-
Posts
-
I found an interesting map of the Milky Way, the most accurate they, showing it as a four-armed spiral.
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4612
Hi,
Nigel wrote,
Personally, I think the next step is to consider what such a “superuniverse space level” would look like
This seems like a good next step. I have found eight papers published between 1966 and 2014 attempting to identify what Orvonton is. They each present carefully-considered but different reasons for why Orvonton is as small as the Milky Way galaxy and as large as the Virgo Supercluster, which contains 1,000 Milky Ways. One way to advance beyond these interpretational differences is to test how these various ideas about Orvonton fit into the superuniverse space level, the next higher level of universe structure.
Revelation presents a fairly clear and stable concept of the internal structure of the grand universe. Orvonton’s parts are in gravitational rotation about Uversa at its center. At the same time Uversa revolves about Paradise in the superuniverse space level. Orvonton is one of seven similar superuniverses, and all of their centers follow the same orbital path around Paradise.
Each superuniverse is simply a geographic space clustering of approximately one seventh of the organized and partially inhabited post-Havona creation, and each is about equal in the number of local universes embraced and in the space encompassed. (12:1.12)
The volume of space and the number of galaxies in each superuniverse are one-seventh of the totals in the grand universe. So the superuniverse space level is evenly divided into seven pie-shaped space sectors, where each sector spans a little more than 51 degrees as measured from Paradise (360/7). Everything in Orvonton is contained within the boundaries of its sector. This plus the detailed descriptions in Paper 15, section 1, give us a fairly good idea of how Orvonton fits into the superuniverse space level.
Figure 1:
Since Orvonton’s galaxies are rotating around Uversa, Uversa must be at the center of a sector that spans one-seventh of the grand universe. Simple trigonometry then places the center of the grand universe, the location of Paradise, at a distance equal to 2.3 times the radius of Orvonton. The far border between superuniverses 3 & 4 is at a distance of 5.6 times the radius of Orvonton. These revealed ratios allow us to test different ideas about what Orvonton is. For instance, if Orvonton is the Local Group, which has a radius of about 4 Mly (million light-years), then Paradise should be 9.2 Mly distant, and the other superuniverses should all be within about 22.4 Mly.
A search of the scientific literature yields no structures consistent with this description of the superuniverse space level. However, it is relatively simple to query NASA’s Extragalactic Database for everything within 36 Mly to see what is out there. This database is the authoritative worldwide master list of objects beyond the borders of the Milky Way. Doing so reveals an enormous belt of galaxies in the sky – what we might logically call the Superuniverse Wall.
Figure 2:
A 2008 composite photograph of the stars in the plane of the Milky Way runs horizontally through the middle of this (equirectangular) whole-sky plot. As of 2010, there were 8,450 galaxies (nebulae) within 36 Mly. More than half of these are densely concentrated in an elongated belt arcing across the sky. This belt is bisected by a red line, which follows the path of a great circle across the sky. This great circle defines a flat plane – the gravitational plane of the grand universe – which is tilted to the galactic plane at an angle of 61 degrees. It appears curved because it is mapped using the spherical coordinate system of galactic longitude and latitude, which is based upon the plane of the Milky Way. (see post #15233 for details) A spherical coordinate system based upon the gravitational plane of the grand universe would show the Superuniverse Wall as a long straight belt of galaxies.
(continued in 2nd post due to space limitations)
(continuation of post #15593)
Figure 3:
Instead of looking at the Superuniverse Wall as it appears on the 2-dimensional surface of the celestial sphere, we can plot the 8,450 galaxies within 36 Mly in 3-dimensions. We can then look down on the gravitational plane of the grand universe, as it is defined by the Superuniverse Wall, from a position directly above Uversa (the blue 4-point star at the center). The blue circle surrounding Uversa is the border of Orvonton 4 Mly away. Exactly 7 superuniverses the size of Orvonton fit along an orbit that passes exactly over Uversa, consistent with the revealed model. The location of Paradise at the geometric center 9 Mly away is shown by the light blue dot, again close to the predicted value of 9.2 Mly. We are told that the central universe is hidden from view behind a wall of dark gravity bodies. The absence of any galaxies within several hundred thousand light-years of Paradise’s location is consistent with the revealed model. There are several more significant tests arising from this revealed model which this cosmic structure successfully satisfies.
The consistency of this cosmic structure with the revealed internal structure of the grand universe is reasonably conclusive empirical confirmation that Orvonton is the Local Group and that this cosmic structure is the superuniverse space level. Finding the orbit of the seven superuniverses makes it possible to identify the universe location of the Eternal Isle of Light for the first time.
An obvious question is why this structure has not been identified previously. Almost all of the galaxies in the Superuniverse Wall were identified and catalogued by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, which did not begin publishing its results until a little over a decade ago. This systematic survey has identified hundreds of millions of new galaxies. Astronomers simply have not had the time or the inclination to examine how the few thousand new galaxies within 36 Mly found by the SDSS are organized in the so-called Local Volume.
This is an extremely brief account of a significant confirmation of the cosmology in The Urantia Book. A lot of things are left unaddressed, and I would be happy to answer any questions about this finding.
George
I’m trying to see where we are at, relative to your fascinating map and in light of these remarks.
P.359 – §8 The Satania system of inhabited worlds is far removed from Uversa and that great sun cluster which functions as the physical or astronomic center of the seventh superuniverse. From Jerusem, the headquarters of Satania, it is over two hundred thousand light-years to the physical center of the superuniverse of Orvonton, far, far away in the dense diameter of the Milky Way. Satania is on the periphery of the local universe, and Nebadon is now well out towards the edge of Orvonton. From the outermost system of inhabited worlds to the center of the superuniverse is a trifle less than two hundred and fifty thousand light-years.
It seems there is another 50 light years (plus or minus) beyond (the center of?) Satania to get to the “edge” of Orvonton. If the radius of Orvonton is 250,000 light years, then twice that gets you only half a million light years, side to side, if it were spherical.
George Park wrote: The blue circle surrounding Uversa is the border of Orvonton 4 Mly away.I don’t get the 4 Mly part. Uversa to Paradise? What is one Mly? I hate to be so dumb.Hi Mara,
“Mly” is an abbreviation for “million light-years,” which I should have spelled out. Uversa is at the center of Orvonton and is shown as the 4-point blue star at the center of the overhead view of the grand universe (Figure 3). We are between 200 and 250 thousand light-years distant from Uversa, (P.359 – §8) which puts us near the center of this map. The Milky Way is also near the center of this map and is a galaxy that is a member of what astronomers call the Local Group. It is supposed here that Orvonton is the Local Group. Astronomers estimate that everything within 4 million light-years is part of the Local Group. The light blue dot is the location of Paradise, which is 9 million light-years away.
Hope this helps.
George
George – thanks for giving us a glimpse of your work! Regarding current astronomy and the UB’s first outer space level, I think your research will serve as a robust starting point for future studies. But regarding the superuniverse space level of the original and ancient grand universe, I’d like us to take a fresh look.
Referring back to this picture: http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/Weyl_03.jpg
I’d like to propose that what actually locks the 7 superuniverses onto Paradise is not the trivial perturbation of linear gravity (as apparently assumed by UB astronomers), but a combination of the following:
(1) the enormous density of emergent energies moving in a pre-defined elliptical “space path of lessened resistance to motion” around Paradise,
(2) the absolute mass of an annular belt of ultimata that formed within this space path of emergent energy (an effectively homogenous condensate),
(3) the action within this condensate of an “ultimatonic Higgs mechanism”.
Now, when they say:
“Each superuniverse is simply a geographic space clustering of approximately one seventh of the organized and partially inhabited post-Havona creation, …” (129.10, 12:1.12)
I have in mind one seventh of this annular belt of ultimata. Also, that it is within this moving annular belt of absolute mass that superfluid vortices were induced by Force Organizers to evolve into spirals of baryonic matter. And that all this happened when the outer space levels were nothing but a gleam in a Master Architect’s eye.
What I like about this scheme is that we can simply plug in so much of current physics: think of how the action of Weyl curvature (please see this link) must have shaped these seven partitions, and how the Brout-Englert-Higgs mechanism (Nobel 2013 – Physics ) can be so neatly explained by the interaction of clusters of huddling ultimatons…
Before going on, to help warm up the imagination, here’s an indication of what the trillion stars of M31 (Andromeda) might look like if rotated edge on. Imagine dropping something a bit smaller, a bit more compact into the superuniverse plane, centered say 150,000 light years through galactic longitude 30 degrees:
Please recall that I began this adventure by asking, with regard to cosmology: “What IS the UB story, and what statements ‘may stand in need of revision’ ?” My speculation about these early days of the grand universe is simply my literal understanding of what the UB appears to describe.
If my assumptions are wrong, please say so
If revision is required, then let’s explore, and collaborate!Our mission, if we choose to accept it, …
Nigel
( continued… )
( continued from previous post )
The story so far has been about the multi-trillion year ancestry of the superuniverse space level of the so-called “grand universe”, a time far preceding the evolution of galaxies in the “outer space levels”. As the story unfolds, this “grand universe” begins to serve as a central (and relatively tiny) nucleus of an absolutely ultimate and enormous “master universe”. How to estimate the spacelike size of the (absolutely ultimate) master universe is unclear, but in this current scheme, using time-dependent telescopes (electromagnetic wavelength as “cycles per second”), we might think of this central “grand universe” (Havona + seven superuniverses) as having a spacelike radius of less than two million light years.
Compare this with what the UB calls “the first outer space level”:
“But about one-half million light-years beyond the periphery of the present grand universe we observe the beginnings of a zone of an unbelievable energy action which increases in volume and intensity for over twenty-five million light-years. These tremendous wheels of energizing forces are situated in the first outer space level, a continuous belt of cosmic activity encircling the whole of the known, organized, and inhabited creation.” (129.12, 12:1.14)
If we imagine this first outer space level as being centered on Paradise and extending out to a radius of say 50 million light years, then we can see how the central “grand universe” is completely dwarfed by this first ring of evolutionary activities. Now, if we go on and try to imagine the 2nd, 3rd and 4th outer space levels, notice how this central “grand universe” becomes increasingly and vanishingly small.
Let’s see if we can put this in perspective. The 4 diagrams in post-15367 showed a “plan view”, as seen from above. Someone asked about a side view and that “Maltese Cross”, so the next four (figures 5 to 8) switch to a side view or cross section.
First up is a crude sketch of relationships revealed about Havona, the “eternal core of perfection” (see paper 14: The Central and Divine Universe).
[See figure 5: http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/UBCosm_01.jpg%5D
Next I try to show the multi-trillion-year prehistory of an evolutionary superuniverse, involving the conversion of space potency (ABSOLUTA) into primordial force (SEGREGATA), then various phases of emergent-energy (ULTIMATA) and finally, universe power (GRAVITA).
[See figure 6: http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/UBCosm_02.jpg%5D
This next sketch tries to hint at spacelike relationships at the absonite core of that famous “Maltese Cross” (124.4, 11:7.3). Such a conception may be wildly misleading, but it does serve as a starting point for discussion
[See figure 7: http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/UBCosm_03.jpg%5D
And finally, figure 8 is a placeholder for that same “Maltese Cross”.
[See figure 8: http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/UBCosm_04.jpg%5D
[Edit]: I’ve removed this “place-holder”. If the concept of an “inconceivably large, V-shaped plane” (124.6, 11:7.5) rotated about Paradise is really a projection of a projection of “a seven-dimensional universe” (1439.5, 130:7.7), then my glyph must only confound the confusion (!)
For me, the issue here is how we are to conceive of the distinction between pervaded and non-pervaded space. For mathematicians (not so much for astronomers), “logic dictates” that both the pervaded and non-pervaded spaces are distinct 3-manifolds which, together with the midspace zones, make up the sort of 7 dimensional universe Jesus was talking about to that Mithraic priest at Carthage:
“It must be apparent that universal reality has an expanding and always relative meaning on the ascending and perfecting levels of the cosmos. Ultimately, surviving mortals achieve identity in a seven-dimensional universe.” (1439.5, 130:7.7)
With all the above diagrams in place, my question is: do these relationships, suggested by the Urantia Book, offer anything that might help us to explain, or even to extend, the two “standard models” that native science has evolved — the standard model of cosmology, and the standard model of particle physics?
Regarding the Milky Way and Orvonton, I think what we really need is a 3d fly-through …
Nigel
Hi Nigel,
The graphics you have created are quite helpful in visualizing your model. Assuming I understand the basics of this model correctly, I find I have a number of questions.
1) In post #15175 you place Andromeda in the first outer space level. This level revolves clockwise, while the superuniverse space level revolves counterclockwise. This will cause Andromeda and the Milky Way to become separated from one another over time; eventually, Andromeda will be on one side of the grand universe and the Milky Way will be on the opposite side. How can this be reconciled with astronomy’s empirical finding that Andromeda is gravitationally bound to the Milky Way? Are you proposing that current astronomy is incorrect in its concept of the Local Group as an enduring cosmic structure?
2) There are numerous statements in the Book which directly state or imply that the major sectors of Orvonton are observable. “Of the ten major divisions of Orvonton, eight have been roughly identified by Urantian astronomers.” (15:3.4) In your model only the Milky Way (Splandon) is observable, because the other 9 are concealed behind the stars and dust making up the plane of the Milky Way. What statements in the Book support this idea of their arrangement?
3) In your Figure 2 in post #15367 you show the other six superuniverses as being concealed behind the “line of avoidance,” which also makes them unobservable.
“Although your spectroscopic estimations of astronomic velocities are fairly reliable when applied to the starry realms belonging to your superuniverse and its associate superuniverses, such reckonings with reference to the realms of outer space are wholly unreliable.” (12:4.14)
The use of the present tense in this 1934 statement clearly implies that the spectra of some galaxies in other superuniverses have been optically observed and their “fairly reliable” velocities estimated. In this case, these galaxies are not hidden behind the “line of avoidance.” What are your reasons for concluding that they are?
4) Since the four outer space levels are concentrically arranged about Paradise in the same plane – the plane of creation – they are also unobservable in your model. This raises a larger issue. Scientific theories are useful to the extent they are able to explain things we can see and quantify. If the organization of the physical universe (apart from the Milky Way) is not observable, what visible material phenomena does this model explain? How can this theoretical explanation be empirically tested against physical evidence for validity, like other scientific theories? What unique prediction does it make, or explanation does it give, which distinguishes it as a superior scientific model of the universe?
George
Hi Nigel and George
It seems that both of you have interesting theories which are incompatible.
George’s theory postulates that Orvonton is constituted of the local group, which is more than an order of magnitude too big for the distances given in the revelation.
Nigel’s theory cannot explain how the astronomers of the 1930s could have identified eight of the ten major sectors.
Where can you both take us from here?
George wrote:
“1) In post #15175 you place Andromeda in the first outer space level. This…”
George – thanks for alerting me to this potential confusion. I’ve updated that offending sketch to indicate that Andromeda (M31) is in that “relatively quiet zone” between the superuniverse beltway of emergent energies (the “present ragged edge of the grand universe” — 129.11, 12:1.13), and the first outer space level.
“The relatively quiet zones between the space levels, such as the one separating the seven superuniverses from the first outer space level, are enormous elliptical regions of quiescent space activities.” (125.1, 11:7.7)
For reference, here is the updated version (may need to refresh browser): http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/MW_vs_M31_b.jpg
(PS: to “lessen conceptual confusion” (469.2, 42:2.2) I’ve also removed figure 8, that “place-holder for the Maltese Cross” – see above.)
William, you asked what are we to do about various inconsistencies. Recall that I began this adventure by referring to the comment in (101:4.2): “within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision”.
I wrote:
“I’m keen to get on with this revision. But if we’re going to revise the UB story, first we need to work out what that story is. Below is my attempt to describe what I understand this story to be, at least with regard to the seven superuniverses. Once we get this in place, we’ll have a target at which to start shooting holes.”
What I’ve attempted so far is simply to describe, from a scientific perspective, the physical implications of a superuniverse beltway of emergent energies in motion about Paradise for at least a trillion years. To make contact with 21st century physics, I’ve used the action (“tidal effects”) of Weyl curvature upon an annular disk of ultimata to help partition, shape and ripen the distribution of gravita (“measurable matter”). Given the nature of orbital dynamics, this superuniverse distribution of gravita must be essentially flat. Please note, this says nothing about the shape of space itself, this is merely an observation about the distribution of measurable matter in the relatively tiny central kernel of a vast “master universe”.
With this concept in place, let’s now think about which of those many “statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision“.
For example, regarding the distance to Andromeda (M31), any modern astronomer reading “almost one million years ago” (170.1, 15:4.7) would simply read that as a quote from Edwin Hubble and move on. So let’s suffer this small revision and allow M31 to be centered at its current estimate of about 2.5 million light years. As to how far its halo extends, that’s a more interesting question!
Regarding the history of human attempts to measure this first cosmological distance, see this link .
George wrote:
“Revelation presents a fairly clear and stable concept of the internal structure of the grand universe. Orvonton’s parts are in gravitational rotation about Uversa at its center.”
George, when you say “gravitational rotation about Uversa”, do you allow for the superfluid flow of an underlying (invisible) foundation of emergent energies, including the (invisible, absolute) mass of moving ultimata?
Regarding the major sectors of Orvonton, and neighbouring superuniverses, you point to the following statements:
“Of the ten major divisions of Orvonton, eight have been roughly identified by Urantian astronomers. The other two are difficult of separate recognition because you are obliged to view these phenomena from the inside. If you could look upon the superuniverse of Orvonton from a position far-distant in space, you would immediately recognize the ten major sectors of the seventh galaxy.” (167.20, 15:3.4)
“Although your spectroscopic estimations of astronomic velocities are fairly reliable when applied to the starry realms belonging to your superuniverse and its associate superuniverses, such reckonings with reference to the realms of outer space are wholly unreliable.” (134.3, 12:4.14)
Are these two of the “many statements” that will stand in need of revision? I don’t know.
George, apart from this single statement (167.20, 15:3.4), do you have any other reason for trying to model Orvonton as the local group? As we know, it’s hard to find “10 trillion blazing suns” among that motley crew. But think about what Andromeda (M31) would look like if it were rotated edge on… My motivation comes from wondering: if M31 were aligned edge on to our line of sight, and if it lay co-planar with, and behind, the line of avoidance, would astronomers notice it?
Continuing along this line of thought, if we model Orvonton as a more-or-less organized set of superfluid spirals, as implied in this sketch,
http://www.ubron.org/groupphotos/Allen_Obscure5.jpg
… then I think I can give you that 10 trillion.
Finally, George asked:
4) Since the four outer space levels are concentrically arranged about Paradise in the same plane – the plane of creation – they are also unobservable in your model. This raises a larger issue. Scientific theories are useful to the extent they are able to explain things we can see and quantify. If the organization of the physical universe (apart from the Milky Way) is not observable, what visible material phenomena does this model explain? How can this theoretical explanation be empirically tested against physical evidence for validity, like other scientific theories? What unique prediction does it make, or explanation does it give, which distinguishes it as a superior scientific model of the universe?
Again, sorry not to have been more clear. So far I’ve intended only to set the stage for modelling the current distribution and motion of emergent energies in the superuniverse beltway of lessened resistance to motion. The “scientific theory” I am attempting to propose has to do only with an unexpected distribution of those “ten trillion blazing suns”
Nigel
Hi,
George’s theory postulates that Orvonton is constituted of the Local Group, which is more than an order of magnitude too big for the distances given in the revelation.
Orvonton is limited to a radius of 250,000 ly from Uversa, if all of Orvonton is inhabited. “From the outermost system of inhabited worlds to the center of the superuniverse is a trifle less than two hundred and fifty thousand light-years.” (32:2.11) However, there is enough latitude in interpretation of various descriptions about Orvonton to conclude that it contains multiple galaxies and that part of it is uninhabited. The Book does not answer this question definitively. No doubt this is by design. Based upon an interpretation of the teachings alone, Andromeda may or may not be part of Orvonton.
In 1936 Hubble was the first to identify the Local Group of galaxies, which includes both the Milky Way and Andromeda. Over the last 80 years astronomers have reached a firm consensus that these two galaxies are bound together by gravity. Where one goes, the other goes also. This is completely analogous to how the sun and planets are gravitationally bound together to form the solar system, which moves through space as a single enduring whole. If astronomers are correct, and all of the empirical evidence supports this conclusion, then Andromeda is part of Orvonton, since “The vast Milky Way starry system represents the central nucleus of Orvonton …” (15:3.1)
It is still possible that astronomers are wrong about Andromeda and the Milky Way forming a gravitational whole. In this case, Andromeda would be in the 1st OSL. However, in all fairness, it would be necessary to present some sort of compelling scientific evidence disproving this current understanding before arguing this position. On the other hand, if Orvonton is the Local Group, the revealed internal structure of the grand universe predicts that it is part of a larger ring-like structure whose radius is 2.3 times the radius of the Local Group. It is has just recently become possible to empirically confirm the existence of this annular structure the teachings call the superuniverse space level.
George
Hi Nigel,
Your “modelling [of] the current distribution and motion of emergent energies in the superuniverse beltway of lessened resistance to motion” is an intriguing approach to understanding the nature of the time-space torus (tunnel) of a space level. I have not considered how a ring-like superfluid condensate of infraultimatonic and ultimatonic energies might respond to the grasp of absolute gravity. I think you are probably right that the action of absolute gravity on ultimatons in Orvonton has some effect upon the gravitational rotation of galaxies about Uversa under the force of linear gravity. It may be this confluence of absolute and linear gravity is manifest in some sort of “tidal effect” as you suggest.
You wrote,
“George, apart from this single statement (167.20, 15:3.4), do you have any other reason for trying to model Orvonton as the local group?”
Here are some of the other statements which lead me to model Orvonton in this way.
“The vast Milky Way starry system represents the central nucleus of Orvonton …” (15:3.1)
This supports the inference that the Milky Way galaxy is at the center of a larger structure, since a “nucleus” is something at the center of a larger whole.
“The vast star clouds of Orvonton should be regarded as individual aggregations of matter comparable to the separate nebulae observable in the space regions external to the Milky Way galaxy.” (15:4.9)
There are “vast star clouds” in Orvonton which are “in the space regions external to the Milky Way galaxy.” While this could refer to the dozens of small dwarf galaxies which are satellites of the MW, the vastness of these star clouds suggests they are nearby galaxies, like Andromeda.
“In the not-distant future, new telescopes will reveal to the wondering gaze of Urantian astronomers no less than 375 million new galaxies in the remote stretches of outer space. At the same time these more powerful telescopes will disclose that many island universes formerly believed to be in outer space are really a part of the galactic system of Orvonton. (12:2.3)
“Island universes” was an archaic astronomic term, even in 1934, which meant “Milky Way-like galaxy.” This is a reasonably clear statement that many “MW-like galaxies” are actually part of the system of galaxies making up the superuniverse of Orvonton.
“There are not many sun-forming nebulae active in Orvonton at the present time, though Andromeda, which is outside the inhabited superuniverse, is very active.” (15:4.7)
In talking about sun-forming nebulae in Orvonton, Andromeda is mentioned as being “outside the inhabited superuniverse.” This supports the inference that Andromeda is an uninhabited part of Orvonton.
“Practically all of the starry realms visible to the naked eye on Urantia belong to the seventh section of the grand universe, the superuniverse of Orvonton.” (15:3.1)
“The unaided human eye can see only two or three nebulae outside the borders of the Superuniverse of Orvonton.” (12:2.2)
These two citations were considered in post #15203. There are just eight nebulae (galaxies) bright enough to be seen with the naked eye. Three are beyond the Local Group: the Sculptor Galaxy (NGC 253), the Centaurus A Galaxy (NGC 5128), and Bode’s Galaxy (M 81). The other five nebulae (galaxies) visible to the naked eye are all members of the Local Group.
“Some of the nebulae which Urantian astronomers regard as extragalactic are actually on the fringe of Orvonton and are traveling along with us.” (12:2.3)
This is an unambiguous statement that some nebulae (galaxies) external to the Milky Way are part of Orvonton and travel along with it as a group. The Milky Way is one of several galaxies within the Local Group which are bound together by gravity, and they all travel together as a group. If modern astronomy is correct about the nature of the Local Group, it is at least part of, if not the whole of, Orvonton.
“The superuniverse of Orvonton is illuminated and warmed by more than ten trillion blazing suns. These suns are the stars of your observable astronomic system. More than two trillion are too distant and too small ever to be seen from Urantia.” (15:6.10)
With a roughly estimated mass of 4-5 trillion suns, the Local Group is the only gravitationally bound structure with a mass that is commensurate with the revealed mass of Orvonton. It is also the only known gravitationally bound structure which could potentially be in rotation about a location that is 200,000-250,000 ly from us.
None of these statements conclusively and definitively identifies Orvonton as the Local Group. All together and in conjunction with current astronomic knowledge I believe they make a strong case for this identification. The ability of this identification to lead to an empirically verifiable prediction about the size and shape of the superuniverse space level would appear to support this conclusion with a very high level of confidence.
George
“The vast star clouds of Orvonton should be regarded as individual aggregations of matter comparable to the separate nebulae observable in the space regions external to the Milky Way galaxy.” (15:4.9)
There are “vast star clouds” in Orvonton which are “in the space regions external to the Milky Way galaxy.” While this could refer to the dozens of small dwarf galaxies which are satellites of the MW, the vastness of these star clouds suggests they are nearby galaxies, like Andromeda.
For my part I can’t help but read 15:4.9, which you highlight, in the important context of the paragraph before it. In 15:4.8 the book speaks of “enormous aggregations” that are “gigantic”… To me, why wouldn’t that be in reference to the same thing as “vast star clouds” and “aggregations” which 15:4.9 then continues to speak about? And according to 15:4.8, the gigantic and enormous aggregations are dwarf galaxies, specifically the book references the Magellanic Cloud.
15:4.8 – “The Milky Way galaxy is composed of vast numbers of former spiral and other nebulae, and many still retain their original configuration. But as the result of internal catastrophes and external attraction, many have suffered such distortion and rearrangement as to cause these enormous aggregations to appear as gigantic luminous masses of blazing suns, like the Magellanic Cloud. The globular type of star clusters predominates near the outer margins of Orvonton.”
Similarly, for the scale to have in mind for spiral and nebula structures in Orvonton, earlier in Paper 15 (15:4.4 and 15:4.5) they are described as being in size only 10s of thousands of stars, although they are compared to some larger examples outside of Orvonton: “Some of the larger nebulae of outer space are giving origin to as many as one hundred million suns.”
That to me is talking about a far smaller scale for Orvonton nebula and spiral structures than the three full-sized spiral galaxies of the Local Group, each with their many billions of stars… the Milky Way, Andromeda, and Triangulum.
I think there are two basics aspects that there is difficulty reconciling, on one hand there are the statements of size in terms of light years and comparison to structures like the Magellenic Clouds (which from my readings I still see as strongly leading to a conclusion that superuniverse scale is the Milky Way plus dwarf galaxies), and on the other hand are statements of superuniverse sizes in terms of trillions of blazing orbs (but astronomy conflicts with the idea of there being 10 trillion blazing orbs in the Milky Way plus dwarf galaxies… off by a factor of 25 or so).
Extending the interpretation of the book so that a superuniverse encompasses the whole Local Group or more then starts to get us closer to the 10 trillion blazing orbs, although as Nigel points out we still fall short by a considerable amount it seems.
Milky Way – 0.400 trillion stars
Andromeda – 1.000 trillion stars
Triangulum – 0.040 trillion stars (a lot smaller than Milky Way and Andromeda)
Large Magellenic Cloud – 0.030 trillion stars (the fourth largest object in the Local Group)
Small Magellenic Cloud – 0.003 trillion stars
Add all of these, and it’s still less than 15% of the “10 trillion blazing suns” that are said to make up Orvonton. The remaining many lesser dwarf galaxies probably add just 1-2% more I’d guess.
Hi tas,
The citations you reference offer a degree of latitude for interpretation which accommodates your reasoning. It’s hard to say exactly how big a “vast star cloud” or an “enormous aggregation” or a “gigantic luminous mass” actually is. A noticeable exception to these sorts of qualitative descriptions is when they tell us there are “10 trillion blazing suns” in Orvonton. It is not a simple matter to estimate the number of stars, and estimates made a decade or two ago are routinely much lower than current estimates. I found 8 peer-reviewed scientific papers published since 2008 which contain estimates of the mass of the Local Group. They range from 1.9 to 5.6 trillion solar masses (Mʘ) and give a simple average of 4.1 trillion solar masses (Mʘ). This is an aggregation of mass that is comparable in scale to the revealed mass of Orvonton. I’ve listed links to these papers below.
George
4.93 1012 Mʘ (2012) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJ…753….8V
5.27 1012 Mʘ (2008) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008MNRAS.384.1459L
4.20 1012 Mʘ (2014) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014ApJ…793…91G
5.58 1012 Mʘ (2008) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008ApJ…678..187V
2.5 1012 Mʘ (2014) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443.1688D
1.9 1012 Mʘ (2009) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009MNRAS.393.1265K
3.4 1012 Mʘ (2009) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009arXiv0902.3871C
4.72 1012 Mʘ (2013) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.436L..45P
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.