- #1
Saul
- 271
- 4
If Astronomers stated that they had using the Hubble telescope found a remote island on the Earth with 1000 meter tall Homo sapiens we would based on scientific knowledge and logic concerning the biological limits of animal structure (any land based animal that moves on the surface of the earth) and human genetics, state that is not possible. The observations, the assumptions for those observations, or the associated calculations themselves must be incorrect.
Is there analogous to the physical impossibility of 1000 meter tall Homo sapiens, a similar impossibility of a 200,000 light year quasar jet?
Our Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light years in diameter.
Now when one looks at the observations of the 200,000 light year jet the objects in question are in a straight line.
Obviously the quasar has intrinsic movement so during the ejection process it will have moved. If it is 200,000 light years long it has at least 200,000 years of movement as the ejection process is occurring to have moved. What one would expect is a curved jet not a straight jet.
It should be noted that there are a whole set of peculiar quasar observations.
For example the massive object in the center of the Milky Way and the largest galaxy in our Cluster Andromeda are baby quasars. Based on the lowest possible estimate of gas in the center of both galaxies the emissions associated with these baby massive objects should based on the quasar unified model (unified is the name used for a classical black hole and an accretion disk) be 10 to 100,000 times greater than what is observed.
An obvious question is why in the local universe are there baby massive objects? Is that just a peculiar statically oddity such as people winning the lottery three times in the same year?
Another puzzle is the paradox of youth stars and high velocity blue stars. (I will add a couple of comments to explain the observations and paradox concerning these stars.)
Another approach rather than starting with a toy model theory that was developed at the turn of the century independent of observations and the associated mechanisms, is to look at the modern observations and then develop mechanisms that are in agreement with what is observed.
As noted in the MECO thread, the Classical Black Hole model is based on observations an incorrect toy model. Observations indicate there is a massive magnetic field that is produced when massive objects collapse. That is not surprising based on observations of neutron stars and magtars.
What is interesting is it appears these super massive objects change, evolve based on observations over time.
Before stating one's position concerning this subject or the position of other people, look at and think about the observations. It seems reasonable that an analysis of the observations will lead to the solution. It seems less likely that if one starts with a theory and mechanisms and then modifies or ignore observations that that process or methodology will solve the problem.
An irrational and ineffective methodology (the methodology of starting with a theory rather than looking at the anomalous observations as a set and then constructing theories and mechanisms.) makes it difficult if not impossible to solve the problem. (i.e. The mechanisms and theories must have a physical connection with the observation as opposed to toy models which have their own logic but have no connection with reality. John Hogan called in his book the "End of Science" the practice of that type of science (construction of toy models) as ironic science as it seems science like but will never solve the problem and in fact blocks or inhibits the solution of the problem.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3C_273
This observation seems to support the existence of a massive magnetic field attached to the object.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.4231v1
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605530v1
Is there analogous to the physical impossibility of 1000 meter tall Homo sapiens, a similar impossibility of a 200,000 light year quasar jet?
Our Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light years in diameter.
Now when one looks at the observations of the 200,000 light year jet the objects in question are in a straight line.
Obviously the quasar has intrinsic movement so during the ejection process it will have moved. If it is 200,000 light years long it has at least 200,000 years of movement as the ejection process is occurring to have moved. What one would expect is a curved jet not a straight jet.
It should be noted that there are a whole set of peculiar quasar observations.
For example the massive object in the center of the Milky Way and the largest galaxy in our Cluster Andromeda are baby quasars. Based on the lowest possible estimate of gas in the center of both galaxies the emissions associated with these baby massive objects should based on the quasar unified model (unified is the name used for a classical black hole and an accretion disk) be 10 to 100,000 times greater than what is observed.
An obvious question is why in the local universe are there baby massive objects? Is that just a peculiar statically oddity such as people winning the lottery three times in the same year?
Another puzzle is the paradox of youth stars and high velocity blue stars. (I will add a couple of comments to explain the observations and paradox concerning these stars.)
Another approach rather than starting with a toy model theory that was developed at the turn of the century independent of observations and the associated mechanisms, is to look at the modern observations and then develop mechanisms that are in agreement with what is observed.
As noted in the MECO thread, the Classical Black Hole model is based on observations an incorrect toy model. Observations indicate there is a massive magnetic field that is produced when massive objects collapse. That is not surprising based on observations of neutron stars and magtars.
What is interesting is it appears these super massive objects change, evolve based on observations over time.
Before stating one's position concerning this subject or the position of other people, look at and think about the observations. It seems reasonable that an analysis of the observations will lead to the solution. It seems less likely that if one starts with a theory and mechanisms and then modifies or ignore observations that that process or methodology will solve the problem.
An irrational and ineffective methodology (the methodology of starting with a theory rather than looking at the anomalous observations as a set and then constructing theories and mechanisms.) makes it difficult if not impossible to solve the problem. (i.e. The mechanisms and theories must have a physical connection with the observation as opposed to toy models which have their own logic but have no connection with reality. John Hogan called in his book the "End of Science" the practice of that type of science (construction of toy models) as ironic science as it seems science like but will never solve the problem and in fact blocks or inhibits the solution of the problem.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3C_273
Contents
Large-Scale Jet
The quasar has a large-scale visible jet, which measures ~200 kly (~62 kpc) long having an apparent size of 23″.[3] In 1995 Optical imaging of the jet using the Hubble Space Telescope revealed a structured morphology evidenced by repeated bright knots interlaced by areas of weak emission.[3]
3C 273 is a quasar located in the constellation Virgo. It was the first quasar ever to be identified.
It is the optically-brightest quasar in our sky (m ~ 12.9), and one of the closest with a redshift, z, of 0.158.[4] A luminosity distance of DL = 2.4 Giga light years (749 Mpc) may be calculated from z.[3] It is also one of the most luminous quasars known, with an absolute magnitude of -26.7. Its mass has been measured to be 886 ± 187 million solar masses through broad emission-line reverberation mapping.[5]
This observation seems to support the existence of a massive magnetic field attached to the object.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.4231v1
Time Variation of Rotation Measure Gradient in 3C 273 Jet
The existence of a gradient in the Faraday rotation measure (RM) of the quasar 3C 273 jet is confirmed by follow-up observations. A gradient transverse to the jet axis is seen for more than 20 mas in projected distance. Taking account of the viewing angle, we estimate it to be more than 100 pc. Comparing to the distribution of the RM in 1995, we detect a time variation of it at the same distance from the core over 7 yr. We discuss the origin of the Faraday rotation based on this rapid time variation. We rule out foreground media such as a narrow-line region, and suggest a helical magnetic field in the sheath region as the origin of this gradient of the RM.
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0605530v1
Shedding New Light on the 3C 273 Jet with the Spitzer Space Telescope
We have performed infrared imaging of the jet of the quasar 3C 273 at wavelengths 3.6 and 5.8 microns with the Infrared Array Camera (IRAC) on the Spitzer Space Telescope. When combined with the radio, optical and X-ray measurements, the IRAC photometry clearly shows that the optical emission is dominated by the high-energy component of the jet, not by the radio synchrotron component, as had been assumed to date. The high-energy component may be due to a second synchrotron component or to IC scattering of ambient photons. In the former case, we argue that the acceleration of protons exceeding 10^16 eV or possibly even to 10^19 eV would be taking place in the jet. In contrast, the IC model, into which highly relativistic Doppler beaming has to be incorporated, requires very low-energy electrons (~ 1 MeV). The present polarization data in the radio and optical would favor the former interpretation in the case of the 3C 273 jet. Sensitive and detailed measurements of optical polarization are important to establish the radiation mechanism responsible for the high-energy emission. The present study offers new clues as to the controversial origin of the X-ray emission seen in many quasar jets.