.....
Astronomers say all the windmills like our own Milky Whey all have more spin than they are supposed to by the amount of the visable stars light and redshift as a measure of how much mass is implied to be there that powers the spin (Where's The Old Giant Song of the Giant LP?). And more to the outside they all rotate as a solid body (The inside has the spiral). The outside is supposed to be going slower than it actually is, and with this much outward speed, the usual laws of physics seem to say they would all expand outward too much by the centrifugal force, and we would be without residuals of the milk, swirl and cheeze foundation. My explanation of this has been that in the center of all these levethians is a central mass of higher density than the strong force, explaining the jets of many of these sources which need more power than the strong force's fusion to power them. The particles would be of what I've named "superfusion". They wouldn't usually found all around us because they are only stable at the high pressures inside these massive bodies. As they would expand out they would fizz to lower power usual cosmic rays, a possible explanation of these otherwise unexplained sources of cosmic radiance. Or they could come from the same reaction in other jets of other massive bodies like our galaxy and fill up much of the room of the universe.


The central mass has the power source of the higher speed spin. This would connect to the rest of the galaxy's motion by way of ionization via the stars. The stars are constantly in radiance and this would set up field lines for the milky way. So the reason the galaxys would rotate like a solid body would be much the same as rotation of a usual solid in our life near here; the much stronger than gravity, electromagnetic field when ionized would holds the mass in solid formation. This would connect the dense mass of the center of the galaxies with the rest of the spin.

.
.The most accepted (or excepted) explanation about this has been dark matter. The dark matter powers all the motion and is distributed where the stellar mass is. Two problems here are, if the dark matter must be distributed where the stars are, why do they find no dark matter with telescopes or anywhere we look? In theory it would have a strong influence on mass of more prosaic sort. And it wouldn't unify the galaxys as solid bodies. If the dark matter has a gravitational field why would it make the galaxys spin as a solid body? Gravity is simple, we know it has no shield, and it attracts all there is with a definite energy. The earth with near radius spins faster than the the far radius of the moon. This is all we know about gravity in general. If we can measure it well if there were any more complexity at moderate power levels we would have found out. So the dark matter may not cause the galaxies to spin as a solid body if all the other gravity we see is without this effect. But the stellar ionization/superfusion theory has no dark particles and the spin and it's oneness are held together (if more proof is found see the rest of post) via the electric field.
.
It's also been believed that since the dark matter has to be near where the usual matter is to explain the motion of the mass like stars of the galaxies and no dark matter is found, a better explanation might be that the force of gravity is more constant with distance. The problem here is that the usual masses like Mars and Venus spin according to the usual law of Sir Issac's gravity. The more massive galaxies of moderate mass have another sort of rotation by way of dark matter, and the more vast superclusters of galaxies spin, like all the nearby masses via the usual angular momentum. Gravity is simple. Why would it change in a complex way between the usual mass around us and the galaxies with a linear radius law, and then return to the usual law, and with the same matter causing all three fields? If it were caused by the stellar ionization it would be unusual only with lots of stars like a galaxy. With no stars between the galaxies and not enough pressure between opposite stellar winds to make the the planets spin as a solid disc, they would both spin the same, and the solid spin of the galaxies would be via by the usual ionization and high central mass density. The spiral arms aren't as easily explained by the constant radius law because the gravity is simple so the geometry of all the galaxies would be the same. The motions of the stars in the spiral arms and such seem to imply more matter there than is seen. Just two long range forces are known, gravity and electromagnetism, but the force seen holding the galaxies together is stronger than gravity, and electromagnetism is stronger than gravity, so it seems the more force that is of worth to explain the observed rotation. If the stars ionize the field, wherever there was light there is gravity generally, as measured. So a falsifiable (true or false by experiment) proof of my theory of Stellar Ionization/Superfusion (at least about ionization being the source of the unified motion of the galaxies) may be about how much light is present. More massive stars and masses with reduced light and other electric radiation would rotate more loosely and accelerate outward if no ionized field was not present also, even with more gravity if gravity isn't the main force that unifies the galaxies. Where there would be more random light or binding radiation there would be more cohesion. If they're more massive via dark matter, there may be more unified spin with reduced radiation. Dark matter has the problem of none found and it should be there near us. So my Stellar Ionization/Superfusion theory seems to be a good explanation.

The galaxies would be held in one motion in Stellar Ionization by the stellar winds expanding outward to keep them from too much implosion. To stop too much expansion, each star seperates its own charge from the spaces between all the stars. So the stars would have one charge and the fields between them the opposite. The stars would attract the fields between them but only till balanced by the outgoing stellar winds. The balance between the inflow and outflow would hold the mass of the galaxies as a solid body.

In his book "The Big Bang Never Happened" Lerner says the 3K radiation supposedly left over from the Big Bang can instead be explained by radiation of stars scattered by the random field of the galaxy. I believe in the Double Disk Vortex Theory of cosmology with two cosmic jets like galaxies but on a cosmic scale, explaining evidence like why the expansion is accelerating outward (the opposite charges by like charge expanding out from the jet and then as the charges attract at the disk speeding up, with the opposite charged galaxies combining and releasing lots of power (quasars) and then the disk losing power and spiralling inward via gravity to fall in and then recirculate out with the jets repeating the cycle. Gravity would be the prime mover explaining why the cosmos never has wound down even with matter and energy never created or destroyed so existing for infinite time.). If the 3K is not leftover radiation from a more active Big Bang Lerner says that the 3K being found to be isotropic (the same in all directions) can be explained by the random motion of the elctromagnetic field of the milky way. It would scatter the radiation from our own stars like light in fog so it would seem to be from all zooms of the north star. And this randomness may also explain how the galaxy spins as one solid body. In usual solid bodies around us most of the orientation of the atoms and fields is random. The stars are with random orientation and most of the higher power sources that put out the most power of import are also. So the galaxy could be held solid the same way a usual solid is and this also explains the 3K.

In the book Lerner says much in support of Alfen's work about plasma physics and how you can take a small bit of plasma and generate an electric field and using just these alone an exact galaxy of plasma can be made in the lab complete with spiral arms. This is evidence that the galaxy can be held together by electromagnetic fields. Dark matter may not be needed to explain it.

***********
"Some S.A. fish swim like most fish for a time after they are hatched and then flip over and for the rest of their lives swim upside down." No the fish aren't upside down, the world is right side up!".

..