Galactic Engines

Active galactic nuclei feedback drives the formation and evolution of galaxies

By RSF scientists Dr. Inés Urdaneta, Amal Pushp (affiliate researcher), and William Brown

For over 25 years physicist Nassim Haramein has been describing primordial black holes as the organizational nuclei of physical systems across scale, from the micro to the cosmological. The reasoning is straight-forward, black holes function as the organizational nucleus for organized matter because they are engines of mass-energy generation and their spin—we discuss this in detail in a later section regarding the Haramein-Rauscher spacetime metric—produces a highly coherent region of quantized spacetime that has a specific ordering parameter. This applies for organized matter across scale—see Haramein’s paper on a Scaling law for Organized Matter [1]—from particles [2-4], to planets, stars, galaxies, and the universe itself [5]. Within the last few decades, in verification of this postulate it has become widely acknowledged that black holes form the organizational nucleus for all regular galaxies. These black holes that are found at the center of most every galaxy are truly phenomenal systems: unimaginably massive, these are super massive black holes, some reaching several billion solar masses (one solar mass is the mass of our Sun).

Interestingly, the most successful way to currently account for the formation and observed size of these supermassive behemoths regards Haramein’s theory that black holes also form the organizational nucleus of stars. In current theory, it is posited that the first stars grew from primordial black holes: these “quasi-stars” as they are called were not powered by thermonuclear fusion— hence within the conventional model they are not considered “normal” stars— but instead by a rapidly growing black hole at their center (supermassive black holes grew in quasi-stars [6]). These quasi-stars eventually grew to truly massive proportions and are visible today across billions of parsecs of spacetime as quasars (quasi-stellar objects), the beacons at the dawn of time that shine with the strength of billions of stars, and which are generally referred to as quasars and /or active galactic nuclei (AGN).

It is now firmly established that supermassive black holes reside at the center of most every regular galaxy, and shape many of the observable characteristics such as:

• the glow of the central bulge, the composition of the galactic halo, and the jets observed emanating from some quasars; first proposed by United Kingdom’s Astronomer Royal Martin Rees [7] (also, see our RSF article on the anomalous correlation among quasar jets in The Rotating Universe).
• galaxy size is correlated to the size of the supermassive black hole in the galactic nucleus; the more massive a galaxy is, the heavier its central black hole [8].
• galactic panspermia by seeding the galaxy with terrestrial planets [9].
• and even the rate of formation of new stars; material from the dense central core is fed into the supermassive black hole at the center, and the black hole emits in spectacular fashion the energized material in thousands of light-years long AGN jets that form massive bubbles in the halo and recirculate into the galaxy. See our article Evidence of Black Holes forming galaxies is Mounting! for a detailed discussion of black holes driving rates of star formation.

The nuclei of active galaxies are the most powerful long-lived sources of radiation in the Universe. They often outshine the host galaxy in which they reside and are able to eject outflows or jets of relativistic plasma that emit all the way from radio waves to the highest energetic gamma rays. To understand the mechanisms that govern AGN we have to go down to parsec or sub-parsec scales, where a central engine formed by a supermassive black hole and a surrounding accretion disc produces helical magnetic fields in which jets are thought to originate. The exact role of the magnetic field and its structure, the composition and dynamics of the ejected jets, as well as the feedback effect of the jets on the gas and dust that surrounds the central engine are however still far from understood. [10]

_{The left image shows a ground-based composite optical and radio view of elliptical galaxy NGC 4261. Photographed in visible light (white) the galaxy appears as a fuzzy disk of hundreds of billions of stars. A radio image (orange) shows a pair of opposed jets emanating from the nucleus and spanning a distance of 88,000 light-years. Image credit and description: NASA}

In active galactic nuclei there are massive extremely high-energy jets emanating from the center, and even in relatively quiescent galaxies like our own Milky Way there are evidence of these past high-energy emissions, such as the “Fermi Bubbles” that have been observed emanating tens of thousands of light-years above and below the Milky Way [11]:

These extant galactic structures are clear evidence of extremely high-energy massive events, yet astrophysicists are still trying to explain them via purely stellar processes, like accumulated super novae. Now, new modeling and simulation results, published in Nature Astrophysics this past spring, have shown that the giant lobes formed within 2.6 million years, far too quickly to be explained by stellar feedback—the feedback mechanism must involve the central super massive black hole, it is AGN-feedback.

What these observations show is the key importance of feedback–feedforward processes— a dynamic that we have discussed the significance of in great detail [12]—integrally involving the relatively small singularity at center, and importantly this is feedback across scale, the ~4 Mega solar mass black hole directing the ~1.5 trillion solar mass galaxy (in the case of the Milky Way), a dynamic that many scientists struggle to understand as these are interactions between such disparate scales—like the Planck to the atomic scale, the significance of the interaction across these two widely disparate scales delineated by Haramein as the Planck-scale voxelation of space generates the observed properties of particles and atoms, such as mass and binding forces.

The struggle for many to comprehend such an intricately interconnected universe stems mainly from the predominant purview in which the fractally-nested architecture of organized systems across scale is not yet fully appreciated, and a hesitancy to tackle such a massively integral interconnected model, as they cannot be easily functionalized in computer simulations (a major tool utilized in the study of cosmology). Indeed, when it comes to the feedback-feedforward processes involving active galactic nuclei it is openly recognized that astrophysicists do not yet understand the process [13 What Drives Galaxies? The Milky Way’s Black Hole May Be the Key].

Understanding the Importance of Feedback at Multiple Scales

The role of regulating the rate of new star formation is a key consideration in current attempts to understand the dynamic between the activity and growth of the supermassive black hole at the galactic nucleus and the evolution and development of the host galaxy, as state-of-the art computer simulations based on current models are not generating the correct observed characteristics of galaxies. As an example of the current lack of predictive power—showing there is something missing from the conventional understanding—large elliptical galaxies are observed to be dominated by a population of old fading stars, and as such these galaxies are referred to as “red and dead”. Yet, when computer simulations are run with the relevant factors of the conventional model, the large elliptical galaxies have stars that glow blue… an output that is not in accordance with actual observations. Something was switching off star formation in these large galaxies that had not been correctly identified.   

When the research team included supermassive black holes in the galactic centers as they merged, the simulation suddenly outputted the correct scenario of red-and-dead ellipticals. Obviously, feedback from the supermassive black hole at the galactic nucleus was determining the rate of new star formation. The energy input from quasars determines the evolutionary and developmental trajectory of the host galaxy [14]. The challenge in modern cosmology is that it is not currently known what turns active galactic nuclei “on” and “off”, what is the regulatory mechanism in the feedback process that determines the extremely high energy epochs and subsequent quiescence of the supermassive black holes? For example, it has been hypothesized that galaxy mergers may be one key catalyst in activating AGN, however recent studies have determined that the Fermi bubbles (see above image) and the corresponding high energy output of the galactic central black hole of our galaxy were not the result of a galaxy merger, so what was it that occurred to activate the black hole in such a way?

_{“NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope reveals never-before-seen details of the galaxy group called “Stephan’s Quintet” in an enormous new image. The close proximity of this group gives scientists a ringside seat to galactic mergers and interactions. Astronomers rarely see in so much detail how interacting galaxies trigger star formation in each other, and how the gas in these galaxies is being disturbed. Stephan’s Quintet is a fantastic “laboratory” for studying these processes fundamental to all galaxies. In a level of detail never seen before, the image also shows outflows driven by a supermassive black hole in one of the group’s galaxies. Tight galaxy groups like this may have been more common in the early universe when superheated, infalling material may have fueled very energetic black holes.” Image credit NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI; description credit: [15].}

_{The top spectrum, from the black hole’s outflow, shows a region filled with hot, ionized gases, including iron, argon, neon, sulfur, and oxygen as denoted by the peaks at given wavelengths. The presence of multiple emission lines from the same element with different degrees of ionization is valuable for understanding the properties and origins of the outflow. The bottom spectrum reveals that the supermassive black hole has a reservoir of colder, denser gas with large quantities of molecular hydrogen and silicate dust that absorb the light from the central regions of the galaxy. Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI. [15].}

In the RSF article Evidence of Black Holes forming galaxies is Mounting!  we addressed the work by Zachary Schutte and his colleagues, who were observing the black hole in a dwarf galaxy called Henize 2-10 which was spewing a crest of ionized gas about 500 light years long, stretching from the galactic center to a cloud of gas on the galaxy’s edge where stars were forming, as the image below shows. They conclude that the black hole outflow triggered the star formation of the galaxy, and their findings were published in Nature.

_{^{HST optical image of the dwarf starburst galaxy Henize 2-10. Taken from origin paper.}}

This all strongly suggest that AGN are driving star-rate formation and evolution of galaxies; they are the precursor of galaxy formation. This is supported as well from recent observation of supermassive black holes that reside at the edge of the visible universe and hence are some of the oldest structures in the universe, contradicting the standard cosmology: If black holes are formed from stellar collapse, then how can supermassive black holes be present when the first stars were just beginning to form?

Haramein’s model gives a simple answer: black holes formed first, during the early epochs of the universe when energy densities were extremely large. They then act as the nucleating centers guiding star and galaxy formation (see our article Astrophysics Gets Turned On Its Head, Black Holes Come First, addressing the comparison between the conventional cosmological model of galactic, stellar, and black hole formation, and the model developed by Haramein). 

Haramein's Solution & Unified Physics Across Scales

Haramein’s theory predicts that matter production and star formation result from spin dynamics in the vacuum structure near the horizons of black holes. The spin dynamics result from the inclusion of torque and Coriolis forces in Einstein’s field equations and the Kerr-Newman solution—termed the Haramein-Rauscher solution [16-18]—which describes the dynamical rotational structures of galaxies, novae, supernovae, and other astrophysical structures as driven by a spacetime torque, which is also responsible for the observed formation of spiral galaxies. The model is consistent with galactic structures having a super-massive black hole at their centers, as well as polar jets, accretion disks, spiral arms, galactic halo formations, and the “wind” or outflow coming out from black holes.

The image below is a topological representation of the Haramein-Rauscher solution resulting from the addition of torque and Coriolis force terms as an amendment to Einstein’s field equations, where the usual Minkowski space is replaced by a double torus (top right). The solution provides new features for the black hole structure and behavior, where a double torus dynamic [17] becomes a primary agent to explain the energy, mass, and information flow in the system. In this dynamic, matter accumulates in the equatorial plane of the double torus (purple waved surface), while electromagnetic fields flow through the poles.  

Haramein’s discovery that the ordering dynamics of physical systems across scales are systems that obey the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein’s field equations [1], is congruent with the now unavoidable fact that black holes must be the key piece of the puzzle for achieving quantum gravity and the unification of scales, because they are massive and very dense, gravitational (and hence relativistic) objects presenting at the same time extreme quantum effects. Therefore, black holes are the natural bridge between general relativity and quantum mechanics, or between a continuous picture, and a granular picture. 

The continuous picture depicts a macroscopic feedback mechanism as shown above, though such mechanism does not originate at this scale. Just as water looks smooth and continuous at macroscopic scale but it is composed of atoms or granules at microscale, the same thing happens with spacetime. This is where the quantized solution for mass and gravity, provided by the generalized holographic model developed by Nassim Haramein, connects the dots and completes the picture at this level.

Haramein’s generalized holographic model is based on a fundamental holographic ratio Φ: a steady state calculation representing an equilibrium energy exchange rate, like the kinetic constant in a chemical reaction, only that in Haramein’s approach it represents the energy or information transfer potential between surface and volume. This fundamental holographic ratio Φ has been determined for cosmological objects and quantum particles as well, and when brought to mass units, accounts for the mass of the object taken as spherical as a first approximation. The problem then reduces to finding the proper scaling factors of the holographic ratio for each case: proton, electron, planets, stars, Black holes, and so on.    

To account for the energy content in the system under consideration, Haramein defines a spherical volume unit with Planck length diameter and Planck mass, that he names “Plank Spherical Unit (PSU)”, and that has a Planck energy density of 10⁹³ g/cm³. These PSU stand for the vacuum energy density at the Plank scale: the vacuum fluctuations energy density. By voxelating the interior of the object with these PSU and pixelating the surface area by the equatorial disc of the PSU (that represents a bit of information as well), Haramein defines a volume energy (or information-entropy) content, and a surface energy content, respectively. Both quantities are nondimensional, and the ratio between surface and volume information content becomes the fundamental holographic ratio Φ, which is basically a ratio of radii. 

_{Image produced by Dr Amira Val Baker for the RSF.}

When this relation between radii Φ is calculated for a quantum object, such as the proton, we obtain the mass of the proton -with experimental accuracy- by multiplying the fundamental ratio Φ by the Planck mass. Equivalently, by knowing the mass of the proton, one can compute its charge radius. It is extremely relevant that Haramein’s calculation predicted the new and most accurate charge radius of the proton in 2012, even before it had been measured that accurately in 2013 [2,3].  This all is part of the proton puzzle that we have addressed in a former article entitled CODATA Proton Charge Radius: the History of this Fundamental Measurement.

When this holographic ratio was later calculated for the electron, and then multiplied by the Planck mass, Haramein obtained the electron mass, with experimental precision [4].  

When the relation between radii (this time the inverse or volume-to-surface ratio 1/Φ) is applied to a cosmological object, such as black hole Cygnus-X1, we obtain the mass of the Black hole [3], just as the Schwarzschild solution does, and when computed for a BH, the numerical values from both equations are equivalent. Hence, the quantized mass equation in terms of PSU units of quantum vacuum energy density that computes the mass of the object utilizing a direct relationship between mass and radius, is equivalent to the Schwarzschild solution for a non-rotating, uncharged spherical black hole, which is a relativistic equation. 

If the charge radius of the proton is inserted into the Schwarzschild solution, we obtain a mass of 10¹⁴ g, the exact same value than when computing the mass of the proton employing the volume-to-surface ratio 1/Φ and multiplying it by the Planck mass. This strongly suggests that the proton also obeys the condition of a black hole [2].

The implications and consequences of such coincidences are extremely profound. First, it means that spacetime is quantized with the very small granular structure of the Planck scale. General relativity as defined by Einstein assumes a smooth spacetime and it is applied at the large scale of planets, stars, and galaxies. Haramein has discovered that spacetime at the quantum level is not smooth but granular.

Secondly, it means that this quantization is what defines the masses and dynamics not only of atomic and subatomic particles, but of the structure of the universe, as well. The mass of the object emerges from the quantum vacuum, as proposed by stochastics electrodynamics [19]. 

Thirdly, if we input the Planck mass inside the Schwarzschild solution, we obtain a Schwarzschild radius of two times the Planck length (or four times the Planck radius). The radius of a Planck mass black hole is 4 times larger than the Planck radius and this fact will be important when we look at the possibility of the PSU as a wormhole termination, because this novel approach to gravity and mass also computes an energy-mass content for the proton which is obtained by multiplying the energy content in the proton (R), by the Planck mass, what gives 10⁵⁵g; a value in accordance to the baryonic mass of the universe. Could it be that the proton is the holographic unit of the universe? Since this energy-mass content of 10⁵⁵g, and the former Schwarzschild mass of 10¹⁴g (that we also call holographic mass), are not the reported rest-mass of the proton of 10^-24g measured in experiments, then, what do they mean? 

The holographic principle as stablished by ‘t Hooft [20-22] and later further developed by Susskind [23] states that a region with surface boundary of area A is fully described by no more than A/4 degrees of freedom, or about 1 bit of information per Planck area. However, Bousso [22] noted that the volume information content exceeds the surface area one for all systems larger than the Planck scale. Thus, the result obtained when only the surface is considered is at odds with the much larger number of degrees of freedom when the volume is considered. One wonders then if whether Bekenstein-Hawking entropy counts all Boolean states inside a black hole or only the ones distinguishable to the external observer. If that were the case, then this could be the reason why 96% of the mass-energy of the universe seems to be missing in cosmological models, and it has been inserted as dark mass and dark energy. Curiously enough, this missing 96% is not considered when computing the radius of the Universe as if it were a black hole. By only considering the baryonic mass in the Schwarzschild solution for a black hole, then the universe doesn’t seem to obey the Schwarzschild condition. When considering all energy mass contributions, including dark mass and dark energy, the universe obeys the Schwarzschild condition, just as the Schwarzschild proton. Haramein shows that the energy-mass content of 10⁵⁵g inside the proton, is deeply related to the dark energy content of the universe [5].

Evidently, something huge is missing in the current understanding of the physical world, mainly because the vacuum fluctuations inside the volume of all matter are not being properly accounted for. It then follows that modern physics is unable to satisfactorily explain the origin of mass, or what it really means.

In the case of the proton, we now understand that the mass we measure of 10^-24g, is just that part of the information/energy available to the outside from its surface or event horizon. The gravitational component of the proton is the strong force [3], which can now be interpreted as the gravitational attraction between Schwarzschild protons with holographic mass of 10¹⁴ g. The strong force is just the Yukawa potential of the gravitational force near the event horizon of the proton, that drops very fast as we move away from this horizon, and is called gravity once it's far from the horizon. This is why people think that gravity is a weak force.

As Nassim Haramein explains:

"Gravity seems weak only away from the event horizon (...). You have a singularity at the center of a proton; when you are looking at a proton, you are looking at a black hole, and like all black holes in the universe, it has the power to overcome electromagnetic fields. That is the definition of a back hole (...)

(...) it's because they don't know the source of mass, and when you tell physicists they tell you "yeah well, but you really need a very big mass", and that is wrong, actually you don't need a very large mass for a black hole, you just need a high energy density. They are all confused about this (...)

The mass we measure is after this Yukawa potential, so it is screened, we only see a very small portion of the energy, but we see the force, we call it the strong force."

A Unified Principle for Organized Matter Across Scale

Coming back to the implications of the proton as the holographic unit of the Universe, and considering that the proton obeys the Schwarzschild condition, and therefore satisfies the conditions of a wormhole metric: this means that the surface of the proton has η = 10⁴⁰ wormhole terminations, such that the volume information is not only the result of the information/entropy surface bound of the local environment, but may also be non-local, due to these wormhole interactions like those proposed by a conjecture (known as ER=EPR conjecture) in which black hole interiors are connected to each other through micro wormholes [24].

Such a network of entangled protons could allow for an information transfer and flow across scales, that actualizes the information in all protons seemingly instantaneously. This would imply a quasi-instantaneous feedback-feedforward mechanism at microscale and below, that could account for the creation and organization of all matter in the universe. The universe would therefore be a nexus of multiple scaled black holes creating a complex feedback-feedforward machinery at the origin of everything that is; the precursors of atoms, stars, and galaxy formation, and their respective evolutions. 

This seems plausible given the fact that immediately following the so-called Big Bang, energy densities would be so great that black holes should be expected to be produced in vast quantities. Calculations showed that the size of the black hole is determined by the time-evolution following the Big Bang, which is to say that black holes smaller than a stellar mass could have formed in the earliest stages, known as primordial black holes (PBHs). Therefore, at a Planck time after the Big Bang (which is ~10^-43­s), black holes of Planck mass (~10^-5g) would form (see Bernard Carr, Quantum Black holes as the Link Between Microphysics and Macrophysics, 2017).

In the context of the structure of spacetime described by the generalized holographic model in terms of discrete Planck Spherical Units, the continuous picture provided by the Haramein-Rauscher solution is the equivalent of the description of a gradient density change between cosmological scale and quantum scale, producing a fundamental torque in the vacuum density at the source of spin. When we consider the co-moving Planck particles or PSUs coherently rotating, we can imagine the dual torus structure being generated in the vicinity of the “fluid dynamics” of the Planck plasma orbiting at high velocity in a region of space and generating highly structured vortexes or “jets” at its poles. Vorticity in black holes has recently been proved (see the paper published in Nature black holes support vortexes structures within).

The fact that the Planck Spherical Unit (PSU) is necessary to achieve Quantum Gravity, implies that the PSU is not just related to a unit of measure. It is a fundamental unit of the Universe. And the recent redefinition of the SI units so that they derive from the fixation of the Plank constant, supports this view; our units of measure are now completely described in terms of vacuum and quantum regime properties, which are fundamental agents.

Having all units defined relative to the Planck constant, the only remaining issue is the limitation posed by the gravitational constant G upon which all Planck units depend. G is the constant with the lowest accuracy at 10^-5 digits, while other constants have accuracies at least of 10^-9. Therefore, the accuracy of G is a limiting factor. 

Now that the Planck constant has been fixed to a more accurate value and now that the units of mass depend on it, the increase in the accuracy of G depends only on achieving the solution to quantum gravity, and that's where the generalized holographic model reaches its climax. We already have the complete solution to quantum gravity expressed in terms of a scaling surface-to-volume ratio 𝝓.

Haramein’s coming paper, entitled Scale invariant Unification of Forces, Fields, and Particles in a Quantum Vacuum Plasma, will demonstrate the unification of all the units, constants, forces and particles, and increase the accuracy of the Planck Units by calculating the gravitational constant G up to  10^-12 digits of accuracy [25]. All known fundamental physical constants can be obtained from this new scaling law model, with such level of accuracy.  

In this regard, work by cosmologists Bernard Carr and Martin Rees (mentioned at the beginning of the article as one of the first to suggest AGN are driven by a black hole at the galactic nucleus), pointed in the same direction. In their paper entitled “Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World” [26], the authors describe how the universe is fine-tuned and various interactions are determined by the combination of only a few fundamental constants, although the origin of these constants is not accounted for in their works. They describe all the different scales (ranging from elementary particles, atoms, black holes, planetary and stellar systems, galaxies, superclusters, etc) and the corresponding phenomena that take place at those scales. Understanding the correlation between the different scales is important as it is crucial to get a coherent picture of various phenomena taking place in nature and also to understand why things are the way they are.  

Even a slight deviation between the values of physical observables corresponding to a particular phenomenon could have resulted in a great disbalance, maybe the universe couldn’t have existed at all. This is what the concept of fine-tuning says and we find several instances in the paper by Carr and Rees where it has been reported significantly. It is also interesting to note here that Martin Rees, in his book entitled “Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the Universe”, has devised the fine-tuning of the universe using only six parameters which are actually dimensionless physical constants. These are N (the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the gravitational force between a pair of protons ~ 1036), Epsilon 𝜀 (Nuclear efficiency of fusion from hydrogen to helium ~ 0.007), omega Ω (density parameter ~ 1), Lambda Λ  (Cosmological constant ), Q (a measure of how tightly bound the large clusters and superclusters of galaxies are. According to Rees, its value is ~10⁻⁵), and finally, D (the number of spatial dimensions in our universe which is 3). 

Another dominant factor is the anthropic principle. First proposed by astrophysicist Robert H. Dicke, the principle states that there is a lower bound on how statistically probable our observables in the universe can be because what we observe can be possible only in a universe capable of supporting intelligent life. There are mainly two versions of this principle, one is called the Weak Anthropic Principle (WAP) and the other is known as the Strong Anthropic Principle (SAP).  

Important deductions about the anthropic principle from the Carr-Rees paper which tell us that explanations of natural phenomena based on anthropic consideration is unsatisfactory are as follows: 

• It has not been used to predict any specific aspect of the universe, although physicists have discarded several cosmological models using this principle. 
• The principle is highly anthropocentric, meaning it regards the human mind as the central element of existence. 
• The principle isn’t explicit when it comes to defining the exact values of the various coupling constants and ratios. The anthropic principle only gives us an idea of their order of magnitudes. 

Although the anthropic constraints do not explicitly tell us about an ontic physical scenario, they may be very crucial when it comes to figuring out why the fundamental ratios have their measured values. Moreover, we do have existing frameworks which might ultimately help validate the anthropic principle and also help it achieve the status of a physical theory. For example, Everett’s many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics may well be consistent with the anthropic principle. According to famous physicist John Wheeler, there could be an infinite ensemble of universes all with different coupling constants and since in the Everettian picture there is no room for a wave function collapse, so all the universes with different coupling constants could exist simultaneously [27].  

Now let us look at how mass and length work at all the different scales stated above. The figure below is the scaling log that was discovered by Carr and Rees in their work. It apparently shows that all objects where gravity plays a significant role have masses greater than the proton mass m_p by some simple power of 𝛼G⁻¹, where 𝛼G is the gravitational fine-structure constant. The full description as mentioned in their paper is reproduced below.  

_{The mass and length scales of various natural structures are expressed in terms of the electromagnetic and gravitational fine structure constants, 𝛼 and 𝛼G. Some of these scales also depend on the electron-to-proton mass ratio, but we have eliminated using me/mp ~ 10𝛼2. The asteroid scale also depends on the molecular weight A of rocky material. All these scales can be deduced directly from known physics except for the mass and length scale of the Universe, which depends on the age of the universe being 𝛼G⁻¹times the electron timescale (h/2)𝜋*m*e*c². Also shown are the atomic density line, the nuclear density line, the black hole density line, and the ”quantum line” corresponding to the Compton wavelength. Most characteristic scales depend on simple powers of 𝛼G; the wide span of so many orders of magnitudes is a consequence of the huge numerical value of 𝛼G⁻¹, which reflects the weakness of gravity on the microscopic scale. Image and Description Source: Nature} 

Many interesting relationships could be deduced from the graph corresponding to the mass and length scales. For instance, the mass of a parameter could be expressed in terms of the mass of two other parameters and similarly for the length of objects. Considering the length scales: Man ~ Planet × atom; Planet ~ Universe × atom etc. Similarly for the mass scales: Planck ~ bursting black hole × proton; exploding black hole ~ universe × proton; Man ~ planet × proton.  

Furthermore, the authors have also discussed several cosmological coincidences (along with their anthropic interpretations) in their paper some of which we mention below:  

• Number of protons in the universe is of the order of 𝛼G⁻²
    
• Considering stellar systems, if G and 𝛼G were slightly larger, all stars would have been blue giants and if it were slightly smaller, all stars would have been red dwarfs.  
• There would have been no formation of planets (and hence no life) if 𝛼G were much larger than 𝛼20.  
• A coincidence related to the weak-interaction coupling constant has to do with the production of helium through cosmological nucleosynthesis. Life could have possibly not existed if the helium abundance (Y) was 100% because Y = 100 % would have resulted in a situation where there would have been no water on the earth. 

Looking at all these aspects, one thing is clear and that is the universe is in perfect harmony. This harmony is brought about by the source of creation, whatever name one may associate it with. The correlations among all the known fundamental interactions have led to a universe capable of supporting life in various forms. Thus, it makes a seeker curious to discover how the fundamental forces and their associated coupling constants bind together in a unified way to give us the experience of life and the universe as we know it, and this is exactly where our work at RSF comes into the picture bridging the apparent gap. This also brings us to the final segment of our discussion. 

Although Carr and Rees figured out the scaling factors corresponding to all the scales ranging from the microscopic to the macroscopic, they weren’t able to relate them to the fundamental constants. They also anticipate in their paper, a unified framework that could explain all the major phenomena and finely tuned observables associated with them, the evidence for which is explicit in the concluding remarks of their article.

Incidentally, the scientists at RSF already have it here through the generalized holographic approach of Nassim Haramein. As mentioned earlier, the new paper by Haramein et alia entitled “Scale-invariant Unification of Forces, Fields, and Particles in a Quantum Vacuum Plasma”, will demonstrate the unification of scales, and perhaps it is the unified framework anticipated by Carr and Rees in their Nature article since the paper would establish a strong link between the scaling factors and the fundamental coupling constants. For instance, it would enable computation of the value of the gravitational constant G up to 10⁻¹² digits of accuracy utilizing the scaling factors thus demonstrating a coherent relationship between the two.

If astrophysicists had recognized Haramein et al.’s work early on, there would be no confusion regarding the observations of active galactic nuclei and the importance of AGN-feedback on shaping galactic evolution and development. It would be expected that systems obeying the Schwarzschild condition will be found as the organizational nucleus for organized matter, as is clearly delineated in Haramein’s scaling law for all organized matter:

_{A scaling law for organized matter of frequency vs. radius. The black hole system is presented in this figure.  Plotted from the top left is the mini black hole at the Planck distance of 10³³ cm through to the stellar-sized black holes, larger black holes, galactic center black holes and at the lower right is a Universe-sized black hole. Note that in between the stellar size and the Planck distance mini black hole we have included a data point for the atomic size which we as well calculate a new value for its mass that includes the energy available in the vacuum space of a nuclei and yields the correct radius to describe an atomic resolution as mini black holes… It is of interest that the microtubules of eukaryotic cells, which have a typical length of 2 X 10^-8 cm and an estimated vibrational frequency of 10⁹ to 10¹⁴ Hz lie quite close to the line specified by the scaling law and intermediate between the stellar and atomic scales. Image and image description from [1].}   

As well, it would be understood that the most important thing for black hole growth and energy output (the feedback-feedforward dynamics) is the hydrodynamic feedback flow of the underlying medium, i.e. the polarizable Planck field of spacetime mass-energy information quanta:

The linear progression of scale of organized matter in our universe from macro to micro, and their apparent coherent relationships, supports the structured vacuum hypothesis leading us to the description of its interaction and constraints on an event horizon topological spacetime manifold.  Through black hole interactions with their surrounding plasma media, vacuum state polarization occurs and produces observable manifestations such as self-coherent collective behaviours [1].

Considered all together, there is a unified dynamic across scale and an organizational principle that unifies all matter and mass-energy interactions, a unified physics. The truly remarkable application of this understanding will not be restricted merely to understanding how galaxies and atoms form, but on engineering and utilizing the underlying formative medium of the Planck field for near limitless energy production, gravitational control, and quasi-instantaneous communication technologies.

References

[1] Haramein, N., Rauscher, E.A., and Hyson, M. (2008). Scale unification: a universal scaling law. Proceedings of the Unified Theories Conference. ISBN 9780967868776

[2] Haramein, N. (2010). The schwarzschild proton, AIP Conference Proceedings, CP 1303, ISBN 978-0-7354-0858-6, pp. 95-100. [3] Quantum Gravity and the holographic mass.

[3] Haramein, N. (2012). Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass, Physical Review & Research International, ISSN: 2231-1815, Page 270-292 

[4] Val baker, A.K.F, Haramein, N. and Alirol, O. (2019). The Electron and the Holographic Mass Solution, Physics Essays, Vol 32, Pages 255-262.

[5] Haramein, N & Val Baker, A. K. F. (2019). Resolving the Vacuum Catastrophe: A Generalized Holographic Approach, Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology, Vol.05 No.02(2019), Article ID:91083, 13 pages

[6] D. R. G. Schleicher, F. Palla, A. Ferrara, D. Galli, and M. Latif, “Massive black hole factories: Supermassive and quasi-star formation in primordial halos,” A&A, vol. 558, p. A59, Oct. 2013, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201321949

[7] D. Lynden-Bell and M. J. Rees, “On Quasars, Dust and the Galactic Centre,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, vol. 152, no. 4, pp. 461–475, Jul. 1971, doi: 10.1093/mnras/152.4.461

[8] J. Magorrian et al., “The Demography of Massive Dark Objects in Galaxy Centres,” The Astronomical Journal, vol. 115, no. 6, pp. 2285–2305, Jun. 1998, doi: 10.1086/300353

[9] I. Ginsburg, M. Lingam, and A. Loeb, “Galactic Panspermia,” ApJ, vol. 868, no. 1, p. L12, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aaef2d

[10] I. Agudo et al., “Active galactic nuclei on parsec scales,” Spanish SKA White Book, 2015. https://www.iaa.csic.es/SKA/Spanish_SKA_WB_09_agnpc.pdf

[11] H.-Y. K. Yang, M. Ruszkowski, and E. G. Zweibel, “Fermi and eROSITA bubbles as relics of the past activity of the Galaxy’s central black hole,” Nat Astron, vol. 6, no. 5, Art. no. 5, May 2022, doi: 10.1038/s41550-022-01618-x

[12] Haramein, N., Brown W., & Val Baker, A. K. F. (2016). The Unified Spacememory Network: from cosmogenesis to consciousness, Journal of Neuroquantology

[13] T. Lewton, “What Drives Galaxies? The Milky Way’s Black Hole May Be the Key.,” Quanta Magazine, Aug. 23, 2022. https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-drives-galaxies-the-milky-ways-black-hole-may-be-the-key-20220823/ (accessed Sep. 23, 2022).

[14] T. Di Matteo, V. Springel, and L. Hernquist, “Energy input from quasars regulates the growth and activity of black holes and their host galaxies,” Nature, vol. 433, no. 7026, Art. no. 7026, Feb. 2005, doi: 10.1038/nature03335

[15] NASA’s Webb Space Telescope Sheds Light on Galaxy Evolution and Black Holes. By NASA August 21, 2022

[16] Haramein, N., and Rauscher, E. A.. The origin of spin: A consideration of torque and coriolis forces in Einstein’s field equations and grand unification theory. Beyond The Standard Model: Searching for Unity in Physics, 1, 153-168 (2005).

[17] Haramein, N., Rauscher, E. A., Collective coherent oscillation plasma modes in surrounding media of black holes and vacuum structure- quantum processes with considerations of spacetime torque and coriolis forces. Orinda: Beyond The Standard Model: Searching for Unity in Physics, 279-331 (2005).

[18] Rauscher, E.A., and Haramein, N.,. Spinors, twistors, quaternions, and the “spacetime” torus topology, International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems, 1373-5411 (2007).

[19] Haisch B., Rueda A, and Puthoff H. E., Inertia as a zero-point-field Lorentz force, Phys. Rev. A 49, 678 (1994)

[20] G. 't Hooft, e-print arXiv:gr-qc/9310026 (1993). 

[21] G. 't Hooft, in Basics and Highlights in Fundamental Physics (Proceedings of the International School of Subnuclear Physics, Erice, Sicily, Italy, 2000)

[22] R. Bousso, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 825 (2002).

[23] L. Susskind, J. Math. Phys. 36, 6377 (1995).

[24] 4 J. Maldacena and L. Susskind, e-print arXiv:1306.0533 (2013).

[25] Scale invariant Unification of Forces, Fields, and Particles in a Quantum Vacuum Plasma

[26] B. J. Carr and M. J. Rees, “The anthropic principle and the structure of the physical world”, Nature vol. 278, 605–612 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1038/278605a0 

[27] Rees, Martin (May 3, 2001). Just Six Numbers: The Deep Forces That Shape the Universe (1st American ed.) New York: Basic Books. p. 4.