Why stars in our galaxy do NOT orbit around a super massive black hole

Many if not all astromorons claim that stars from galaxies like our Milky Way are orbiting around a super massive black hole which lies in its center. Like most things astromorons say, that is simply not true. The stars orbit their shared center of mass, or barycenter. Here is why:


Marius: Do galaxies have a barycenter ?

Gemini:  

Yes, galaxies have a barycenter, which is the center of mass for the entire system. 

Individual Galaxy Barycenters
  • The Galactic Center: For a single galaxy like the Milky Way, the barycenter is the point around which all its stars, gas, and dark matter rotate.
  • Location: This point is usually located in the galactic bulge, near a supermassive black hole (like Sagittarius A* in our galaxy).
  • Misconception: Contrary to popular belief, stars do not "orbit the black hole" in the same way planets orbit the Sun. The black hole’s mass is only a tiny fraction (about 0.000003%) of the galaxy's total mass. Instead, both the black hole and the stars orbit the galaxy’s shared center of mass. 
Larger Scale Barycenters
Galaxies also exist in groups that share common centers of mass: 
  • Galaxy Groups: Our Milky Way and the Andromeda Galaxy are part of the Local Group. They are currently moving toward a shared barycenter located somewhere between them.
  • Galaxy Clusters: Larger collections of galaxies also orbit a common barycenter, often dominated by vast amounts of dark matter and hot plasma.
So galaxies spin around their center of mass/barycenter no matter if there is a black hole there or not
Correct. 
Galaxies rotate around their barycenter (center of mass) regardless of whether a supermassive black hole is present. 
While supermassive black holes (SMBHs) are often found at the exact centers of galaxies, they are not the "anchors" that cause the galaxy to spin. 
Key Facts About Galactic Rotation
  • The Black Hole's Mass is Negligible: A typical SMBH makes up only about 0.001% (or even less) of a galaxy's total mass. If the Milky Way’s central black hole were suddenly removed, the rest of the galaxy would continue rotating essentially unchanged.
  • Self-Gravity and Dark Matter: A galaxy is held together by the combined gravity of its billions of stars, massive gas clouds, and, most significantly, a massive "halo" of dark matter. This collective mass defines the barycenter and dictates the rotational behavior.
  • Galaxies Without Black Holes: Astronomers have identified some galaxies, such as M33 (the Triangulum Galaxy), that appear to have no central supermassive black hole at all. These galaxies still rotate around their barycenters normally.
  • Why the Black Hole is There: SMBHs migrate to the center of mass because of dynamical friction. As they move through the galaxy, they interact with hundreds of thousands of stars, losing energy and naturally "sinking" to the gravitational center over billions of years.
  • Independent Spin: The spin of a central black hole is often not aligned with the rotation of the galaxy itself. This indicates that the black hole's own rotation is governed by the specific material it recently "ate" rather than the overall spin of the galaxy. 
In short, a galaxy spins because of the conservation of angular momentum from the original cloud of gas and dust that formed it—the black hole is just a relatively small passenger at the center. 



So they think there is a supermassive blackhole because they see stars orbiting that central point. 
But there really isnt anything in that point (except aether), it's just the centre of mass of the galaxy, 
so everything rotates around it.  
What's funny is that even Einstein claimed that black holes dont exist, and that singularities are 
impossible to exist. And he used the same GR theory that others used to prove they exist. 
This is not the first time when GR gave opposite results for different people, as it resulted in a 
contracting universe for Einstein and an expanding universe for Friedmann.





  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The fundamental error of the Michelson-Morley experiment. Special relativity is wrong.

Image
''The  Michelson–Morley experiment  was an attempt to measure the motion of the  Earth  relative to the  luminiferous aether , [ A 1 ]  a supposed medium permeating space that was thought to be the carrier of  light waves . The experiment was performed between April and July 1887 by American physicists  Albert A. Michelson  and  Edward W. Morley  at what is now  Case Western Reserve University  in  Cleveland , Ohio, and published in November of the same year. [ 1 ] Michelson and Morley's  interferometric  setup, mounted on a stone slab that floats in an annular trough of  mercury The experiment compared the  speed of light  in perpendicular directions in an attempt to detect the relative motion of matter, including their laboratory, through the luminiferous aether, or "aether wind" as it was sometimes called. The result was negative, in that Michelson and Morley found no significant difference...
Read more

An introduction to Refractional Redshift, and how it was confused with gravitational redshift (updated)

Image
  AN INTRODUCTION TO REFRACTIONAL REDSHIFT, AND HOW IT WAS CONFUSED WITH GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT. GENERAL RELATIVITY DEBUNKED. Marius L. Vasile @Vasile Effect   In this paper I will prove that refraction causes a redshift, which I cleverly named Refractional redshift, and that this redshift was not so cleverly confused with gravitational redshift by the world's finest scientists- we're talking Harvard, Nobel prize level here- which were either ignorant of refraction, or doctors in doctoring experiments with it. Refractional redshift is by far the most common and yet unknown type of redshift- certainly for astronomers, who have no ideea that it exists. It is caused due to the fact that during refraction the speed of light changes, but the frequency remains constant. Since f=v/lambda, where lambda is the wavelength, it immediately follows that the wavelength changes too in order to preserve the frequency. This results in an increase of wavelength or a redshift when...
Read more

Why the speed of light is Invariant in Classical Physics. Einstein was dead wrong

Image
 The speed of light in a vacuum is invariant, meaning it is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion or the motion of the light source. This is a fundamental postulate of Einstein's theory of special relativity, and it has absolutelly nothing to do with it. It has to do with the Doppler effect and how it changes the frequency and wavelength of the light wave due to the motion of the observer/source. But it does NOT cause a change in the observed velocity. Because if frequency increases, then wavelength decreases, and if frequency decreases, then wavelength increases. The result of this is that their product v=f*lambda will always be constant  when measured by a moving observer. This explains why speed of light is invariable in different inertial frames in classical physics, and why it is not variable as these geniuses like Michelson, Lorentz or Einstein expected. Here is the AI calculation which proves it, which made Google Gemini (following Copilot) adm...
Read more