Material source of the quasar redshift

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the complexities of quasar redshift, particularly distinguishing between quasars and blazars. Quasars primarily emit light from their accretion disks, while blazars have jets directed toward Earth, resulting in blueshifted and redshifted emissions. The determination of quasar redshift is complicated by the presence of these jets and the metallicity of quasars, which reflects their current accretion rather than primordial materials. Accurate measurement of redshift is crucial for understanding the universe's timeline and the nature of quasars.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quasar and blazar definitions
  • Knowledge of redshift and blueshift phenomena
  • Familiarity with accretion disks in astrophysics
  • Concept of metallicity in astronomical objects
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between quasars and blazars
  • Learn about the mechanics of accretion disks and their role in quasar luminosity
  • Study the implications of redshift measurements on cosmic timelines
  • Explore the concept of "black holes have no hair" in astrophysics
USEFUL FOR

Astronomy students, astrophysicists, and anyone interested in the mechanisms behind quasar emissions and redshift analysis.

CosmologyHobbyist
Messages
61
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
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   Reactions: 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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K