Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A Proper motion of a Quasar?

  1. May 16, 2018 #1
    Hello,
    Does quasars has a proper motion? I searched in different article and sometimes they are considered as objects having a proper motion and other times not. So I want some clarification. in which case can we say that a quasar has a proper motion?
    Thanks
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 16, 2018 #2

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Everything has proper motion. The motion can be very small, and for objects far away it is simply too small to detect it, but it won't be exactly zero.
     
  4. May 16, 2018 #3

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2017 Award

    Where? Which articles exactly?
     
  5. May 16, 2018 #4

    phyzguy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Quasars are so far away that their proper motion is unmeasurably small. This is why Gaia uses them as a fixed system of reference. In fact, in this recent paper, they are searching through the Gaia data release to find objects with zero proper motion (within the error of the measurement of course) as a way to find new quasars.
     
  6. May 16, 2018 #5
    Yes, exactly. If you think you've measured the proper motion of a quasar, you've probably done something wrong. :)
     
  7. May 16, 2018 #6

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Just as order of magnitude estimate: 500 km/s relative velocity at ~5 Gly (?) angular diameter distance gives a proper motion of 70 nas (nano-arcseconds) per year as very fast motion. Gaia hopes to measure positions of bright sources down to 7 μas for very bright sources, and somewhere between 100 to 300 μas for weaker sources - more than a factor 1000 above the expected proper motion.
     
  8. May 17, 2018 #7
    Thanks this is why am working on, i am using DR2 to study the proper motion of quasars. I found that the most of quasars does not have a proper motion, but few of them have a proper motion. how can t his be explained (are they quasars with small redshift?)
     
  9. May 17, 2018 #8
    (a) they are not quasars
    or
    (b) measurement errors
     
  10. May 17, 2018 #9
    No they are considered as quasars by SDSS. and it s not measurement error
     
  11. May 17, 2018 #10
    Oh. Then they have transverse velocity on the order of 500 000 km/s. ;)
     
  12. May 17, 2018 #11
    Can you explain more please?
     
  13. May 17, 2018 #12
    You did not like my honest answer, so I attempted to guess the answer which you look for.
     
  14. May 17, 2018 #13

    mfb

    User Avatar
    2017 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Are you sure you got the right object from SDSS? How do you compare them?
    What are their redshift values?
    Is the proper motion significantly different from zero, or compatible within the uncertainties?
     
  15. May 17, 2018 #14

    phyzguy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I agree with nikkkom. How do you know SDSS didn't make an error? And how do you know it's not measurement error? Try calculating the lateral motion you would need to give the proper motion you see at the distance inferred from the redshift. It's probably unbelievably large.
     
  16. May 17, 2018 #15
    What is the definition of a quasar?

    Quasars are supposed to be active galactic nuclei.
    Galactic nuclei at various degrees of activity are found in many galaxies, including ours (but not all, Magellanic Clouds and Triangulum conspicuously lack nuclei).

    A distant AGN should not have proper motion (that would require a large transverse speed).
    But how about a nearby AGN? How is the distinction made between a distant AGN, and a nearby AGN that happens to have low transverse velocity?
    Many quasars have redshifts, usually high, suggesting that those are distant. Are there also any quasars that have blank continuum spectra and therefore no redshift?
     
  17. May 18, 2018 #16
    There is no nearby AGN which would be active enough to be classified as quasar. The nearest quasars are all more than 2 Gly distant.
     
  18. May 18, 2018 #17
    if you take a look at quasars catalogue, you will see that there are many quasars with redshift<2.
     
  19. May 18, 2018 #18

    phyzguy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    An object at a redshift of 2 is at a comoving distance of ~ 5 Gpc or ~ 17 Gly. nikkkom's statement was that the nearest quasars are more than 2 Gly distant. A comoving distance of 2 Gly equates to a redshift of about 0.15.
     
  20. May 19, 2018 #19
    Markarian 231´s status is in dispute. A quasar or a Seyfert galaxy? If a quasar, it´s just 580 million light years.
    The next is 3C 273, at 2400 million lightyears.

    What is the defining line between quasars and Seyfert galaxies?
    What is the most distant Seyfert galaxy not qualified as a quasar?
     
  21. May 19, 2018 #20

    Ken G

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Could the handle "quasarLie" be a clue here?
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted