About time the mainstream catches up with the rest of us...

And what about the ol' Faraday disk and homopolar motor as a "driving force"?

Remember, the galaxy is basically a disk rotating in a disk/torus of electromagnetic energy... Could it be that energy is stored in the disk and used to power rotation? Nah... Couldn't be... Then again, when one considers, and reads thoroughly:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060302darkenergy.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050902milkywayctr.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050826galaxy.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040913plasma-galaxy.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060403milkyway.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050824seeing-circuits.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050106universe-arp.htm
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060501twoblackholes.htm

A fairly strong case... Out there, admittedly, also possibly wrong (but any science CAN BE wrong if falsified, so that's neither here nor there), but interesting.

Main points: axis of rotation, rather than 3D sphere around a central point like gravity-only would seem to predict (IE, you don't generally see ANYTHING rotating perpendicular to the plane of rotation, it's all within the disk with little or no stray; gravity-centric should be rotating in a sphere around a center of gravity, no? As opposed to a 2D disk.).

And what happens when you spin a magnetic disk/ring? Ohh, right, you get an acceleration of particles along the axis in both directions along magnetic force lines. But that doesn't at all mimic nature... Does it? I mean, it's not like we see it in nearly EVERY picture we take of a black hole, pulsar, quasar, AGN, blazar, radio galaxy, x-ray burster, etc. etc. Ohh, wait... What am I thinking. We DO see it in just about everything we look hard enough at (in sufficient resolution)!

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap971107.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040908.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap060528.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap960306.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap021008.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031128.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap050326.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030114.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020226.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030705.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030501.htmlhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020928.htmlHmm, awful lot of jetting going on. All over the place. Always at the poles, along the axis, often spanning lightyears without dissipation. Why, you ask? Rotating magnetically self-confined charged patrticle streams. Currents in space, coming off rotating magnetic disks/rings. Yup, the ol' Faraday disk on a cosmic scale. Who's with me? Can I get an Amen? Time to reconsider the old gravity-centric cosmos. Magnetism, and its attendant electricity may just rule the roost, in the end. It's funny how we can see the magnetism, but we very conveniently "forget" that Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism. Ya' really can't have one without the other. Rotating a magnet inside a conductor (metal wire, or perhaps PLASMA??) creates an electric charge. And moving electric charges create their own magnetic field. It's a vicious cycle, but quite explanatory when viewed on a cosmic scale. IF (and it's a big if nowadays) you're willing to look, and to see what SHOULD be obvious. I know, I don't have the hard math/science to back it up, but if you LOOK UP photos of black holes, quasars, pulsars, etc. etc., it becomes plainly obvious that they're the SAME structure repeated across nature, we're simply misinterpreting them as DIFFERENT structures. In pretty much every instance we have 1) an AXIS of rotation (not a point, lest rotation be in a 3D sphere around the center of gravity) 2) a generally flat mostly 2D disk of matter or a large magnetic torus around the axis 3) rotation of the disk/torus around the axis 4) energetic jets coming from both poles 5) filamentary structure to the jets 6) cohesion of jets across lightyears of space 7) high energy radiation coming off the jets even at distances by which any thermal radiation should have died off as the matter cooled (read: synchrotron radiation, or electrons spiralling quickly in a magnetic field). How much more evidence do we need to assimilate before a new model forms that is NOT exclusively gravity driven? I just have to wonder. Anyway, I hope the example pictorials and articles help. Not trying to beat a dead horse. I just find that illustrations make the point easier to "get." Hopefully someone out there "got" it and can see what I'm getting at. And possibly provide some more mainstream sources to confirm or deny some aspect or corollary of the model.