Thermodynamics: heat (energy) flows from hot to cold i.e. from higher energy density to lower. For BH engine, is there only one way out for energy – via polar vortex; or also re-distribution circulation into any lower energy density regions of interior of BH? Would either avenue appear thermodynamically (entropic) favorable?
Might one have egress from vortical wall energy density surface, or from BH interior, or just from infalling mass? For galactic BH, perhaps not much ongoing infalling mass; yet continuous beaming? Would rebound off vortical wall energy density surface seem less likely? Would an energy source other than just infalling mass seem reasonable?
Does any narrow collimation of beam suggest a very deep origin? For deep in cusp, might one even have gravity wave generation (see below), and in absence of dust, perhaps B-mode polarization, in a simulation? Also if jets originate from within BH, would this seem consistent with no horizon; hence also consistent with acoustic/optical BH simulation (adapted to polar vortex model) effectively not having a horizon; hence facilitating mass outflow for BH?
For assumed ~20 km (?) diameter stellar BH, 10 -13 of radius would be ~1-10 Angstrom from center. But a few Angstroms scale is ~ energy scale of chemical bond. Would ~10 -13 cm, or smaller, nucleus scale be sufficient for BB scale nucleosynthesis (NS) energy density level? Would such smaller volume of ~10-13 cm, and hence extreme mass density, be consistent with extreme energy scale of assumed directed narrow beam short duration hard (intense) GRB, such as for GRB 080319B, versus lower energy scale of a longer duration soft GRB?
Thus is origin of a jet from an extremely small nuclear scale volume, with associated directed (channeled) explosiveness along rotation axis via vortical cusp? A ‘just so’ scenario? Would this be tantamount to nature revealing such finer scale that exists every where, and for very early ‘universe’ ? Could any mechanism, other than colliding (merging easier?) beams, account for such energy density scale, and resultant powerful jet? Could such GRB small volume of colliding (merging) beams be the same as for entire early ‘universe’ at nucleosynthesis stage? However at least 30 seconds unfolded since commencement of Big Bang; hence universe’s 3-volume would seem larger than mass density volume source of GRB.
However might colliding beam scenario for short GRB be too exotic and infrequent to account for statistics if ~100+ (?) short duration GRB? Alternatively, might just thermodynamics suffice (or just necessary?) to explain a basis for short duration GRBs? That is, energy density flows from high to lower scale. Hence for smaller and smaller volume, and hence higher mass (energy) density, up to scale of NS, might then there be two alternatives for energy to re-distribute itself? As alluded to, perhaps via interior circulation, to any lower energy density environment, or egress out of polar vortex. Could then the availability of such ‘choices’ (or also whether vortical cusp horizon is there or not?) account for the statistics? Conversely might one utilize short GRB statistics to suggest the frequency of any transient egress via vortical cusp?
Other than gravitational potential, are there other independent considerations such as thermodynamics and entanglement? That is, is presence of horizon or not, of any significance for nature at such site? If a jet is generated and emitted from within such BHm, then one would seem to have a no horizon scenario. Thus no choice of opening and closing of cusp scenario; rather just no horizon scenario for deep in such vortical cusp? Then infrequent (?) commencement of jet must be related to something else. In other words, what might trigger, or enhance, such thermodynamic process? Perhaps an initiator, such as sudden change in infalling mass density, or likewise for interior circulation down near vortical cusp, but from inner aspect – see figure; hence no assumption of uniform flow of mass density. Perhaps also timing (spatially and temporally) of such considered significant increase in mass density, together with alignment with comparatively small rapidly moving (in 3-dimensions) cusp exit i.e. assuming no local horizon, or it’s irrelevancy (?) to independent thermodynamic process.
Might a scenario of no horizon in polar vortex be less of a dilemma for nature than coalescing of BHs? Might g.w.s be more common in polar vortex cusp extreme environment than in attempted coalescing BHs case? Also thermodynamics is a separate (i.e. not subservient) description from that of GRT. Is then whether or not a horizon is present irrelevant to what might be an independent thermodynamic driven process? Hence what is occurring near and at polar cusp might be just a result of higher energy density escaping from a heat engine, with entropy directing energy relocation to a more probable distribution? Is such simple scenario plausible? Yet jets are infrequent; therefore there must be more than just thermodynamics, it would seem; analogy to thermodynamics vs kinetics in chemical reactions?
What is the mechanism; colliding (merging?) beams, or ‘just so’ timing, spatially and temporally, of mass density variation and 3-D cusp motion for assumed favorable exit location? Might egress of energy through vortical wall i.e. energy density surface, be more difficult than egress along rotation axis, if mobile cusp were transiently aligned with such axis? What would vortex experiments indicate in regards to comparative ease of penetration of vortical wall vs along rotation axis of cusp, for energy egress? Also see above entanglement discussions. Thus would vortical thermodynamics and entanglement seem a valid avenue of inquiry and emphasize, in regards to GRBs?
Might vortices wobble, under ambient heterogeneity; thus might their apices (cusps) wander or spiral about each other? Hence only intermittent alignment of beams; and only transient alignment with rotation axis – an additional requirement, facilitating ease of egress? Beams ‘exploring’ configuration or phase space, changing very rapidly; thus eventually (how long duration, in 3-dimensional simulation, with sparse sampling collage of ‘integrated’ 2-D cross-sections?) resulting in beam alignment, and also rotation axis alignment? Thus no necessity for external nor internal aggregated mass inward spiraling, as etiology for GRBs? Or are such latter ‘initiators’ also required? Over the age of universe, might one have any significant contributions to new mass, mass re-distribution, and thus to curvature? Might detection of primordial abundance of lithium, or deuterium/hydrogen higher primordial ratio for blazar or microblazar (?) spectra be possible? Might higher than predicted D/H in any clouds in vicinity of our galactic BH (1) be consistent with new matter from BH finer scale nucleosynthesis? Or alternatively from typical SNs (?) or just SN-soft GRBs, more limited (?) NS in galactic bulge for early stages? But wouldn’t latter scenario result in further processing?
For typical supernova, might energy level attained not even be sufficient for nucleosynthesis? 1 erg ~1012 ev and 107 ergs ~1 joule. If there is not any compact object formation, for typical SN, might one have just a bounce off nucleon degeneracy effective energy density surface (not any hypothetical still higher massive neutrino energy density surface?); without any nucleosynthesis i.e. no gamma radiation? Might BH formation just simply result from a sufficiently large critical mass density for nucleon degeneracy (or massive neutrino?)? Might typical SN, not have a residual compact object? Thus less frequently, a neutron star, or BH formation with no beaming? Neutron star formation requires a smaller critical mass density than for BH formation. Therefore easier to form a neutron star; thus greater prevalence than for BHs? Thus do most SNs result in no compact object; and a smaller percentage for neutron star formation, and even less common for BH formation? Has number density of compact objects been over estimated? However for approximately 2008, ~1800+ pulsars were detected, with much larger neutron star number projections (~200,000?) for our galaxy.
For a database showing a not insignificant number of soft GRB associated with SN, then might say 1/1000 (?) SN have a very special mechanism, wherein resultant BH formation has BB scale nucleosynthesis (and more?) with extremely energetic gamma radiation i.e. intense short duration narrow beam GRB? For SN together with GRB, to date has just a ‘broader beam’ (hence similar for still larger database?) been assumed for such longer duration soft GRB? Alternatively, might a long duration, and short duration intense (i.e. assumed narrow beam?), occur concomitantly for GRB? However wouldn’t different energy scales seem to suggest differing mechanisms, rather than just further amplification of one mechanism? Might occurrence of SN and associated GRB sometimes result not from the same object? That is, might one have a binary with a massive star supernova, with some of ejected mass infalling to associated BH of such binary, triggering a GRB for the latter? Hence in spite of any coincidental appearance, actually separate SN and GRB events for such binary system? Would comparison of light curve properties (and any spectra) of respective afterglows, indicate sameness (i.e. thus same star) versus differences, and hence two objects? Might a SN type explosion arise from a binary system, with infall of mass on to alleged solid fission core of red dwarf ?
Reiterating, might one have new matter i.e. new mass from nucleosynthesis for SN-soft GRB? Would supernova, with any associated GRB, be a definitive sign not only for nucleosynthesis, but also indicating black hole formation with jetting; hence confirming BHs’ existence, independent of mass argument alone? However gamma radiation would seem to indicate nucleosynthesis, but not necessarily BH and beam formation. Might this sometimes generate an intense (narrow beam?) hard GRB; and not just a SN with a more common soft GRB?
Over 25 years, would SN1987 data be suitable for deuterium/hydrogen measurement – primordial abundance, or just qualitative? What would spectroscopic back lite hydrogen absorption (and any deuterium shoulder) show for LMC, in general; consistent with past copious SNs and/or GRBs? Might most all deuterium be consumed in SN explosion, such as deuterated (heavy) water; leaving only lithium abundance (distinguishable spectroscopically from heavier metals?) as a marker of new nucleosynthesis from a supernova? Abundant lithium (mixture of 6 and 7) on earth would suggest a similar abundance in solar nebula; all of such mixture not just from Big Bang? If ~1/1000 stars become SN, then 108 per our galaxie so far; mostly in bulge? Would significant SN lithium detection then be consistent with new matter and new mass from BH beaming?
So might intense (narrow beam?) hard GRB, with nucleosynthesis, inclusive of still higher energy scale, be consistent with not only ongoing finer scale nucleosynthesis, but also with fermion mass spectrum and superhadron creation; resulting in ongoing new matter and mass generation everywhere, as described in Spiral Rotation Model SRM monograph Section 47, 48, 49, 52 ? Hence for a very long duration ‘universe’, an eventual predominance of mass in large voids, with our existing superclusters becoming the insignificantly new dark matter? see SRM c/p/c 204, 206, 225, 249 and web pages at https://sites.google.com/site/zankaon TMM
D. A. Lubowich, Jay M. Pasachoff, Thomas J. Balonek, T. J. Millar, Christy Tremonti, Helen Roberts & Robert P. Galloway Nature 405, 1025-1027 29 June 2000, Deuterium in the Galactic Centre as a result of recent infall of low-metallicity gas.
Duncan R. Lorimer, Binary and Millisecond Pulsars, relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2008-8/