home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!pacbell.com!well!metares
- From: metares@well.sf.ca.us (Tom Van Flandern)
- Newsgroups: sci.astro
- Subject: Re: Standard model of QSOsex
- Message-ID: <Bt5syD.Ipt@well.sf.ca.us>
- Date: 18 Aug 92 03:13:25 GMT
- References: <1992Aug10.024159.18356@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca> <BsunH7.JMK@well.sf.ca.us> <77539@ut-emx.uucp>
- Sender: news@well.sf.ca.us
- Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
- Lines: 26
-
-
- Earlier, I wrote:
-
- >> Quasars are not, of course, *predicted* by the standard model. They are
- >> just part of what it attempts to explain, ad hoc.
-
- and yaron@astro.as.utexas.edu (Yaron Sheffer) replied:
-
- > How about this prediction: "Shortly" after the BB, galaxies form. Their
- > early collapse builds up a dense core of billion solar masses. Also,
- > galaxies interact frequently thanks to higher density of the Universe. A
- > natural consequence is the flare up of active galacic nuclei. Prediction:
- > from Earth, 1992, these should be very bright, unresolvable, variable,
- > points of light with high cosmological redshift. In short: QUASARS!
-
- Assume your theory is true. At half the universe's present age, its
- volume would be one-eighth what it is at present. So the frequency of such
- galaxy interactions today should be about one-eighth of what it was then.
- Then the number of new quasars today should be about one-eighth of the number
- of 5-7 billion-year-old quasars. I don't think that can be reconciled with
- observations. Nice try, though. -|Tom|-
-
- --
- Tom Van Flandern / Washington, DC / metares@well.sf.ca.us
- Meta Research was founded to foster research into ideas not otherwise
- supported because they conflict with mainstream theories in Astronomy.
-