Suzy B Software 2

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ Suzy B Software 2 / Suzy B Software CD-ROM 2 (1994).iso / nasa / quasar / quasar.far < prev

Wrap

Text File | 1995-05-02 | 32.0 KB | 650 lines

QUASARS: NEAR VERSUS FAR Tom Van Flandern Meta Research ABSTRACT All observed characteristics of quasars are customarily interpreted using the standard Big Bang model and the assumption that their redshifts are primarily due to the expansion of the universe. These same characteristics can also be interpreted using alternative models in which quasar redshifts are not cosmological. The quality of these two interpretations is compared. It is concluded that, although both are viable, Occam's Razor cuts in favor of the nearby quasar interpretation. The consequences of continuing to ignore this in journal articles, at meetings, in grant awards, in experiment and instrument design, in telescope allocation, in textbooks, and in the classroom, are to inhibit meaningful progress in the field on many fronts. This is true regardless of which hypothesis is more nearly correct, since ignoring useful, viable hypotheses or discordant data teaches unscientific behavior. 1. INTRODUCTION Evidence exists that quasar redshifts may not be predominantly cosmological in origin. This evidence does not individually or collectively constitute proof; but then, hypotheses in physics cannot be proved, only disproved. We propose here to examine the observational evidence from the perspectives of the standard model (the "far") and a generic alternative (the "near"), and to make a comparative evaluation of the scientific quality of the interpretation with both models. It is not the purpose of this paper to advance a particular alternative model in which quasars are closer than their redshift distances. Instead, we will consider a "generic" alternative model, in which quasars are relatively nearby objects (some in or near our own galaxy, most near other galaxies with redshifts less than about 0.1). We do not mean to specify a particular cause of their non-cosmological redshifts; but for discussion purposes, let us think of the quasar redshifts as gravitational, since this is a well-understood redshift mechanism. In this generic model, quasar dimensions are then more like those of supermassive stars than like those of galaxies. The details of how such objects might come to exist and to survive over long periods are model details which we will ignore here. But at least one such model exists (Van Flandern 1992). 2. OBSERVATIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS Let us examine how the various quasar observed properties with distance implications can be interpreted in the standard cosmological model, and in this generic alternative model. OBSERVATIONAL FACT INTERPRETATION IN INTERPRETATION IN STANDARD MODEL GENERIC MODEL (1) Quasars have Only the center of Quasars really have little or no visible the galaxy-like mass stellar dimensions, angular extent. which produces the occasionally energy is visible. surrounded by nebulosity. (2) Quasars have Most quasar light Light variations are rapid light comes from a small not unusual in high- variations (Heckman source of solar mass stellar-sized 1991). system dimensions, objects. even in quasars as big as giant galaxies. (3) Even high- Such jets must be the Such jets result from redshift quasars have largest contiguous ordinary mass long jets. structures in the ejections. universe. (4) Features in Apparent faster-than- Small mass transfers quasar jets are light motions must be are occurring at observed to move relativistically ordinary velocities. outward. beamed toward us. (5) The angular size An evolutionary Higher mass quasars, of visible nebulas effect, since early, which have higher surrounding some distant, high- redshifts, have quasars does not redshift quasars are larger associated diminish, and may more energetic. nebulas. even increase, with increasing redshift (Heckman 1991, Table 2). (6) Quasar redshifts Either the Supermassive stars seem to be time- observations are are expected to variable (Tifft wrong, or infalling pulsate, causing 1991). matter must influence slowly variable the redshifts. gravitational redshifts. (7) Some high- Unknown energy Not surprising, since redshift quasars are mechanism produces redshift does not relatively bright. equivalent of indicate distance, thousands of but perhaps mass. supernovas per year, Some of these objects enabling them to be are nearby. bright at great distances. (8) Quasars do not An evolutionary Since redshift is not exhibit the type of effect caused by a distance indicator, brightness-redshift quasars being no redshift-distance relationship found primarily a feature relationship is for galaxies. The of the early stages expected. Objects distribution is flat of the universe. No with z > 2 have out to nearly z = 2, predictable relation shorter lifetimes, then drops sharply between quasar e.g., because of (Arp 1987). numbers and space their higher mass. volume exists. (9) Small redshift Most quasars died out High redshift objects and large redshift long ago. Quasars emit limited visible quasars are found formed and died light. Low redshift infrequently. during a limited objects are period of evolution undistinguished and of the universe. difficult to find. (10) Discrete X-ray Most X-rays come from Only nearby sources sources are found in nearby or very far can give off our own galaxy and in away, but generally detectable X-rays. some quasars and not from intermediate Most galaxies are too related objects. distances. far away to see their X-rays sources. (11) An X-ray flare These X-rays must be There is nothing from a quasar with z relativistically unusual about such an = 0.14 was observed directed toward us in X-ray flare in a to increase its a narrow, short-lived high-mass star. brightness by 67% in beam. just three minutes (Remillard 1991). (12) The calculated Theoretical problem No special problems charged particle getting photons out arise. density is a function from interior when of inferred distance density gets too (Arp 1987). high. (13) Some low Statistical Those galaxies are redshift galaxies coincidence and the parent of the have associated optical illusions. associated quasars. quasars. Some of those appear to be connected to the galaxies (Arp 1987). (14) Quasars, even at Statistical Association with high redshifts, are coincidence and parent galaxies plus frequently gravitational lensing gravitational lens accompanied by faint by galaxy clusters. effects, with galaxies at small High-redshift foreground quasars separations (Webster associations cannot lensing background 1988; Hintzen 1991). be real. galaxies. (15) The magnitudes An observational This is the predicted and angular selection effect quasar-parent galaxy separations of which will disappear relationship. quasar-galaxy pairs when catalogs are are correlated with more complete. the galaxy redshift (Burbidge 1990). (16) Low-redshift Possible effect of As expected if the quasars show a discovery redshifts are not deficiency of large- incompleteness. interpreted as scale pairs or distances. clustering (Roeder 1992). (17) Where distant An evolutionary Quasars of distant clusters of galaxies effect, not fully galaxies should be are observed, quasars understood. invisible. are generally not found in them. (18) Quasars with The significance of Such quasars are redshifts greater galaxy voids is still nearby, and should than 1.5 show no being studied. therefore not display tendency toward Clustering is an clustering. Redshift clustering, and no evolutionary effect, is not a distance evidence of voids, not yet strong during indicator, so no both of which are the main quasar era. voids should be seen for galaxies evident. (Osmer 1991). (19) Absorption lines Caused by intervening Lines are due to in the spectra of hydrogen clouds. layers in the massive quasar light are Implied cloud stellar object or its quite narrow (Smith temperatures (5,000- surrounding 1990). 10,000 degrees) are nebulosity, not below predicted intervening clouds. 30,000 degrees. (20) The number of The hydrogen clouds The absorption absorption line doing the absorbing systems are due to systems seen in Lyman are not uniformly layering in the alpha is not spread through space, quasar and its linearly, or even and are more abundant surrounding monotonically, at recent (therefore nebulosity. No correlated with close) epochs. Lack linear or monotonic redshift. 3C 273 at of metal lines makes relationship with z = 0.16 and other galaxy halos unlikely redshift is expected. low-redshift quasars candidates as have as many absorbers. absorption systems as high-redshift quasars (Morris 1991). (21) So-called "iron These still defy any Normal for stellar quasars" contain consensus objects in a certain extremely strong explanation. range of mass and emission lines from temperature. ionized iron (Lipari 1991). A careful examination of the middle column reveals that almost all of these observational features of quasars have explanations in the standard model. But it also reveals that most of these explanations were contrived after the properties were discovered, and are therefore ad hoc helper hypotheses, serving the purpose of saving the feature of the standard model that quasar redshifts are distance indicators. By contrast, inspection of the last column reveals that most quasar properties become unremarkable if quasars are assumed to be nearby. Only a few arguments are ad hoc, and then perhaps only because of the lack of specificity of the generic model. Our preliminary conclusion is therefore that astronomers ought to at least feel uncomfortable with the ad hoc nature of the standard model, even though it can still be defended. 3. DISCUSSION To complete this discussion, a few additional theoretical or observational facts which do not fit into our table should be considered. (22) In the standard model, high-mass stellar-sized objects do not exist for very long before they collapse to form "black holes." It is often forgotten that this is simply a theory based on extrapolating a mathematical formula far beyond the domain of the observations it was derived from. On other occasions when this was done in physics, such as the case of the "ultraviolet catastrophe," it has turned out that the mathematical formula needed amending, rather than that a singularity actually existed in nature. It is therefore imprudent to assume that black holes are the natural end state of high-mass stellar-sized objects merely because a formula exists which predicts them, and because that theory has become familiar. Some alternative cosmologies (Van Flandern 1992) predict different natural end states; for example, long-lived high-redshift objects. (23) Low luminosity quasars generally have wide jets, while high luminosity quasars have narrow jets (Perley 1990). In the generic "near" model, low luminosity means surrounded by more nebulosity, and therefore closer to us than its brightness would suggest; and vice versa. Naturally, the jets for closer quasars will be seen on average as wider. In the standard model, it was expected that the high-luminosity quasars were physically larger and would have bigger jets, but the reverse was observed. (24) Different emission lines in quasar spectra give systematically different redshifts. These velocity shifts are not well understood in the standard model, but are believed to be due to outflowing or infalling gas (Tyler 1992). In the generic model where quasars are compact high-mass stellar objects with gravitational redshifts, both the redshift anomalies for these emission lines, and the absorption line systems with completely different redshifts mentioned earlier, are simply layers of different gravitational redshift in the "corona" of the quasar. There is no need for infalling matter or intervening clouds of hydrogen. (25) While recounting problems with interpreting quasar redshifts as indicating great distances, the same is true of so- called "active galactic nuclei" (AGN's). These lower redshift objects often have quasar-like behavior. One of them, Markarian 231, has now been shown to have three additional (lower) redshifts associated with it, seen as absorption lines in its spectrum. The newest and lowest of these absorption line sets has just recently been discovered because it wasn't present prior to 1984. The traditional interpretation is forced to conclude that intervening clouds between us and the AGN are causing the absorption. There must be one intervening cloud for every different set of absorption lines, or a total of three different intervening clouds at distances from each other so great that they cannot be physically associated. The sudden appearance of the previously invisible third cloud implies that it has just moved into the line of sight (Boroson 1991). All of these improbable coincidences are avoided if it is assumed that the AGN is a gravitationally-redshifted nearby object surrounded by absorption clouds in its own environment. (26) The standard quasar model calls for the presence of an accretion disk and broad line clouds surrounding the object. The presence of these features should affect the quasar's spectrum. In particular, a discontinuity in the continuum at 912 angstroms is expected. Only quasars seen more-or-less edge-on might fail to show this discontinuity. The IUE (ultraviolet telescope) results show that the discontinuity is not present in any of the 19 quasars examined, except for cases of "intervening gas clouds" between us and the quasar (Koratar 1990). In another investigation, a void in the Lyman-Alpha "forest" of spectral lines was found to occur at different wavelengths in different quasars (Dobrzycki 1991). Both results suggest that something is wrong with the standard quasar model. (27) Nearby quasars appear to be underabundant by about a factor of 100 in the standard model, implying that the oldest quasars are now burned out and "dead." Assuming they had been absorbed into the nuclei of galaxies, no evidence for their existence could be found (Bower 1990). (28) There are about a dozen instances of double or multiple close quasar images with nearly identical redshifts. In the standard model, these are interpreted as gravitationally-lensed images due to a foreground galaxy. But the gravitational lens hypothesis has run into difficulty. The number of images created is not consistent from lens to lens. The images are round and compact, not distorted into ringlets as they ought to be. A central quasar image should be visible behind the lensing galaxy, but is not; and often no lensing galaxy is visible either. The component brightness variations should be correlated, but often are not, which must be explained by "microlensing" from individual stars in the lensing galaxy. Yet these brightness variations are of the same character as seen in unlensed quasars. In the case of the Huchra lens (the "Einstein cross"), the lensing galaxy must be smaller than two kiloparsecs in diameter, which doesn't allow room for very much mass in the galaxy. And recent studies of a 3- component "lens" found by the Hubble telescope, 1208+101 at z = 3.8, show the three components forming a roughly 120 degree angle, which no simple lens model predicts. Moreover the brightest image lies between two similar faint images, which is also contrary to ordinary lens models. A contaminating field star is suggested; but the only other high-redshift case, 2016+112, also has an image geometry requiring two lensing galaxies or some other exotic explanation (Maoz 1992). One way the generic model might explain this phenomenon is suggested by the existence of emission line companions (emission lines suggest that the light is passing through some sort of heated gas) to some high redshift quasars (Djorgovski 1985; Hintzen 1991). These secondary quasar images might be the natural result of refraction of quasar light passing through a gaseous medium, rather than gravitational lensing. In support of this idea, the quasar companions are bluer and more luminous than active galaxies should be, but just as refracted images might be. It should also be noted that a pair of "twin" quasars, about 18 arc minutes apart, have almost identical "foreground" absorption spectra, despite the significant separation of the quasars on the sky (Ferrarese 1990). This does not trouble a refracted-image model, but is not so far explainable with the gravitational lens model. 4. CONCLUSIONS What would definitively decide the issue between the "far" and "near" hypotheses? In the "near" quasar model, some quasars may be close enough to the Sun to permit direct detection of a proper motion relative to the distant galaxies. The detection of a high- redshift quasar with a proper motion would be a virtual proof that some quasars are nearby objects. Attempts to save the standard model after such a find by suggesting that the quasar itself has been relativistically beamed toward us would go far beyond the tolerance of Occam's Razor. On the other hand, the "far" model would be greatly bolstered by the finding of any characteristic in quasars which is known in galaxies to be associated with great distance; for example, a regular absorption-line pattern at roughly z = 0.03 intervals, indicative of the walls and voids structure noted for galaxies in several deep-sky pencil-beam surveys. It has gradually become clear that a lot of people have a lot to lose if an accepted paradigm, such as the "far" model, is challenged: the authors of the original and supporting theories, whose names became well-known in that connection; all those who published papers which reference or depend on the theories; journal editors and referees who have made decisions or criticized other works based on those theories; funding agencies which have paid for research which pre-supposes certain theories; instrument builders and experiment designers who spend career time testing ideas which spring from the theories; journalists and writers whose publications have written about or promoted the theories; teachers and interested members of the public who have learned the theories, been impressed by the wonderment in them, and who have no wish to have to teach or learn new theories; and students, who need to find a job in their field of training. The consequences of continuing to ignore this are to inhibit meaningful progress in the field on many fronts for the indefinite future. This is true regardless of which hypothesis is more nearly correct, since ignoring useful, viable hypotheses or discordant data teaches unscientific behavior. All astronomers should take another look at the "near" versus the "far" controversy, and in general at viable models which challenge paradigms in their own areas of specialization. Science is better served by keeping all viable models on the discussion table until they are pushed off by observation or experiment, rather than by authoritative consensus. Table I from QUASARS: NEAR VERSUS FAR by Tom Van Flandern (4/93) ----------------------------------------------------------------- OBSERVATIONAL FACT INTERPRETATION IN INTERPRETATION IN STANDARD MODEL META MODEL (1) Quasars have Only the center of Quasars really have little or no visible the galaxy-like mass stellar dimensions, angular extent. which produces the occasionally energy is visible. surrounded by nebulosity. (2) Quasars have Most quasar light Light variations are rapid light comes from a small not unusual in high- variations. source of solar mass stellar-sized system dimensions, objects. even in quasars as big as giant galaxies. (3) Even high- Such jets must be Such jets result redshift quasars the largest from ordinary mass have long jets. contiguous ejections, and are structures in the unremarkable in universe. size. (4) Features in Apparent faster- Small mass transfers quasar jets are than-light motions are occurring at observed to move must be ordinary velocities. outward. relativistically beamed toward us. (5) The angular size An evolutionary Higher mass quasars, of visible nebulas effect, since early, which have higher surrounding some distant, high- redshifts, have quasars does not redshift quasars are larger associated diminish, and may more energetic. nebulas. even increase, with increasing redshift. (6) Some high- Unknown energy Not surprising, redshift quasars are mechanism produces since redshift does relatively bright. equivalent of not indicate thousands of distance, but supernovas per year, perhaps mass. Some enabling them to be of these objects are bright at great nearby. distances. (7) Quasars do not An evolutionary Since redshift is exhibit the type of effect caused by not a distance brightness-number quasars being indicator, no relationship found primarily a feature brightness-number for galaxies. The of the early stages relationship is distribution is flat of the universe. No expected. Objects out to nearly predictable relation with z > 2 have redshift z = 2, then between quasar shorter lifetimes, drops sharply. numbers and space e.g., because of volume exists. their higher mass. (8) Small redshift Most quasars died High redshift and large redshift out long ago. objects emit limited quasars are found Quasars formed and visible light. Low infrequently. died during a redshift objects are limited period of undistinguished and evolution of the difficult to find. universe. (9) Discrete X-ray Most X-rays come Only nearby sources sources are found in from nearby or very can give off our own galaxy and far away, but detectable X-rays. in some quasars and generally not from Most galaxies are related objects. intermediate too far away to see distances. their X-rays sources. (10) An X-ray flare These X-rays must be There is nothing from a quasar with z relativistically unusual about such = 0.14 was observed directed toward us an X-ray flare in a to increase its in a narrow, short- high-mass star. No brightness by 67% in lived beam. beaming is required. just three minutes (11) The calculated Theoretical problem No special problems charged particle getting photons out arise. density is a from interior when function of inferred density gets too distance. high. (12) Some low Statistical Those galaxies are redshift galaxies coincidence and the parent of the have associated optical illusions. associated quasars. quasars. Some of those appear to be connected to the galaxies. (13) Quasars, even Statistical Association with at high redshifts, coincidence and parent galaxies plus are frequently gravitational gravitational lens accompanied by faint lensing by galaxy effects, with galaxies at small clusters. High- foreground quasars separations. redshift lensing background associations cannot galaxies. be real. (14) The magnitudes An observational This is the and angular selection effect predicted quasar- separations of which will disappear parent galaxy quasar-galaxy pairs when catalogs are relationship. are correlated with more complete. the galaxy redshift. (15) Where distant An evolutionary Quasars of distant clusters of galaxies effect, not fully galaxies are too are observed, understood. faint to be visible. quasars are generally not found in them. (16) Quasars with The significance of Such quasars are redshifts greater galaxy voids is nearby, and should than 1.5 show no still being studied. therefore not tendency toward Clustering is an display clustering. galaxy-like evolutionary effect, Redshift is not a clustering or voids. not yet strong distance indicator, during the main so no voids should quasar era. be evident. (17) Quasars do show Selection effect of The nearby galaxies strong, large-scale concentrating and clusters are clustering around searches in these parent bodies for nearby galaxy regions. those quasars. groups, such as the Virgo and Sculptor clusters and M87. (18) Absorption Caused by Lines are due to lines in the spectra intervening hydrogen layers in the of quasar light are clouds. Implied massive stellar quite narrow. cloud temperatures object or its (5,000-10,000 surrounding degrees) are below nebulosity, not predicted 30,000 intervening clouds. degrees. Cooler temperatures expected. (19) The number of The hydrogen clouds The absorption absorption line doing the absorbing systems are due to systems seen in are not uniformly layering in the Lyman alpha is not spread through quasar and its linearly, or even space, and are more surrounding monotonically, abundant at recent nebulosity. No correlated with (therefore close) linear or monotonic redshift. 3C 273 at epochs. Scarcity of relationship with z = 0.16 and other metal lines makes redshift is low-redshift quasars galaxy halos expected. have as many unlikely to be absorption systems principal absorbers. as high-redshift quasars. (20) Quasar jets The magnetic field The magnetic field have variable is in invisible, is that of the local polarization due to young intervening parent galaxy of the a magnetic field. galaxies, which must quasar. Local then have fields as galaxies have fields strong as mature of about the galaxies. measured strength. (21) So-called "iron These still defy any Normal for stellar quasars" contain consensus objects in a certain extremely strong explanation. range of mass and emission lines from temperature. ionized iron. (22) Some quasars There must be some These quasars are have been detected tunnels through the within our own at extreme interstellar medium galaxy and among the ultraviolet that allow us to see closest to us. wavelengths, where certain quasars the local through them. interstellar medium is virtually opaque. (23) VLBI techniques These are caused by These may be real, have found about 20 systematic errors of and if confirmed by quasar proper unknown origin continuing studies, motions with strong because we don't yet may prove that some statistical know everything that quasars are nearby. significance. can affect positions at the 100 micro- arc-second level of precision. (24) Different Caused by rapidly Lines originating at emission lines in outflowing or different heights in quasar spectra give infalling gas above the gravitational systematically quasar. potential of a different redshifts. supermassive stellar object. (25) Metal emission An earlier These are young lines exist in generation of star- objects formed in quasars, even with z containing objects the already metal- = 3 and up. made these metals, rich interstellar went supernova, and media of nearby collapsed again to galaxies. form the quasars. REFERENCES Arp, H. C. 1987, Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies (Berkeley: Interstellar Media) Boroson, T. A., Meyers, K. A., Morris, S. L., & Persson, S. E. 1991, ApJ, 370, L19 Bower, G., Richstone, D., Bothun, G., & Heckman, T. 1990, Bull. Amer. Astr. Soc., 22, 1338 Burbidge, G., Hewitt, A., Narlikar, J. V., & Gupta, P. Das. 1990, ApJ Supp. 74, 675 Djorgovski, S., Spinrad, H., McCarthy, P., & Strauss, M.A. 1985, ApJ, 299, L1 Dobrzycki, A. & Bechtold, J. 1991, ApJ, 377, L69 Ferrarese, L., Blades, J. C., & Cristiani, S. 1990, Bull. Amer. Astr. Soc., 22, 871 Heckman, T. M., Lehnert, M. D., Breugel, W. van, & Miley, G. K. 1991, ApJ, 370, 78 Hintzen, P., Romanishin, W., & Valdes, F. 1991, ApJ, 366, 7 Koratar, A. P., Kinney, A. L., & Bohlin, R. C. 1990, Bull. Amer. Astr. Soc., 22, 1194 Maoz, D., Bahcall, J. N., et al. 1992, ApJ, 386, L1 Morris, S. L., Weymann, R. J., Savage, B. D., & Gilliland, R. L. 1991, ApJ, 377, L21 Osmer, P. S. & Hewett, P. C. 1991, ApJ Supp., 75, 273 Perley, R. A. 1990, Bull. Amer. Astr. Soc., 22, 822 Remillard, R. A., Grossan, B., Bradt, H. V., Ohashi, T., Hayashida, K., Makino, F., & Tanaka, Y. 1991, Nature, 350, 589 Roeder, R. C. 1992, ApJ, 387, L13 Lipari, S. 1991, Sky & Tel., 81, 246 Smith, L. 1990, Sci. News, 138, 253 Tifft, W. G. 1991, ApJ, 382, 396 Tyler, D. & Fan, X. M. 1992, ApJ Supp., 79, 1 Van Flandern, T. 1992, preprint Webster, R. L., Hewett, P. C., Harding, M. E., & Wegner, G. A. 1988, Nature, 336, 358