I Material source of the quasar redshift

AI Thread Summary
Quasar redshift discussions often confuse the light sources, as the primary emission comes from the accretion disk rather than the jets, which are characteristic of blazars. The redshift observed is influenced by the motion of these jets, with the jet pointing towards Earth being blueshifted and the opposite jet redshifted, complicating redshift measurements. Quasar metallicity reflects the materials currently being consumed rather than the primordial constituents of the black hole, as black holes lack identifiable features. Accurate determination of quasar redshift is crucial for understanding the universe's timeline, despite the complexities involved. Overall, the nuances of quasar emissions and their redshift require careful consideration to avoid misinterpretation.
CosmologyHobbyist
Messages
61
Reaction score
4
TL;DR Summary
When we look at quasar redshift, are we looking at the redshift of the blueshifted jet pointed toward us?
When I see discussions about quasar redshift, exactly what are they talking about? I assume a quasar is similar to a black hole, so emits little radiation from the main mass. The light from a quasar comes principally from its jets of accelerated material, no? Which means the jet pointed toward us is blueshifted and the jet pointed away from us is redshifted, no? And the blueshifted jet would be extra-energized by the blueshift, so would probably obscure the red-shifted jet's spectrum, no? So doesn't all this make determining quasar redshift a complicated affair?

And on a tangentally related note, wouldn't quasar metallicity simply reflect what they are currently devouring, not the primordial black hole constituent materials? So does that mean metallicity issues concerning quasars, means no galactic cores should have second-generation stars by that time period in the universe? And determining the universe timeframe of the quasar is much dependent on accurately determining its redshift with the issues above?

When I see discussion about quasar redshifts, it appears that the redshift is being used raw without regard to the high degree of falsification owing to the way it is generated. Are all the adjustments handled behind the scenes and taken for granted? If not, then we should assume most quasars are highly blueshifted, which makes their deep redshifts even more puzzling. But as a layman, I assume I am missing the fundamentals of the picture, thus my question. "When we look at quasar redshift, are we looking at the redshift of the blueshifted jet pointed toward us?"
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
CosmologyHobbyist said:
The light from a quasar comes principally from its jets of accelerated material, no?
No, it's principally from the accretion disk. What you seem to be thinking of is not quasars, but blazars - i.e. the relatively rare quasars with their jet beam directed towards Earth.
CosmologyHobbyist said:
Which means the jet pointed toward us is blueshifted and the jet pointed away from us is redshifted, no? And the blueshifted jet would be extra-energized by the blueshift, so would probably obscure the red-shifted jet's spectrum, no? So doesn't all this make determining quasar redshift a complicated affair?
Remember that quasars are extended objects, not point sources. One can find the redshift of the host galaxy by blocking the central region of the aperture.

CosmologyHobbyist said:
And on a tangentally related note, wouldn't quasar metallicity simply reflect what they are currently devouring, not the primordial black hole constituent materials?
Yes. One can never know the black hole constituent materials anyway, because black holes have no hair.
But I don't quite get the rest of the question.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Oldman too and PeroK
Hi Bandersnatch, Great name.
Thanks for your answers, and yes I suppose I am talking blazars. I did some reading on related threads below, and found the material jets only move at 1/10 the speed of light, which won't falsify the redshift much. I thought they moved at relativistic speeds, which even then wouldn't much affect readings from high-redshift blazars.
 
About metallicity, yes black holes have no hair, meaning we can never determine what constituents went into it. So all metallicity readings are coming from the accretion disk.
 
So you say quasar light comes from the accetion disk being consumed? Hm, that news to me. And that explains their great brightness? Wow, that's going to take some digesting...
 
Thanks again for refining my understanding.
 
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Asteroid, Data - 1.2% risk of an impact on December 22, 2032. The estimated diameter is 55 m and an impact would likely release an energy of 8 megatons of TNT equivalent, although these numbers have a large uncertainty - it could also be 1 or 100 megatons. Currently the object has level 3 on the Torino scale, the second-highest ever (after Apophis) and only the third object to exceed level 1. Most likely it will miss, and if it hits then most likely it'll hit an ocean and be harmless, but...

Similar threads

Back
Top