The Hidden Force That May Be Holding the Galaxy Together By David Freeman - October 5, 2025
Radiation in space is usually treated as background noise, a passive glow left behind by stars, supernovae, and the cosmic microwave field. A new study argues that this background may do more than illuminate space. It may quietly help hold it together. The paper, published as a preprint in late 2025, presents a direct, testable claim. Continuous radiation flowing through astrophysical plasmas could help those plasmas remain stable over very long timescales.
The study comes from Prof. Md Faridul Islam Chowdhury, founder of the Tanfarid Vision Research Institute in Bangladesh. He is known for developing the Tanfarid Quantum-Thermodynamic Universe framework, a theory that connects radiation, thermodynamics, and quantum behavior. In this new work, Chowdhury isolates one simple idea from that larger framework and puts it to numerical test: radiation may act as a stabilizing agent in charged gases.
The reasoning begins with an astrophysical puzzle. Large-scale plasma structures such as galactic filaments and diffuse ionized gas often last millions of years, far beyond what simple decay models predict. Conventional physics explains this longevity with magnetism, turbulence, and gravity. Chowdhury proposes that the radiation constantly passing through these regions could be doing part of the work. If radiation energy density crosses a certain threshold, he writes, it could sustain correlations between electrons and protons long enough to preserve order.
He does not present this as a philosophical suggestion. The paper lists specific values that can be tested. In the diffuse Milky Way environment, cosmic rays carry about 1.6 × 10⁻¹² erg per cubic centimeter of energy, with a heating rate near 1.7 × 10⁻²⁷ erg per cubic centimeter per second. Using those figures, Chowdhury calculates a stability threshold where a plasma transitions from unstable to long-lived behavior. In his simulations, that threshold sits almost exactly at the observed energy input from cosmic rays, implying that existing galactic radiation may already be enough to maintain coherence.
The core quantity in the model is called the coherence parameter, a number between zero and one that measures how well electrons and protons move together. In simple language, it represents the degree of organized motion within the plasma. Radiation both damps and drives this motion. The outcome depends on balance. Too little radiation, and coherence decays. Enough radiation, and it stabilizes at a high level. Chowdhury does not claim to know the detailed microscopic mechanism. He keeps the parameter phenomenological, something to be measured or replaced by future refinements. The paper’s strength lies in this restraint. It defines a measurable threshold, not a grand theory.
Radiation pressure also receives quantitative attention. The equations of motion gain a radiation force term, and the classic gravitational instability criterion—known from Jeans’ work on gas collapse—is modified. Under typical interstellar conditions, with an intensity around 10⁻³ erg per square centimeter per second per steradian, an electron density near 0.1 per cubic centimeter, and a temperature of ten thousand kelvin, the calculated radiation contribution becomes comparable to thermal pressure. The result is a predicted increase in the characteristic instability scale by roughly forty percent. In practice, that means radiation could suppress small-scale fragmentation and help explain why certain clouds stay smooth instead of breaking into clusters of stars.
The numerical study uses the Athena++ magnetohydrodynamic framework, extended to include radiation–plasma coupling and coherence tracking. The simulation box covers one cubic kiloparsec, divided into 512 cells per side. Starting conditions mirror the warm interstellar medium: an electron density of 0.1 per cubic centimeter, temperature of 10⁴ kelvin, turbulence of 100 kilometers per second, and a magnetic field of one microgauss. The radiation source term varies from 10⁻²⁹ to 10⁻²⁶ erg per cubic centimeter per second, a range chosen to represent environments from dim to bright. Each run evolves for one million years to show long-term effects rather than short transients.
Results sort into clear regimes. When the radiation source term equals or exceeds 2 × 10⁻²⁷ erg per cubic centimeter per second, the coherence parameter stays high, above 0.8, throughout the simulated million years. Between 10⁻²⁸ and 2 × 10⁻²⁷, coherence decays slowly but remains significant. Below 10⁻²⁸, it collapses quickly within ten thousand years. The paper reports a critical flux for stability at about 1.7 × 10⁻²⁷ erg per cubic centimeter per second, with an uncertainty of ±0.5 × 10⁻²⁷. That value is strikingly close to measured cosmic ray heating rates. The match may be coincidence, but if independent simulations confirm it, the implication is powerful.
Visualizations from the simulations show the difference in structure. Above the threshold, plasma patterns stay organized. Below it, turbulence dominates and order vanishes. Chowdhury avoids any claim that these maps correspond to specific clouds in the sky. They simply demonstrate that, under controlled numerical conditions, radiation can separate stable from unstable behavior.
The discussion section outlines where this idea might apply. First is the stability of cosmic structures. The threshold aligns with the energy densities found in the interstellar medium, suggesting radiation could contribute to the endurance of galactic filaments and parts of the cosmic web. Second is star formation efficiency. If radiation extends the instability scale, it may help explain why many clouds glow without quickly collapsing into stars. Third are smaller environments, such as plasma disks around faint stars or planetary ionospheres, where weaker radiation might lead to less stability. These possibilities are presented as targets for observation, not as proven outcomes.
Limitations are listed directly. The coherence parameter is model-dependent and not yet measurable. Magnetic effects are simplified and need fuller treatment. The coupling between radiation and matter ignores spectral dependence. The resolution does not reach kinetic scales. Each limitation is framed as a prompt for further work rather than an apology. Chowdhury calls for comparisons using other magnetohydrodynamic codes, for self-consistent radiation transport, and for larger parameter sweeps across real astronomical environments.
Testing the hypothesis does not require new telescopes or exotic instruments. The paper outlines immediate observational paths. One is to use James Webb Space Telescope imaging of galactic filaments to compare regions with different radiation fields and see if coherence changes near the predicted threshold. Another is to analyze synchrotron radio maps that trace cosmic ray distributions, matching them to the structural coherence of ionized gas. A third is to use gamma-ray data, which reveal cosmic ray energy density, and see whether regions above the threshold show greater stability. Each route uses existing archives and methods already familiar to astronomers.
Numerical validation is equally clear. The study calls for multi-code tests using different radiation–plasma coupling schemes. The key question is whether the threshold reappears when details change. If it does, the effect is likely real. If not, it may be an artifact of one numerical setup. The author has released all simulation data, scripts, and model code in a public repository so other teams can repeat or challenge the results. That openness gives the idea a fair and rapid path to confirmation or rejection.
Chowdhury’s conclusion is careful. The findings provide preliminary support for the idea that radiation fields may contribute to plasma stability. A critical radiation flux near 1.7 × 10⁻²⁷ erg per cubic centimeter per second sustains long-term coherence in the simulations. Under stated conditions, radiation pressure can raise the gravitational instability scale by about forty percent. None of this is claimed as final truth. The paper calls for independent observational and numerical checks before any revision of standard models.
What makes this proposal notable is its simplicity and testability. The predicted threshold lies at ordinary galactic energy levels, not in exotic extremes. The effects operate on familiar scales, from star-forming clouds to diffuse filaments. The model’s limits are openly described, and the method for checking them is available to anyone. It is a rare case where a theoretical idea arrives with a direct route to verification.
The paper also rebalances how radiation is viewed in astrophysical models. Traditional treatments consider it mainly as a source of heating or pressure, secondary to magnetic and turbulent forces. Chowdhury’s work does not replace those mechanisms. It asks whether radiation’s quiet influence might deserve a place beside them. If later studies confirm that radiation helps maintain plasma order, simulations of galactic structure and star formation may need to weigh photon and cosmic ray energy alongside magnetic tension and turbulence.
Two early questions will decide whether the hypothesis survives. First, does the same stability threshold appear in other numerical frameworks that model radiation–plasma coupling differently? Second, in real astronomical data, do regions with higher radiation flux show greater coherence? Both tests can begin immediately. The required datasets already exist. Filament maps from JWST, radio synchrotron surveys, and gamma-ray sky maps contain the relevant parameters. The work is to compare them against the predicted threshold and look for a pattern.
If the radiation-mediated effect proves real, it would add a new stabilizing term to our understanding of galactic structure. It could help resolve why certain ionized regions stay intact even when magnetic or gravitational support appears too weak. It could also refine models of how stars form, why some clouds stay diffuse, and how energy circulates through the Milky Way. If the threshold does not hold up, the failure will still be valuable, closing one proposed mechanism with data rather than opinion.
The next steps are clear. Run independent simulations across multiple codes, vary the coupling parameters, and test the 1.7 × 10⁻²⁷ erg per cubic centimeter per second line under different conditions. Cross-check those results with observational data from telescopes already in operation. Because the data and scripts are public, these replications can start immediately. A single confirmed or refuted threshold will decide the fate of the idea faster than any debate.
As of October 2025, that is where the hypothesis stands. The simulations show a stability threshold that aligns with known cosmic ray energy input. The effect raises the calculated instability scale by about forty percent under stated conditions. The results are suggestive, the uncertainties explicit, and the verification path open. Whether radiation truly helps hold the galaxy together will now depend on what the next wave of observations and simulations reveal.
Source:
Based on the 2025 preprint Radiation-Mediated Plasma Stability: Testing a Quantum-Thermodynamic Hypothesis with Astrophysical Data by Prof. Md Faridul Islam Chowdhury of the Tanfarid Vision Research Institute, Bogura, Bangladesh. ChristopherBlackwell
Re: The Hidden Force That May Be Holding the Galaxy Together By David Freeman - October 5, 2025
The gist I get from this is (probably oversimplified) about quantifying conservation of energy through different densities of matter that diffuses into a state of equilibrium.
Absorbed radiation is usually transformed into other forms when radiated. But the amount of energy is always conserved.live long and prosper as best you can Jacque
Radiation is oscillation of something that sheds heat. What causes R to oscillate? Cooling? Microcooling from the original Big Bang thermal peak? Higgs may play a role here. You can look away from a painting, but you can't listen away from a symphony
on October 6, 2025, 5:18 pm
