Can Supermassive Black Holes Explain Galaxy Rotation Curves?

In this post, I will state the case for a new hypothesis related to the dynamics of galaxy center active galactic nuclei (AGN) supermassive black holes (SMBH). This new solution has multiple mechanisms that could plausibly change galaxy dynamics and solve the galaxy rotation curve problem observed by Dr. Vera Rubin and that led to a many decade search for dark matter.

In the mid 20th century several scientists noticed anomalies in galaxy rotation curves. Dr. Vera Rubin, an American astronomer, is credited with making the largest scientific advancement that precisely identified a major problem with respect to the contemporaneous understanding. Was the understanding of gravity incorrect, or was there unaccounted-for mass that could explain the observations? Springing out of this work has been the concept of dark matter and the subsequent fruitless search for signs of it. Somewhere along the line, the concept of dark matter became the consensus theory as if it was the only possible solution. NPQG provides four potential contributors to explain the observations attributed to dark matter.

Vera Florence Cooper Rubin (July 23, 1928 – December 25, 2016) was an American astronomer who pioneered work on galaxy rotation rates. She uncovered the discrepancy between the predicted angular motion of galaxies and the observed motion, by studying galactic rotation curves. This phenomenon became known as the galaxy rotation problem, and was evidence of the existence of dark matter.


First row, Vera Rubin in 1974. Second row, last picture 2009.

“Fame is fleeting, my numbers mean more to me than my name. If astronomers are still using my data years from now, that’s my greatest compliment.”

Vera Rubin 1928 – 2016

It seems to me that scientists’ imagination was constrained in looking mainly for dark matter, with a smaller contingent searching for a modified gravity solution as an explanation for Dr. Rubin’s observations. We know that the Sun converts mass to energy and this causes the Earth’s orbit to expand. Why did the scientists not look for a similar mechanism for black holes, especially the supermassive black holes at galaxy centers?

I believe scientists acted prematurely with regards to black holes, and very quickly established a very simplified and incorrect model that did not understand the singularity, the Planck core, and Planck plasma emission as jets or ruptures. Perhaps someday a science historian will be able to establish the timeline of key decisions with regards to black hole theory.

In this post, I will state the case for new hypotheses related to the dynamics of galaxy center active galactic nuclei (AGN) supermassive black holes (SMBH). This new solution has multiple mechanisms that could plausibly change galaxy dynamics and solve the galaxy rotation curve problem observed by Dr. Vera Rubin and that led to many decades of searching for dark matter that has been fruitless.


  1. Under sufficient conditions, some matter-energy that is ingested by a black hole can cause some matter-energy in the black hole to enter Planck particle phase and reduce or cease transmitting its mass via gravitational waves. The specific sufficient conditions will be a subject for ongoing scientific research, and will likely consider events that can happen to a black hole, and therefore may include:
    – spin,
    – charge,
    – ingestion of matter-energy (what is ingested in each absolute time interval)
    – ingestion rate and ingestion rate changes (e.g., spikes, mergers, etc.),
    – whether a core has already formed,
    – if the black hole is currently jetting and at what rate,
    – the rate of change of the Planck core size, (jet=shrink, ingest=grow)
    – merger dynamics,
    – black hole layer dynamics possibly partly due to what was ingested (e.g., gas vs. another BH),
    – and the most obvious of all – the overall ratio of conserved elements: energy, electrinos, and positrinos.
  2. Under a different set of sufficient conditions, such as black hole spin or merger with a dense object, a black hole may emit Planck plasma sourced from the Planck core of the black hole.
  3. General relativity does not apply to Planck core or plasma.
  4. Planck plasma experiences neither gravity nor presents mass.
  5. The mass of a black hole does not include the Planck core.
  6. The emission of Planck plasma via jets or ruptures will immediately lead to rapid formation of very high energy neutrinos and photons which will react and form other standard matter.
  7. This event will be characterised by galaxy-local inflation which leads to a regional expansion.
  8. If Planck plasma is jetted from the poles of an SMBH, it sometimes tends to pool around distant knots or a distant terminus. Along the way, the plasma may have begun to cool into massy particles which are subject to gravitation. (see figure below)
  9. The knots and terminus formed by the jet ejecta, often have the raw matter-energy to evolve into child galaxies. (see figure below)
  10. Halton Arp’s observations of this parent-child galaxy relationship was very insightful, and it deserves to be fully recognized as we re-evaluate our understanding of redshift given the natural occurence of galaxy local inflation. (see figure below)


In a Planck particle core, mass drops off of the gravitational accounting books. A Planck particle can accept no more energy. It has reached the maximum energy level. The first harmonic. Therefore any Planck particle inside the Planck core has no way to receive a gravitational wave. It cannot exchange energy with any nearby neighbor particles because they are all Planck particles. Quantum numbers are aligned throughout the Planck core so that maximum energy is stored. This may include alignment like a very dense ultimate battery. The only change possible is on the surface of the Planck core.

Are some or all quantum numbers related to the wave equation and energy storage of each type of particle? This is intuitive given the importance of these quantum numbers to quantum mechanics. How is this implemented in NPQG?

Black holes with a Planck core can ingest matter-energy and the net result is that the Planck core would grow and mass would disappear and objects in the galaxy would change orbits because the gravitational force would drop by the following formula.

\mathbf{\frac{GM{_1}M{_2}}{r^2}} .

For every particle ingested that crosses the phase boundary there is a moment T1 when that particle’s mass counts towards the mass of the black hole. And then there is the moment T0, where time stops, where the phase change occurs, where the mass is no longer transmitting. It is as if the mass has disappeared. How is that for emergent behavior?!

This also means that the mass of the black hole does not account for the dense matter-energy in the Planck core. Hopefully, science will be able to use black hole measurements to inform a mathematical relationship to the characteristics of the Planck core, i.e., charged or not, spinning or not, observed mass.

How can we determine the Planck core size and energy? Well, I suppose volume would be related to energy. It is a matter of how many Planck particles pack into a sphere if not spinning or oblate spheroid if spinning. Scientists and geometers can also probably determine the packing and orientation of the 1/1 Planck particles. Is it face-centered cubic (FCC), something else? A mix? Are there blanks, ruptures, tears? Does the core spin differently than the remainder of the black hole? These ideas may also help us explain the curious fact that SMBH masses are so small relative to their galaxies.

We would like to have a science that could predict:

  • the core size and shape.
  • when a core is predicted to emit through jet or rupture.
  • how much of the Planck core is projected to emit in a jet event.
  • how the event horizon area will be reduced.


The case was presented for a new hypothesized solution to the old problem of galaxy rotation curves. It was shown that scientists have not yet pursued a solution that invoked black hole dynamics. It is straightforward to show how black hole dynamics could easily lend themselves to a solution. Now it is time to see if the hypotheses can be supported with evidence.

J Mark Morris : San Diego : California : June 27, 2019 : v1

By J Mark Morris

I am imagining and reverse engineering a model of nature and sharing my journey via social media. Join me! I would love to have collaborators in this open effort. To support this research please donate:

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s