Archive for the ‘Redshifts’ Category

3C 348 (Hercules A)

Saturday, April 18th, 2015

3C 348 opticalTreating gravity as the dominate force in the Universe and extragalactic redshifts as evidence of cosmic expansion creates a lot of unnecessary headaches for astrophysicists and cosmologists.  A good example of this is an object posted in the gallery, galaxy 3C 348 and its radio loud core Hercules A.   Mainstream scientists calculate that this galaxy’s spectral redshift of 0.155 z (z = (observed wavelength – rest wavelength)/(rest wavelength)) puts it at distance of over 2 billion light years expanding away from us at almost 43,000 kilometers per second.

At first glance 3C 348 looks like just another ordinary elliptical galaxy and the radio jets of Hercules A appear typical of many other such jets that have been observed.  But by placing them at such a huge cosmological distance scientists have created a monster.   To account for this object’s angular size at such a great distance scientists have Hercules A radiocalculated that the galaxy is over a 1,000 times more massive than the Milky Way Galaxy and the jets streaming from the center of Hercules A are each almost a million light years long.  They have also calculated that the central black hole powering these jets is nearly 1,000 times more massive than the black hole in the center of our galaxy or 3 to 4 billion times the mass of our sun.  This makes it one of the largest black holes known.

How do astrophysicists account for such a colossal object?  The simple answer is they can’t.  An object of this size just cannot be explained using any known physics or even hypothetical processes.  But of course scientists only assume it’s so large because they also assume its redshift is a result of cosmic expansion.  But there are other explanations for extragalactic redshifts, especially in a universe dominated by plasma and the electromagnetic force instead of gravity.

For example, Thomas Smid and Ari Brynjolfsson both have proposed intriguing and testable theories that light is redshifted when it passes through intergalactic plasma.  It has even been suggested that Brynjolfsson’s theory has already been proven in the laboratory.  3C 348 and Hercules AIf true, plasma redshifts would completely change our current understanding of the universe.  To quote Brynjolfsson from his website:  “Plasma redshift explains the solar redshifts, the intrinsic redshifts of stars, quasars, the galactic corona, the cosmological redshifts, the cosmic microwave background, and the X-ray background.  The plasma redshift explains the observed magnitude-redshift relation for supernovae SNe Ia without the big bang, dark matter, or dark energy.  It explains also the observed surface brightness of galaxies.  There is no cosmic time dilation.  The universe is not expanding…..the universe is quasi-static, infinite, and everlasting.  The universe can renew itself forever.”

Images credit:  NASA, ESA, S. Baum and C. O’Dea (RIT), R. Perley and W. Cotton (NRAO/AUI/NSF), and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)

NOTE:  This object is also posted on the Plasma Pics online image gallery and discussion site.

NGC 772

Sunday, October 28th, 2012

Adam Block/Mount Lemmon SkyCenter/University of Arizona

Arp 78, also known as NGC 772, was originally listed in Halton Arp’s Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies because of its possible interaction with nearby high redshift companions via its extensive and diffuse spiral arms.  Its redshift is listed in NED as z = 0.008246.  This places the galaxy at a distance of 115 million light years using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 70 (km/s)/Mpc.

The image on the right is from the University of Arizona’s Mt. Lemmon SkyCenter.  It has been rotated and cropped to match the orientation of the original image used by Dr. Arp in his atlas. The bright object on the right is the likely true companion NGC 770.  In a straight line above NGC 770 are two small yellow objects which are the high redshift companions in question.  In addition to their distinct color compared to NGC 772 and NGC 770, their size and morphology indicate that they are most likely not companions after all but distant background galaxies.

Modern observations may have clarified two possible redshift discordancies in NGC 772 but they have also revealed a new and more compelling one!  In the late 1980’s a quasar labeled [HB89] 0156+187 was discovered near the galactic core of NGC 772.  The exact location of this quasar along with two observed supernovae is shown in the image below generated using the free Aladin interactive sky atlas software.  The light green square marks the QSO.

NGC 772 and [HB89] 0156+187

Close examination of even the highest resolution images available reveal little more than bright knots of gas and stars in this inner most region of the galaxy’s spiral arms.  It is difficult to believe that any background object could be visible through the density of stellar material present in this location near the center of the galaxy.  Yet continued spectral analysis of [HB89] 0156+187 into the early 21st century indicates a redshift of z = 2.61 which would supposedly place it far behind NGC 772 at a distance of well over 11 billion light years!

Obviously, as with most of the examples I have posted to this site, there is a need for higher resolution observations and closer examination of the objects presented.  If it were not for the extremely high redshift of [HB89] 0156+187 it would be easy to assume by most scientists that the object was located either within or in front of the inner spiral arms of NGC 772, based on the data available today.  Better observations may clarify the actual position of this quasar and place it in the background as in the case of the previously described companion objects observed by Arp.  However, what will scientists do if better observations reveal that the quasar is indeed part of NGC 772?  Will they finally be forced to reexamine the true nature of extragalactic redshifts and the validity of universal expansion?  Either way it is important that research be continued and questions continue to be asked, regardless of whether or not we like the answers that result.

Shannon

RXJ0911+0551

Thursday, April 12th, 2012

RXJ0911+0551 is another excellent example of a multiple quasar system described as a gravitational lens by astronomers and astrophysicists.  As with my previous two examples, the Einstein Cross and PG1115+80, this system consists of four high redshift quasars encircling a lower redshift central galaxy.  In SIMBAD the quasars are listed as a single object QSO B0908+0603 and the central galaxy is listed as [KCH2000] L2.    QSO B0908+0603 is listed as having a redshift of 2.7933 z which supposedly places it at a distance of 11.5 billion light years  using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 70 (km/s)/Mpc.   [KCH2000] L2 is listed as having a redshift of 0.7689 z which supposedly places it at a distance of 6.8 billion light years from Earth also using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 70 (km/s)/Mpc.  However, despite being allegedly separated by a distance of almost five billion light years, filaments of material can be seen connecting the central galaxy with the surrounding quasars in this system.

The above pair of images is from the CfA-Arizona Space Telescope LEns Survey (CASTLES) which utilized Hubble Space Telescope optical and near infrared images using NICMOS/NIC2 for H band observations and WFPC2/PC1 for V and I band images when none exist.  The image on the right has been “cleaned” using image filtering software based on hypothetical gravitational lens models.  Yet the image still clearly shows faint streamers of material between the central galaxy and encircling quasars, but they are not mirrored as would be expected in a gravitational lens.   The near-infrared image on the right is from the 2.56 m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT) using the High Resolution Adaptive Camera (HIRAC) and from the ESO 3.5 m New Technology Telescope (NTT) using the “Son of ISAAC” (SOFI) near-infrared camera.  It shows a jet of material on both sides of the central galaxy with one jet connecting it with the lower left quasar in the system.  But again nothing is mirrored as would be expected in a true gravitational lens.

Astronomers have observed the x-ray fluctuations of the four quasars in RXJ0911+0551 in the hopes that a shared flare up between them would prove that they are merely mirages of the same background quasar.   A sudden increase in x-ray intensity was detected using the Chandra X-ray Observatory.  But the flare up, which lasted for more than half an hour, only occurred for one of the four quasars.  Astronomers measured x-ray intensities of the four quasars for over eight hours but the flare up never repeated in any of the other three.  The image below on the left is taken from the Chandra Press Room and shows the light curves of two of the quasars with the flare up clearly visible in one and not the other.  Astronomers refused to give up and claimed that the flare ups of the other quasars must have occurred before their observations were made.  The astronomers also claimed that a long term observation of this system will reveal shared flare ups among the quasar “mirages” providing precise extragalactic measurements and thereby allowing the expansion rate of the universe to be better estimated.  The original observations were made back in 2000 and despite all of these claims there have still yet to be any long term observations made of RXJ0911+0551.

Time and again scientists have tried to prove that this quadruple quasar system is a gravitational lens and time and again they have failed.  It is interesting that multiple quasar systems contain a limited number of quasars encircling a central galaxy in a limited number of positions.  What can account for this and for the bridges of material between these objects?  As I speculated in my previous examples, perhaps this is due to the quasars being ejected from the central galaxy in a symmetrical tetrahedral pattern.  An excellent way to visualize such a pattern is to look at a Jmol model of a methane molecule.  I am not suggesting that methane plays any role in multiple quasar systems.   But the four hydrogen atoms surrounding the carbon atom in a methane molecule can be rotated to very closely match the positions of the quasars in multiple quasar systems, including RXJ0911+0551 as shown in the image below on the right.

The reason that quasars ejected from a central galaxy could be positioned in such a way is simplicity.  A tetrahedron has the least number of faces and angles of any geometric solid.   The least number of objects, other than a pair, that can be evenly spaced with matching angles around another centralized object is four, but only if they are positioned at the vertices of an imaginary orthographically projected tetrahedron.

There are many more examples of tetrahedral symmetry displayed in compact multiple quasar systems, several of which I would like to post.  But tell me readers, do you think this is a viable explanation for what has been reported as gravitational lensing in many systems?  Or are there other alternatives that can better explain the number and positioning of quasars in these multiple quasar systems?  Let me know and thanks for reading!

Shannon

PG1115+80

Thursday, February 2nd, 2012

The Einstein Cross is an excellent example of a probable quadruple quasar system described as a distant gravitational lens by current mainstream scientists.  In fact, there are many good examples of multiple quasars that surround and even appear to be ejected from dimmer, lower redshift central galaxies.  But unfortunately these objects too have been explained away as gravitational lenses, despite their lack of correlation with any known optical physics.

Take for instance PG1115+080 near the constellation Leo.  This object also consists of four quasars surrounding a dimmer, lower redshift core.  This central host galaxy displays a redshift of 0.31 z which supposedly places it over 2.9 billion light years away using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 85 (km/s)/Mpc.  The four quasars display identical redshifts of 1.7355 z each which supposedly place them at a much greater distance of almost 8.3 billion light years also using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 85 (km/s)/Mpc.

PG1115+80

Interestingly enough, most images of PG1115+080 show a tenuous connection between the central galaxy and one or more of the surrounding quasars, despite their accepted separation of over 5 billion light years.  In the above images from the 8.2 meter Subaru Telescope at the Mauna Kea Observatory in Hawaii filaments of various thicknesses are shown connecting the central galaxy with all four of the surrounding quasars!  PG1115+80 cleanedPG1115+80 optical and near infraredThe following image on the left is from the CfA-Arizona Space Telescope LEns Survey (CASTLES).  CASTLES utilized Hubble Space Telescope optical and near infrared images using NICMOS/NIC2 for H band observations and WFPC2/PC1 for V and I band images when otherwise unavailable.  The image also shows all four quasars connected to the central galaxy via tenuous bridges of material.  Even after the image is “cleaned” using image filtering software based on hypothetical gravitational lens models the two paired quasars at the lower left of the image on the right still display strong connections while very faint filaments are still visible between the other two quasars.

PG1115+80 infraredDespite this evidence there are still scientists who try to manipulate the data.  The pair of infrared images on the left is taken from the Hubble Space Telescope NICMOS.  The left image is the original while the right image has supposedly had the quasars and central galaxy digitally subtracted from it to reveal a lensed galaxy in the background.  There are a few problems with this processed image however.  Besides the dubious method of subtraction used to create the image, the resulting ring of light is incomplete and irregularly shaped and does not conform to any accepted PG1115+80 x-rayoptical physics or gravitational lens models.  The image to the right is a 7+ hour exposure of PG1115+080 made by the Chandra X-Ray Observatory.  If the light from a background quasar and its host galaxy is supposedly being lensed and is showing as a ring in infrared and possibly visible wavelengths why is there no trace of the hosting galaxy when it is viewed in the x-ray portion of the electromagnetic spectrum?  The most likely explanation is that there is no real ring nor any gravitational lensing occurring at all other than what scientists so desperately wish to see rather than face the stunning reality of their observations.

If the four quasars encircling the central galaxy in PG1115+80 are not the result of gravitational lensing then what can account for their number and positioning?    Why are quasars typically only located in a limited number of positions around the central galaxy in other compact quadruple quasar systems?  One very interesting theory is that these quasars have been ejected from the central galaxy in a symmetrical tetrahedral pattern.  The various filaments and connections observed between the quasars and the central galaxy in PG1115+80, the Einstein Cross and other quadruple quasar systems appears to confirm the ejection part of the theory.  But I must admit I have always had trouble visualizing a tetrahedron configuration for the quasars in these compact systems.  That was until one of my readers posted a comment under the Einstein Cross example.  He suggested the humble methane molecule as a visual aid for tetrahedral symmetry.  Of course it is not being suggested that methane plays any role in quadruple quasar systems.  But the four hydrogen atoms that surround the central carbon atom in methane are positioned at the vertices of an imaginary tetrahedron orthographically projected from the central carbon atom.  By rotating this tetrahedron the hydrogen atoms can be positioned so that they align themselves very closely with the majority of the quasar positions observed in compact quadruple quasar systems such as PG1115+80 and the Einstein Cross.

tetrahedral symmetryThe best way to view these alignments is to utilize a Java applet such as Jmol that allows viewing and manipulation of various molecules in orthographic perspective.  The easiest way to accomplish this is to search for “JMOL methane” in any search engine.  This query will return a variety of pages displaying the methane molecule in an embedded viewer.  By rotating the methane molecule displayed in one of these Java viewers I was able to line up the angles of the hydrogen atoms to almost precisely match the angles of the quasars surrounding the core of PG1115+80 in the above observations.  Any variance from the resulting image on the left is possibly due to the viewing angle and/or independent motion of the quasars since their ejections from the core.  I was also able to rotate the methane molecule to align its hydrogen atoms precisely with the positions of the quasars shown in the Einstein Cross.  Please be sure to visit this previously posted example to view the newly added resultant image.

So if the aforementioned objects are indeed formed by the ejection of quasars in a symmetrical tetrahedral pattern from a central galaxy why this particular pattern?  I proffer that the answer is simplicity.  A tetrahedron has the least number of faces and angles of any geometric solid.  Therefore, other than a pair, the least number of objects that can evenly encircle a central object with matching angles is four and only if they are positioned at the vertices of a tetrahedron.  There are many more examples of tetrahedral symmetry displayed in compact quadruple quasar systems.  I plan to post several more of these as time permits.  In the meantime continue to question the accepted theories, doubt the explanations given, and search for the truth about our universe and modern cosmology.  Thanks for reading!

Shannon

NGC 1232 and NGC 1232A

Saturday, October 8th, 2011

NGC 1232 is a wonderful example of a spiral galaxy with a companion at the end of one arm.  It is also a wonderful example of obviously discordant redshifts that have either been covered up or are simply ignored by mainstream astronomy.  NGC 1232 and its companion, NGC 1232A, were first listed as Arp 41 in Dr. Halton Arp’s Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies published by Caltech in 1966.   They are also discussed in Dr. Arp’s book Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies (Interstellar Media, 1987) and are mentioned in several papers published by him in The Astrophysical Journal.  The following image is from the European Southern Observatory’s (ESO) 1.5m Danish telescope in Chile.  I have cropped the original image in order to fit it on this page but it is otherwise unaltered.

NGC 1232 and NGC 1232A

From the color and morphology of NGC 1232A alone it is very apparent that it is a part of its parent galaxy NGC 1232.  But if one traces the spiral arm to which NGC 1232A appears faintly connected back to the core of NGC 1232 a great disturbance and split in the arm is clearly visible.  Perhaps, as Dr. Arp suggests, this is the path taken by the companion object after it was ejected from the core of the parent galaxy?  Regardless of how the companion object reached its current location, I noticed during my research that its existence is either entirely ignored in the scientific literature describing NGC 1232 or it is described as being at the same or similar distance as NGC 1232.  However a quick look at the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) reveals that not only does the companion object exist, based on its listed redshift it is supposedly located much, much further away.

According to its listing on NED the redshift of NGC 1232 is 0.005347 z which places it at a supposed distance of approximately 95 million light years from Earth using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 55 (km/s)/Mpc.  However, NED lists the redshift of NGC 1232A as 0.022012 z which supposedly places the companion object at a much greater distance of approximately 390 million light years from Earth using a so-called Hubble Constant value of 55 (km/s)/Mpc.  It is no surprise then that these numbers have been suppressed by the scientific community.  Otherwise astronomers and cosmologist would have to face the fact that extragalactic redshifts do not represent distance or expansion of the universe for that matter.  And if that were true where would that leave the Big Bang Theory and their jobs?

NGC 1232 closeup

Another interesting feature of NGC 1232 is a small but bright object that appears right next to the aforementioned split and disturbance in the spiral arm leading out to NGC 1232A.  Dr. Arp measured the redshift of this object at 28,000 km/s or 0.0934 z which places it at an astonishing 1.63 billion light years from Earth!  It has been argued that this object is a distant background galaxy shining through NGC 1232 but there is no possible way a background object’s light could make it through the stars and dust of a galaxy’s spiral arm.  Dr. Arp explains in his book Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies that even if a background object were to show through a thin area of a spiral arm its color would be deeply reddened.

There are several examples of this reddening effect visible between the arms of NGC 1232.  The image on the left is a vertical slice of a larger ESO photograph showing a couple of these examples.  In this image the bright high redshift object is at the top, embedded or even possibly slightly in front of the disturbed spiral arm of NGC 1232.  In the middle of the image slice is a small spiral shaped object just showing through the end of a gap between the disturbed spiral arm and another large arm to the right.  Notice how red the object is compared to the one at the top.  Toward the bottom of the image slice is another object of the same size and morphology peeking through the edge of a small band of stars and dust between the base of the arm on the right and another arm just out of view at the very bottom of the image.  This object is also the same red color as the object in the middle and both look nothing like the object at the top which is actually quite blue in comparison.

So once again we have a clear and unmistakable example of visibly associated objects that display greatly discordant redshifts thereby negating redshifts as a measure of distance and universal expansion.  And yet once again the observations are completely ignored and once again I find it my duty to bring them out into the light for all to see.  Eventually if enough observations are revealed their existence will no longer be able to be ignored and their implications will finally have to be faced and discussed.  So as always I will keep posting to this site and thanking you for reading and encouraging everyone to pursue their own observations and to share any interesting ones!

Shannon