From pulsar to magnetar, from planet to star, from galaxy to the cosmic sphere, their gravitational fields seem to be always associated with magnetic fields, are there any theoretical explanations to these phenomena?

I have my proposals on the paper about a cosmological model, but still like to listen to different opinions.

Guoliang,

Venus, for example, has a negligible internally generated magnetic field, yet the gravitational effects it produces are generally proportional to its mass, just like the Earth. This suggests to me that there is not a direct correspondence between gravitational effects and electromagnetism. Certainly charged, rotating mass is an important factor in generating magnetic fields...

The star or planet's magnetic field comes from a decayed neutron star buried in its center, so the negligible magnetic field of the Venus suggests that it has a very small neutron star core.

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/science-ticker/black-hole-spurts-jets-iron-and-nickel?mode=magazine&context=337

Recently, new observations show that the jets of black hole 4U 1630-47, in the direction of the constellation Norma, carry massive particles, such as iron and nickel atoms, instead of the typical low-mass particles such as electrons. This implies the heavy nucleus are formed inside a quasi-black hole before a jet explosion or supernova explosion is triggered, and the strong magnetic field of a quasi-black hole or a neutron star comes from the intrinsic magnetic dipole fields of neutrons. My cosmological model proves that a true black hole can not be formed, no matter how heavy it is.

"This implies the heavy nucleus are formed inside a quasi-black hole before a jet explosion or supernova explosion is triggered..."

- Not to the researchers. See http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.5080 - its abstract concludes:

"Here we report the detection of Doppler-shifted X-ray emission lines from a more typical black hole candidate X-ray binary, 4U1630-47, coincident with the reappearance of radio emission from the jets of the source. We argue that these lines arise in a jet with velocity 0.66c, thereby establishing the presence of baryons in the jet. Such baryonic jets are more likely to be powered by the accretion disc rather than the spin of the black hole, and if the baryons can be accelerated to relativistic speeds, should be strong sources of gamma rays and neutrino emission."

The observations of relativistic in the accreting black hole binary 4U1630-47 suggest that the material being expelled is a product of the accretion process. There is no evidence that any material detected within the relativistic jets originated from within the black hole candidate, even if an event horizon does not exist. In the more likely case of an event horizon no particles could possibly be ejected from it.

The study indicates, it's more likely that the heavy particles originated within the accretion disk and were accelerated by it, rather than being accelerated by black hole rotation, which should eject lighter particles.

However, there is an alternative that has not been ruled out - that lighter particles (protons or even quarks) were ejected at relativistic velocities by ether the black hole rotation or the accretion disk and subsequently condensed to form the heavy nuclei as they cooled within the jet and decelerated to the observed velocity 0.66c.

The existence of a cosmic axis which is associated with a preferred reference frame has ruled out GR as a valid theory in cosmology, so a true black hole should be ruled out as well.

The strong magnetic fields of pulsars or magnetars, the high speed accretion disc jets of supermassive black holes are in the list of unsolved problems of physics, GR would not be able to solve these problems.

Guoliang,

In deference to your stated viewpoint re. 'true' black holes, I qualified my statement:

"There is no evidence that any material detected within the relativistic jets originated from within the black hole candidate, even if an event horizon does not exist."

That the compact object accreting matter from its companion star is ejecting massive compound particles is most simply explained by their having originated on the companion and accelerated by the accretion process. The supernova that produced the accreting object in these cases occurred long before the observed accretion process began. Your explanation that the compound particles originated within the progenitor star prior to its supernova must, in these accretion configurations, be excluded.

James,

If the heavy particles can be formed in the accretion disc, then there is no reason they cannot be formed inside a quasi-black hole.

Even the accretion discs involved magnetic fields to realize the angular momentum redistribution. So the accretion discs could also be due to magnetic fields, just like the cosmic axis could be due to a large scale magnetic field. Of course the origin of the magnetic field need to be addressed.

Guoliang,

"This implies the heavy nucleus are formed inside a quasi-black hole before a jet explosion or supernova explosion is triggered..."

Regardless of where they're formed or whether there is an event horizon, the idea that jets originate within the compact object is unfounded. That relativistic jets occur only for collapsing and accreting objects indicate that they originate at the object's periphery.

This scenario also avoids the heavy particle having to reach the compact object's peak escape velocity in order to reach relativistic velocities within the jets.

James,

In my cosmological model, I have found the energy source to power the supernova or even hypernova explosion, so to power the heavy particle jets from the quasi-black holes is not a problem for me.

Guoliang,

Then, in the scenario you propose, an existing compact object - now again accreting material from a companion star - produces a long duration supernova that powers a relativistic polar jet originating from deep within? Perhaps you can better explain how the observed conditions are produced?

James,

In my cosmological model, quasi-black holes are rest mass quanta associated with different rest mass densities, so whenever the upper limit of rest mass is approaching by accreting material from a companion star, the gravitational black body radiation will reduce the rest mass either by a relativistic polar jet, or even a supernova explosion if the among of accreted rest mass is big enough.

Guoliang,

In my conception of black hole accretion, or even the initial collapse of a stellar core during black hole formation, while dimensional fundamental particles' minute rest mass is ejected prior to its being 'ingested' into the black hole, its released binding energy, constituting the vast majority of compound particle rest mass, _is_ incorporated within the black holes event horizon as gravitational energy (contracted spacetime). Ejected material does not reduce black hole rest mass - it has never properly contributed to it.

James,

Detailed discussions are on my paper under section 4.4

The Mechanism of Gravitational Wave is Black Body Radiation.

Any stellar objects come near the event horizon will cause intense vacuum fluctuations to produce large amount of anti-neutrons, which will then annihilate and turn everything into heat energy. Even though the black hole will lose mass due to the conservation of energy, the momentum and angular momentum of the falling particles are transferred to the black hole due to the conservation of momentum and angular momentum.

Article A Cosmological Model with Variable Constants (Functions of t...

The universal flat space-time reference frame full of Higgs fields, sitting infinitely far away from any gravitational fields, is the only valid inertial reference frame in reality. The proof of the existence of a preferred reference frame implies that the special relativity is really very special. If we talk about time dilation without referring to the preferred reference frame, then it can only lead to all kinds of paradoxes.