“Dark matter and dark energy are two of the most vexing problems in science today. Together they dominate the universe, comprising some 96 percent of all mass and energy.
But nobody knows what either is. It’s tempting to consider them products of the same unknown phenomenon…
Dark matter was invoked decades ago to explain why galaxies hold together. Given regular matter alone, galaxies might never have formed, and today they would fly apart. So there must be some unknown stuff that forms invisible clumps to act as gravitational glue.” 1
In other words, the galaxies themselves (if they really were hundreds of millions, or billions of years old) shouldn’t possess spiral arms, but should simply consist of large balls of stars, with more stars in the center and fewer on the perimeter. This is because, as galaxies spin, after about 4-5 revolutions, they should lose their “structure” (i.e. their spiral arms), but for some reason they don’t.
Astronomers believe this is because there is a lot more mass in the galaxies than can be detected, and so they have invented the theory of “Dark Matter” to account for their belief that the Galaxies are billions of years old, when (in fact) they look quite Young. But rather than consider this possibility, they continue to search for something that probably doesn’t exist. In other words, the “Missing Mass” really does appear to be missing — meaning that the Galaxies themselves point to a Young Universe.
Another way to think of this is to look at our own Solar System. The Planets that are closest to the Sun are rotating around it much more rapidly than those on the outside. This is also (almost certainly) the way things are with Spiral Galaxies. I.E. The stars near the center are rotating around the center much faster than those on the outer reaches. However, in the case Spiral Galaxies, Astronomers and Cosmologists believe that the outer stars are rotating around their central cores almost as fast as the ones in the center. In other words, they believe that some invisible force is holding the whole thing together so that it turns around like a rigid mass (or like a Ferris Wheel). For example, they believe that Neptune and Pluto are rotating around the Sun, not in 165 and 248 years, (as they in fact do) but almost as fast as the Earth. Rybka Remarks:
In this regard Rybka 2 has stated that:
“Spiral galaxies possess a central core which is oblate spheroidal in shape, and have an outer thin flat disk which contain the spiral arms. Spiral galaxies are rotating, and they are rotating faster in the center than in the outer arms. As a result, after a few periods of rotation of the galaxy, the spiral arms would become wound up (as one winds up a ball of yarn).” 2
“The period of rotation of our sun about our galaxy is approximately 200 million years. The galactic rotation of the central core takes about 100 million years. Most galaxies have spiral arms that are less than one to two turns. This argument, therefore, maintains that since the Milky Way galaxy and, indeed, other galaxies, show spiral arms, the universe cannot be older than 3/2 x 100 million years = 150 million years.” 2
“A model of a spiral galaxy that is used is the following: The central core rotates as a rigid disk. Outside this central core are that spiral arms and the celestial objects therein obey the Keplerian law that the square of the orbit period is proportional to the cube of the orbit radius.” 2
“If we consider an object on the edge of the central core, it takes 100 million years for one revolution. Our sun, which is a third of the way in from the spiral extremity, takes 200 million years. The spiral extremity period calculates as well over 350 million years.” 2
“Now, in the time it takes a star at the central core edge to make one revolution, a star at the spiral arm extremity would make a little more than a quarter on a revolution.” 2
“… Since most spiral galaxies have spiral arms less than one turn, this consideration indicates that the galactic age is 100 million years maximum.” 2
“Slusher 1 notes that spiral arms should break up within a few rotations of a galaxy (within at most five hundred million years), and galaxies should lose their spiral structure.” 2
“… Swihart 2 uses the idea of spiral density waves to explain the continued existence of the spiral arms. The wave is simply a region that has a higher-than-average density, and this, in turn, forms new stars. The density wave, and the stars which have formed, move at different speeds. The stars are said to age and die as they lag behind the density wave. New stars are formed in the region that the density wave then occupies. The spiral arms do indeed contain many hot and young (so designated) stars. “Older” and cooler stars are observed in the regions of the disk between spiral arms. However, astronomers Clube and Napier 3 state, “One problem is that the density waves seem to be incapable of compressing diffuse gases into the cold dense clouds actually observed in the spiral arms. For such reasons, some astronomers question whether the density wave picture is correct.” 2
“Clube and Napier 4 explain that the spiral arms can continue to exist, despite the differential rotation which would very soon tear the arms to shreds, in the following manner. The spiral arms are to be thought of as being formed and reformed again and again. The arms are said to emerge from the nucleus at intervals in the form of cold dense clouds, and then are destroyed by the shearing forces of rotation. Clube and Napier claim that the spiral arms are made conspicuous by a relatively few, new, especially luminous stars that are short lived.” 2
“There are several constraints and problems with this scheme. If the lifetime of the bright stars in the arms is not less than the spiral arm lifetime, then the region between the subsequently formed spiral arms is still filled with bright stars; hence no spiral structure can result. The intervals at which dense cold gas is ejected from the core must be greater than the lifetime of the spiral arms. Otherwise, spiral arms with different curvature would exist in the same galaxy. No galaxies with differing spiral arm curvature, to my knowledge, have been found. What causes these cold masses of gas to periodically emerge from the core? Why do these gas masses always emerge in pairs at opposite sides of the central core, and only in the plane containing the spiral arms?” 2
“The barred spirals … consist of a bar connecting the spirals to the core. This structure of the barred spiral is clearly contradictory to the idea of the galactic spiral arms being formed and re-formed.” 2
“Hence the maximum age deduced from the differential rotation of spiral galaxies is 100 million years.” 2
What about Barred Spirals!
“Barred Spiral Galaxies: Barred spirals are a special type of spiral galaxy. Like spiral galaxies, barred spirals have outer spiral arms, but only a small central core. In addition, they possess a straight region of stars, called bars, which connect the core to the spiral arms. Some excellent photographs of barred spirals are presented in Timothy Ferris’ book. 1 In the solar system, Kepler’s Third Law states that the squares of the periodic times of the planets are proportional to the cube of the approximate radii of their orbits. From this law of physics, these structures must be young or the bars would long since have been bent into spirals.
The period of rotation of the inner core is 100 million years. Taking one-eighth of a rotation as the maximum galaxy could have rotated since formation, one obtains a maximum age of 12.5 million years.” 3
But That’s Not All!
From Scheffler and Elsässer 4 comes the following:
“As we already know from optical observations of the differential galactic rotation of the stars…” 4
“An outstanding problem of stellar dynamics is the construction of a dynamic model of the galaxy… demands a dynamical interpretation. Whilst the galactic stars themselves in their totality cause the gravitational field, this for its part influences the stellar motions — the interstellar matter is involved in this to an essentially minor extent… 5
“… An interesting ancillary problem of galactic dynamics is the explanation of the spiral structure: the spiral arms can be interpreted as density waves in the galactic disc of stars, caused by gravitational interactions.” 5
“…Full understanding of the complicated structure of the galaxy can only be obtained from consideration of the general, time dependent dynamical problem, in which the gas dynamic development of the protogalactic cloud and the subsequent star forming processes are also included.” 5
The Winding Up Dilemma:
“Like our Milky Way system, the other flat galaxies as a rule rotate differentially, with an angular velocity w = w(R) which decreases outwards. Non circular structures, therefore, such as a straight band lying in the main plane through the centre of rotation, will be drawn out with time into a spiral configuration. The development of spiral structure accordingly appears at first easy to explain. However a spiral arm which always consisted of the same stars and interstellar clouds, thus representing a structure fixed in the material would, be already fully ‘wound up’ (like a clock spring) after only a few rotation periods and thereafter disappear. For a galaxy the size of the Milky Way system this would require only a few 108 years. To explain the high observed frequency of galaxies with spiral arms, therefore requires either the assumption that a new spiral structure be created after only about 108years, or that the observed spiral arms are not structures fixed in the material, but represent a relatively long-lived wave-like perturbation of the original rotationally symmetric galaxy. ” 6 Emphasis added.
However, there is a third explanation which wasn’t even considered, due to the (evolutionary biased and naive) assumption that the Universe is Billions of years old.
That is: the possibility that it isn’t really all that old. A possibility which doesn’t require all sorts of fancy interpretations, and unlikely scenarios, but rather is quite straightforward. The only problem is that a young Universe completely eliminates any possibility of Evolution playing anything but an extremely minor part in the history of life on Planet Earth, while at the same time, pointing in the direction of a Creator: something that evolutionary-believing “Scientists” seem Hell-bent on avoiding at all costs — even if it means keeping the public in the dark while pretending like they know what they are talking about and what is good for our kids to be taught in schools: i.e. that evolution is (somehow) true and that this is how we got here. For they seem to think they are the High Priests of all (scientific and factual) knowledge and that they are pretty smart: not smart enough to make a living organism, but they’re working on it, and one day, perhaps, if they are smart enough they will succeed in DESIGNING one.