane and "push" or "pull" each other in single file along the arching bivortex field lines back toward the axial tube and back toward the opposite polar vortexes.

In this bivortex thought experiment, we assume that the two conjoined funnels are not physical objects made, say of glass or metal. Similarly the fluid is not water or apple juice. Instead, the whole bivortex consists of a spinning cloud of particles evolving or assembling itself out of a surrounding ocean of particles. This spinning cloud of moving particles forms the body of the bivortex. Except for the relatively few particles that escape the system, these moving particles recycle or recirculate continuously to maintain the bivortex form.

Let us return to the ordinary apple (the apple that is said to have inspired Newton's thoughts about gravity) as our model for the bivortex. The apple has a vortex at each end and a tube (core) through the center. Just imagine that it is spinning on its axis and that it consists of moving subparticles that constitute the shape of the apple. The subparticles flow down the vortexes and tube. When they meet at the core of the apple, they radiate outward and create the belly of the apple. Then they arch back toward the rapidly rotating core and its two vortexes--some toward the north pole and some toward the south pole--collectively delineating the bivortex field.

Now I shall make my own attempt to define a bivortex:

Bivortex. A bivortex is a spinning spheroidal (globe-like) or toroidal (doughnut-like) particle or body composed of subparticles that recirculate along its quadrupole field lines and thus maintain the bivortex form, which consists of a vortex at each of two poles, a connecting axial tube, a center point "collider," and an equatorial bulge that often extends into an equatorial disk. A bivortex may range in scale from subatomic, such as a proton, to astronomic, such as a galaxy. The quadrupole bivortex field unifies the gravitational field and the electro-magnetic field into a single gravito-electro-magnetic field.


The Bivortex Field

Bivortex subparticles flow along bivortex field lines, which appear to be identical to magnetic and electromagnetic field lines. These bivortex field lines differ from the familiar illustration of magnetic field lines shown by the response of iron filings to a bar magnet, an experiment familiar to school children. The bar magnet's field lines (demonstrated by the arched positioning of the iron filings) generally are interpreted as flowing from one pole to the opposite pole. The bivortex field lines, however, emerge at the equator and flow along hemispherical arches in opposite directions toward the two polar vortexes. (Perhaps the difference between bivortex field lines and bar magnet field lines results from the two-dimensional nature and the lack of precision of the iron filings experiment compared with the three dimensional bivortex.) The bivortex field lines follow the three-dimensional spheroidal form of the bivortex particle. They form a toroid or "doughnut." The hole of the "doughnut" corresponds to the two vortexes together with their connecting tube. Since the overall bivortex particle is itself rotating, the bivortex field lines take a spiral path from the equator toward the two poles, a three-dimensional spiral path that the iron filings experiment cannot show.


The Bivortex Spin

Every bivortex revolves around its tubular axis, carrying along its constituent subparticles in spiral trajectories. Half the subparticles spiral from the equatorial plane toward the polar vortex of one hemisphere, and the other half toward the opposite polar vortex. All return either to the walls of the axial tube or to the polar vortexes, spiraling in opposite directions depending upon the hemisphere. Both subparticle flows meet at the bivortex center point and begin their cycle again.

When two bivortexes draw near each other, their individual spins affect their interaction. Assuming, for simplicity, that the axes of the two bivortexes are parallel, there are two possibilities: (1) both bivortexes are spinning in the same direction; (2) one bivortex is inverted, relative to the other, and is spinning in the opposite direction. In both instances, the interaction between the two bivortexes begins when the outermost subparticles of their equators or equatorial disks come into physical contact with each other:

(1) When two approaching bivortexes spin in the same direction, say to the right, the outer subparticles of Bivortex A will meet the outer subparticles of Bivortex B in a head-on approach. (Try this with two apples, their stems up, and you will see.) Meeting of the subparticles head-on will slow down the spins of the two bivortexes and cause them to eddy around each other. They will become a binary pair.

(2) When two approaching bivortexes spin in opposite directions, the outer subparticles of Bivortex A will meet the outer subparticles of Bivortex B moving together in the same direction. (Try this with two apples, Apple A stem up, Apple B stem down, and you will see.) The coming together of the subparticles moving side by side will tend to pull the two bivortexes closer together. The two bivortexes will not eddy around each other but will continue moving alongside each other in an apparently parallel but actually slightly converging direction. Eventually the two bivortexes will draw together in closer contact as their outer subparticles overlap and push each other along. The two poles of two adjacent hemispheres will tilt toward each other and continue to tilt more and more until the two poles merge. This creates one bivortex that is twice the size of each original bivortex, with a tube twice as long. It is a "doublet" bivortex, or a double-weight bivortex, but it is nevertheless only one bivortex. The two merged poles form the center point of the new doublet bivortex. (The original stem-down apple is inverted, either on top of, or on the bottom of, the original stem-up apple. The resultant doublet apple will have only one stem and one calyx and will be either "stem up" or "stem down." It is one bivortex.)

If a third singlet bivortex comes along, spinning in opposite direction to a doublet bivortex, it may merge pole to pole with the doublet bivortex and form a triplet bivortex. The triplet bivortex will be triple-weight, but it is nevertheless only one bivortex. (Picture three apples stacked upon each other, showing one stem and one calyx.)


The Bivortex Proton; The Bivortex Electron 


At the subatomic level the well-known proton is a bivortex particle. The equally well-known electron is a bivortex particle too, but much smaller--about 1/1800th the mass of the proton. The electron contributes little to atomic weight in comparison to the proton.

As a proton bivortex spins, it acquires an electron bivortex as a satellite, thereby becoming an atom. The orbiting satellite electron occupies a point of equilibrium along the equatorial plane of the proton. (This equilibrium point may perhaps be the equivalent of Lagrange points, which are known stable positions for satellites or other objects orbiting the Earth.) There might be two explanations for the arrival of the satellite electron: (a) a free proton and a free electron spinning in opposite directions may attract each other until the electron reaches the equilibrium point, at a relatively great distance from the much more massive proton, or (b) a swirling turbulence at the proton's point of equilibrium may create a bivortex electron out of free subparticles at that location. In either explanation, each proton will have one satellite electron, and the proton and satellite electron together will constitute one atom. The proton and electron will have opposite spin.

Thus, one proton and one electron join to make up the simplest and most basic of all atoms, the hydrogen atom. All other atoms are built up from combinations of the proton and the electron. The proton is a bivortex. The much smaller electron also is a bivortex. The Periodic Table of Elements gives the hydrogen atom "Atomic Number 1" and "Atomic Weight 1." The Bivortex Theory interprets "Atomic Number 1" to indicate one proton bivortex (the electron is not counted in determining Atomic Number). It interprets "Atomic Weight 1" to indicate one proton singlet bivortex.

As discussed above, in regard to the spin of bivortexes, two singlet (single-weight) protons, each orbited by an electron, may merge to form one doublet (double-weight) proton. Because the doublet proton constitutes only one bivortex, albeit double-weight, the doublet proton will have only one electron. The extra electron either will be lost, or the two electrons will similarly merge into one doublet electron. This doublet proton atom, with its electron, is known as the deuterium atom, or Hydrogen 2, a form of hydrogen called heavy water. Its Atomic Number 1 indicates one proton bivortex. Its Atomic Weight 2 indicates one proton doublet bivortex.

Continuing, one doublet proton (deuterium) may merge with one singlet proton (hydrogen) to form one triplet (triple-weight) proton. Again, because the triplet proton constitutes only one bivortex, albeit triple-weight, the triplet proton will have only one electron. The extra electron will be lost, or the original singlet and doublet electrons will merge into one triplet electron. This triplet proton atom is known as the tritium atom, or Hydrogen 3. Its Atomic Number 1 indicates one proton bivortex. Its Atomic Weight 3 indicates one proton triplet bivortex.

We now have singlet, doublet, and triplet proton hydrogen atoms. The triplet proton atom, tritium, is known to be unstable (radioactive) and prone to lose its third proton or have it knocked off. In view of the instability of tritium, it seems unlikely that hydrogen atoms having quadruplet or quintuplet protons exist, even for short duration.

Does the bivortex electron change while the bivortex proton is changing from singlet to doublet to triplet bivortexes? Although the resulting excess electrons may be set free, could they instead merge as the protons did? Could it be that a singlet electron orbits a singlet proton, a doublet electron (muon electron) orbits a doublet proton, and a triplet electron (tau electron) orbits a triplet proton? If so, the doubling or tripling electron would increase in size similarly to the doubling or tripling proton. I have read that the mass of the electron is 0.511 MeV/c², of the muon electron 105.7 MeV/c², and of the tau electron 1777 MeV/c². This makes the triplet electron (tau) 3,490 times more massive than the singlet electron.

Now, let me move on to Helium, the next element after hydrogen in the Periodic Table. Helium has the Atomic Number 2 and Atomic Weight 4. The Bivortex Theory interprets this to indicate two proton doublet bivortexes of the same spin, in binary orbit with each other. One electron (perhaps a muon electron) orbits each proton doublet bivortex. The two electron orbits are not identical but instead overlap each other, since each is centered upon its own proton. This atom of Helium has the appearance of two deuterium atoms in binary orbit with each other. Its two doublet bivortexes indicate Atomic Number 2. Being double-weight, they indicate Atomic Weight 4 (2x2=4).

From these first four examples (hydrogen, deuterium, tritium, helium) it becomes obvious that various combinations of singlet, doublet, and triplet protons might account for all the Atomic Numbers and Atomic Weights in the Periodic Table. For example, carbon might consist of 2 singlets (with a weight of 2x1=2) + 2 doublets (with a weight of 2x2=4) + 2 triplets (with a weight of 2x3=6) = 6 bivortexes (with a weight of 2+4+6=12). The Atomic Number is thus 6, and the Atomic Weight is 12. Uranium, a heavy element, could conceivably have 0 singlets, 38 doublets (38x2=76), and 54 triplets (54x3=162) for Atomic Number 92 (38+54) and Atomic Weight 238 (76+162). There are numerous proton combination possibilities for the elements and their different-weight isotopes. Too many for me! Therefore, I leave it to the scientists to determine all the combinations of singlets, doublets, and triplets in the Periodic Table.

In addition to bivortex protons and electrons, it should be mentioned that there are also bivortex neutrinos. The neutrinos are to electrons what electrons are to protons. Neutrinos are so small that they have long been considered to be without mass. Scientists now believe that they exist in three forms comparable to the three forms of electrons--neutrinos, muon neutrinos, and tau neutrinos.

Surely, someone will ask, "What happened to the neutron?" The neutron is not mentioned in the above analysis because the "Apple" Bivortex Theory considers the familiar and long-accepted neutron to be fictitious. James Chadwick deservedly received the Nobel Prize for his 1937 discovery of the neutron. Scientists welcomed Chadwick's neutral particle, or neutron, (which had an extremely short lifetime before "decaying" into a proton and an electron) because it served as a convenient and simple arithmetic tool for balancing atomic protons and electrons with the actual weight measurements of various atoms. The "Apple" Bivortex Theory, however, provides a model that structurally accounts for the protons, electrons, and atomic weight, rendering neutrons superfluous. Chadwick's neutron (or neutral proton) might correctly apply to a brief, initial qualitative status of the proton, such as high speed, spin, or non-spin, prior to the proton's capture of an electron.

[The identity of the neutron has been questioned before, for example, by Gordon Kane, The Particle Garden, page 47--"The strong nuclear force is independent of the electric charge. There is the same force between proton-proton, proton-neutron, and neutron-neutron. In fact, as far as this interaction is concerned, the proton and neutron are one and the same thing but in different electric charge states, even as two magnets might be in different electric energy states if a magnetic field were turned on."]


Strong Attachments and Weak Attachments

Scientists have described two forces that hold nuclei together as the "strong force" and the "weak force." They have said that the strong force holds together the protons and neutrons of nuclei, and that the weak force involves the radioactive decay, or breakdown of unstable nuclei.

The Bivortex Theory describes two ways in which protons attach themselves together in the nucleus. One of them is a pole-to-pole merger of two single-weight protons with opposite spin, which forms a new double-weight proton. The other is a binary-orbiting partnership of two single-weight protons with the same spin. These two ways of holding together continue to operate while an atom acquires more and more protons and electrons and grows into more and more complex elements. Alternatively, the attachments may be broken by collisions with other particles.

The Bivortex Theory suggests that the binary-orbiting of two bivortexes operates with a strong attachment which results from the intermeshing of the outer subparticles of two same-spin bivortexes. If these bivortexes are pulled apart, the intermeshing field lines will pull them back together when they are released--like a stretched rubber band.

On the other hand, the pole-to-pole merger of two opposite-spin bivortexes implies a weak attachment because the outer subparticles only push each other in the same direction, without intermeshing. The radioactive decay of tritium provides an example of this weak attachment.


The Bivortex: Gravity and Curved Space-Time

The bivortex model appears to agree well with Isaac Newton's rules for measuring the force of gravity between bodies. It also agrees with Albert Einstein's idea that bodies gravitate by following the lines of curvature in space-time that are induced by the presence of matter.

Newton demonstrated that the more massive a body is, the greater its gravity or pull, and that gravity diminishes rapidly as two bodies move farther apart. Gravity, according to Newton, is directly related to the product of the mass of two bodies and inversely related to the square of the distance between the two bodies. Newton's discovery made possible the accurate measurement of the effects of gravity but did not explain what causes gravity. He said that he made no hypothesis about the cause of gravity. Many scientists in Newton's day argued that the attraction of bodies at a distance with nothing in between was a mystical idea.

The Bivortex Model, without Newton's reluctance, hypothesizes gravity's cause. Gravity, according to the bivortex theory, is the collective force exerted by the moving subparticles constituting a bivortex field. This gravitational force clearly extends to the interaction between the contiguous bivortex fields of bodies that otherwise seem to be at a distance. The concentration and momentum of these bivortex field subparticles are the measures of gravity. Their concentration and momentum increase with proximity to the bivortex center point (strengthening the force of gravity) and decrease with distance (weakening the force of gravity). Thus the bivortex theory explains the cause underlying Newton's laws of gravity. It defends Newton from the charge that his "action at a distance" was mystical reasoning.

Einstein's General Theory of Relativity holds that gravity is not a (mystical) force between bodies but a property of curved space-time. According to him, the presence of matter causes space-time to curve. Other bodies follow the line of least resistance along this curved space-time. This is illustrated by a well-known thought experiment. A bowling ball placed upon a stretched sheet of rubber causes a deep pocket. When a marble is rolled along the sheet, it curves toward the depression caused by the bowling ball. If the marble is moving fast enough, it skirts the rim of the pocket and shoots past like a not-quite-perfect golf ball putt. If not moving fast enough to escape, the marble spirals faster and faster down into the bowling ball pocket never to be seen again, as if into a "black hole." Einstein's theory predicted that particles of light from a distant star on the opposite side of the Sun from the Earth would bend around the Sun on their way to Earth. Other scientists proved this true by observing such a star during a total eclipse of the Sun. With his E=mc² equation, Einstein showed that the faster a particle moves the more massive it becomes, and the greater the concentration of particles the higher their energy. While Einstein spectacularly discovered the curvature of space-time and the equivalence of mass and energy, he, like Newton regarding Newton's laws of gravity, failed to explain the ultimate cause underlying his discoveries.

The Bivortex Model beautifully illuminates Einstein's curved space-time. Passer-by particles or bodies from outside are forced to bend along the curved field lines of a bivortex body. The degree of their deflection depends upon their size and momentum relative to the size and momentum of the subparticles in the bivortex field lines. Should the passer-by particles be sucked into one of the two vortexes, they will arrive at the bivortex center point (the "black hole" that was deduced from Einstein's theories), but they will not disappear forever. Instead they will radiate outward from the center point, along the bivortex field lines, and join the other recycling particles of the bivortex. The concentration and momentum of the bivortex subparticles within the bivortex explain Einstein's observation of the equivalence of mass and energy. The concentration of the bivortex subparticles indicates the mass of the bivortex. The momentum of the bivortex subparticles indicates the energy of the bivortex.

Thus the Apple Bivortex Theory satisfies the theoretical requirements of both Newton and Einstein.


The Bivortex and Antimatter

In the Bivortex Theory a bivortex is a bivortex whether it spins up, down, or sideways. (An apple is an apple whether it is turned stem up, stem down, or sideways.) How one defines the "up" or "down" depends upon the "up" or "down" of the observer. The relationship to the observer is not the crucial factor, however. The crucial factor is the relationship between bivortexes. Do two bivortexes approach each other with both spinning in the same direction (both "up" or both "down"), or each spinning in an opposite direction (one "up" and one "down")? (To avoid complications, we shall stick to approaches of bivortexes exhibiting parallel axes and avoid approaches exhibiting head-on or oblique axes.)

What terminology should be used for bivortexes approaching each other? Should it be same spin and opposite spin? Up spin and down spin? Bivortex and antibivortex? Physicists using high-energy accelerators and colliders have produced "antiparticles" such as antiprotons and antielectrons. Some have experimentally produced antiatoms or antimatter, leading them to theoretical conjecture of another universe consisting of antimatter. But experimentally produced antimatter particles do not last long, and astronomers have not found antimatter stars or antimatter galaxies. Since the Bivortex Theory does not consider bivortexes with opposite spins to be different kinds of particles, it avoids the terminology of particles-and-antiparticles and bivortexes-and-antibivortexes. It prefers "up bivortexes" and "down bivortexes." To shorten these words, it suggests the nicknames "up bivorts" and "down bivorts."


The Bivortex and Galaxies

The famous astronomer, Edwin Hubble, classified galaxies into three basic categories: elliptical galaxies, spiral galaxies, and barred spiral galaxies. All consist of large conglomerations of stars and clouds of particles. The elliptical galaxies are shaped like spheres, spheroids, or ellipsoids. The spiral galaxies look like pinwheels with spiral arms when seen face on, or like long disks with a bulge in the middle when seen edge-wise. Some spirals have just two distinct arms, but often the arms wrap around more than once, get tangled, or break up, giving the appearance of many arms. (Our own Milky Way is a spiral galaxy, and our solar system is located in one of its arms.) Barred spirals are similar to spirals but differ by having a rectangular bar stretched across the center, with a single arm spiraling out of each end of the bar. One other type, which does not fit into these three, is called irregulars.

Scientists have never settled just how galaxies formed or how they evolved into Hubble's categories. Some scientists say that large clouds of particles "collapsed" (a favorite word) from the effects of gravity and formed rotating spheroids that gradually turned into galaxies. If the spheroids rotated slowly, they became elliptical galaxies. If the spheroids rotated quickly, they flattened into disks with a central bulge, and the disks then broke up into separate arms to create spiral galaxies.

The Bivortex Theory agrees that galaxies evolve from large clouds of particles. According to it, a bivortex forms within a cloud of particles, similarly to the formation of a tropical storm or tornado. Cloud particles do not "collapse" but instead spiral into the two polar vortexes of the bivortex, swirl faster and faster into the bivortex tube, meet at the bivortex center point, swirl outward to produce a bivortex equatorial bulge and, ultimately, an equatorial disk beyond the bulge.  All along the equatorial plane, the particles arch back again toward the polar vortexes. Being in open space, the bivortex is not constrained, as is a tropical storm by touching the Earth's surface, and consequently forms a sphere. As the bivortex continues to radiate particles outward at its equator, its shape becomes ellipsoidal. At this point the elliptical galaxy, minus an equatorial disk, is complete. It may remain an elliptical galaxy as long as the conditions are appropriate, such as speed of rotation, supply of cloud particles, and unobstructed motion through space.

According to the Bivortex Theory, all galaxies, including the elliptical galaxy, are variations of the barred galaxy. The bivortex tube (Hubble's "bar") passes through the center of every galaxy. In the elliptical galaxy this axial bar is concealed by the concentration of particles in the ellipsoid. In spiral galaxies the "bar" also is generally concealed, but in some a hint of the bar is visible. Finally, in barred spiral galaxies the bar is quite obvious, being scantily clothed by a thin accumulation of particles.

How do galaxies evolve into ellipticals, spirals, and barred spirals? The Bivortex Theory offers an explanation of the development of spiral arms that differs from the view usually given.

Scientists generally refer to the equatorial disks seen in many galaxies as "accretion disks," implying that cloud particles travel inward along the rotating disks until they are deposited on the galaxy itself at the base of the disks. Some have said the disks eventually warp and split up into spiral arms. This sequence presents the problem that the spiral arms would be expected to "wind up" tighter and tighter, but observations show, to the contrary, that the spiral arms remain distinct. In the 1960's scientists suggested that "density waves" moving outward from the galactic center might maintain separation of the arms.

The Bivortex Theory holds that galactic disks are extensions of the bivortex equatorial bulge emanating from the center point of the bivortex. The bivortex field lines flowing outward along the equator and back to the poles define the disks. The disks could be called "expulsion disks" rather than "accretion disks," but since they do indeed carry particles back toward the two polar vortexes, it may be best to call them "equatorial disks."

 The development of galaxy spiral arms, according to the Bivortex Theory, does not begin with the equatorial disks, at all, but instead with bipolar jets. These powerful, high-speed jets spewing out of both poles of bivortex radio galaxies first became visible to astronomers with the advent of radio telescopes. The jets stretch out millions of light years from the opposite poles of a galaxy before trailing off in puffs of intense radio energy. They appear to rotate and are highly collimated. They carry enormous amounts of material, and star formation takes place inside them. The Bivortex Theory suggests that, as the galaxy with its two jets moves through space, one jet may meet more resistance than the other from cloud particles or other objects in its path and slow it down relative to its counterpart jet. This one-sided resistance initiates tumbling by the galaxy. The galaxy tumbles pole over pole, and the jets wrap around the tumbling original galaxy to form the arms of a newly evolved spiral galaxy. The galaxy continues to spin on its original axis while tumbling on a second, new axis.

The spiral galaxy now has two axes. The bivortex tube ("bar") continues rotating on its original axis with the original equatorial disk at its center; however, a jet now extends from each pole. The galactic spiral created by tumbling of the two polar jets becomes a second, much larger equatorial disk, with an axis perpendicular to the original axis. Both axes pass through the center point of the original bivortex tube, spinning at right angles to each other.

The recirculating flow of particles of the original equatorial disk may provide a barrier that separates the two tumbling, spiraling polar jets and prevents them from coalescing with each other over a long period of time.

Additionally, the two spiral arms may each be likened to a tornado descending from the eye of a cyclone.  As a tornado extends the eye or vortex of a cyclone downward by sucking available particles into a tighter and tighter tube, so a bivortex galaxy that has achieved a sudden burst of energy might extend bipolar jets, the eyes and walls of which would maintain their tube-like integrity over a long period of time.    



- posted by George William Kelly @ 10:51 AM