Can A 'Distant' Quasar Lie Within A Nearby Galaxy?

University of California, San Diego ^ | 10 January 2005 | Kim McDonald

[PatrickHenry]

An international team of astronomers has discovered within the heart of a nearby spiral galaxy a quasar whose light spectrum indicates that it is billions of light years away. The finding poses a cosmic puzzle: How could a galaxy 300 million light years away contain a stellar object several billion light years away?

The team’s findings, which were presented today in San Diego at the January meeting of the American Astronomical Society and which will appear in the February 10 issue of the Astrophysical Journal, raise a fundamental problem for astronomers who had long assumed that the “high redshifts” in the light spectra of quasars meant these objects were among the fastest receding objects in the universe and, therefore, billions of light years away.

“Most people have wanted to argue that quasars are right at the edge of the universe,” said Geoffrey Burbidge, a professor of physics and astronomer at the University of California at San Diego’s Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences and a member of the team. “But too many of them are being found closely associated with nearby, active galaxies for this to be accidental. If this quasar is physically associated with this galaxy, it must be close by.”

Astronomers generally estimate the distances to stellar objects by the speed with which they are receding from the earth. That recession velocity is calculated by measuring the amount the star’s light spectra is shifted to the lower frequency, or red end, of the light spectrum. This physical phenomenon, known as the Doppler Effect, can be experienced by someone standing near train tracks when the whistle or engine sounds from a moving train becomes lower in pitch, or sound frequency, as the train travels past.

Astronomers have used redshifts and the known brightness of stars as fundamental yardsticks to measure the distances to stars and galaxies. However, Burbidge said they have been unable to account for the growing number of quasi-stellar objects, or quasars—intense concentrations of energy believed to be produced by the swirling gas and dust surrounding massive black holes—with high redshifts that have been closely associated with nearby galaxies.

“If it weren’t for this redshift dilemma, astronomers would have thought quasars originated from these galaxies or were fired out from them like bullets or cannon balls,” he added.

The discovery reported by the team of astronomers, which includes his spouse, E. Margaret Burbidge, another noted astronomer and professor of physics at UCSD, is especially significant because it is the most extreme example of a quasar with a very large redshift in a nearby galaxy.

“No one has found a quasar with such a high redshift, with a redshift of 2.11, so close to the center of an active galaxy,” said Geoffrey Burbidge.

Margaret Burbidge, who reported the team’s finding at the meeting, said the quasar was first detected by the ROSAT X-ray satellite operated by the Max-Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany and found to be closely associated with the nucleus of the spiral galaxy NGC 7319. That galaxy is unusual because it lies in a group of interacting galaxies called Stephan’s Quintet.

Using a three-meter telescope operated by the University of California at Lick Observatory in the mountains above San Jose and the university’s 10-meter Keck I telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii, she and her team measured the redshifts of the spiral galaxy and quasar and found that the quasar appears to be interacting with the interstellar gas within the galaxy.

Because quasars and black holes are generally found within the most energetic parts of galaxies, their centers, the astronomers are further persuaded that this particular quasar resides within this spiral galaxy. Geoffrey Burbidge added that the fact that the quasar is so close to the center of this galaxy, only 8 arc seconds from the nucleus, and does not appear to be shrouded in any way by interstellar gas make it highly unlikely that the quasar lies far behind the galaxy, its light shining through the galaxy near its center by “an accident of projection.”

“If this quasar is close by, its redshift cannot be due to the expansion of the universe,” he adds. “If this is the case, this discovery casts doubt on the whole idea that quasars are very far away and can be used to do cosmology.”

Other members of the team, besides Geoffrey and Margaret Burbidge, included Vesa Junkkarinen, a research physicist at UCSD; Pasquale Galianni of the University of Lecce in Italy; and Halton Arp and Stefano Zibetti of the Max-Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany.

[silverleaf]

cosmos ping

[freedumb2003]

Can A 'Distant' Quasar Lie Within A Nearby Galaxy?

Not in Utah and certain counties in Arkansas.

[Junior]

Red shift has nothing to do with brightness. It has to do with where its emission lines fall on the spectrum. Red shift means those emission lines are shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. Blue shift indicates the opposite and means the emission lines are shifted toward the blue end of the spectrum.

[Fitzcarraldo]

Dark matter has been invoked to explain galactic rotation curves. Maybe that could be used to explain this situation, where in the case of a black hole the dark matter is close to the hole and creates the mass distribution you require.

The rotation curve for the galaxy NGC3198 from Begeman 1989

"Invariably, it is found that the stellar rotational velocity remains constant, or "flat", with increasing distance away from the galactic center. This result is highly counterintuitive since, based on Newton's law of gravity, the rotational velocity would steadily decrease for stars further away from the galactic center. Analogously, inner planets within the Solar System travel more quickly about the Sun than do the outer planets (e.g. the Earth travels around the sun at about 100,000 km/hr while Saturn, which is further out, travels at only one third this speed). One way to speed up the outer planets would be to add more mass to the solar system, between the planets. By the same argument the flat galactic rotation curves seem to suggest that each galaxy is surrounded by significant amounts of dark matter. It has been postulated,and generally accepted, that the dark matter would have to be located in a massive, roughly spherical halo enshrouding each galaxy. "

[massgopguy]

Maybe all that Dark Matter is raising Hell with the Red Shift?

[freedumb2003]

Maybe all that Dark Matter is raising Hell with the Red Shift?

Ah hah! It's not Bush's fault -- it's Hillary's!

[Tamberlane]

Mayhaps. Some of us dislike all the ad hoc additions though, such as "dark matter" and lately also "dark energy". It seems to me that ever new epicycles are being imposed to square the theory with observations. It's a degenerating research program as Lakatos would say.

I'm a complete and utter layman, however. My reference, and the source of my doubts about the BB, is a particularly good 2-part film that details the problems quite thoroughly. I'd recommend the DVD to anyone who is interested in the debate and can spare a buck.

[Yo-Yo]

Ayup. Sorry, when I said 'brightness' I should have said 'color.' I understand when you find a spectral pattern for hydrogen, but shifted one way or the other, you can assume dopplar shift of the emission bands. But the bands I've seen are so full of other noise, it isn't certain that among all the noise in the spectrum, this peak here, and this peak here, and this peak here equals hydrogen, red shifted by so much.

I say 'what about all these other peaks?' Shuddup!

[Tamberlane]

By the way, Halton Arp is interviewed in the above mentioned film, along with many other scientific dissidents. Here's a better link: http://www.universe-film.com/?p=episode1

[6SJ7]

Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear.

[Physicist]

Ayup. Sorry, when I said 'brightness' I should have said 'color.' I understand when you find a spectral pattern for hydrogen, but shifted one way or the other, you can assume dopplar shift of the emission bands. But the bands I've seen are so full of other noise, it isn't certain that among all the noise in the spectrum, this peak here, and this peak here, and this peak here equals hydrogen, red shifted by so much.

Oh! If that's your problem, set your mind at ease. One hydrogen line is much brighter than all the others, so you take the brightest line and say that's it. Then you know exactly where you expect to find the other hydrogen lines, so you can easily account for them, too. The remaining lines are either different elements or other blobs of hydrogen at different redshifts. Either way, the series of lines are like fingerprints: either there are lines where you expect them, or there aren't. If you find a match, you've accounted for another batch of lines.

There really isn't much in the way of noise, especially for a space-based telescope. Every spectral line has meaning.

[clyde asbury]

If it weren’t for this redshift dilemma, astronomers would have thought quasars originated from these galaxies or were fired out from them like bullets or cannon balls

We would see red and blue shifting in that case. So where are the blue ones?

[LurkedLongEnough]

Thanks for posting! This is cool. Or maybe hot.

[swilhelm73]

I'm a bit confused by this; Margaret Burbidge, who reported the team’s finding at the meeting, said the quasar was first detected by the ROSAT X-ray satellite operated by the Max-Planck Institute for Astrophysics in Garching, Germany and found to be closely associated with the nucleus of the spiral galaxy NGC 7319. That galaxy is unusual because it lies in a group of interacting galaxies called Stephan’s Quintet.

How did they determine this? Are they making a similar argument to Arp? Or did they establish this association by something a bit more measurable?

[carlr]

Just a question,probably a dumb one.I remember a science teacher a long time ago saying that nothing could travel faster than the speed of light.Was he correct or mistaken?

[js1138]

you also have to prevent other matter from forming a normal accretion disk with a second, more normal redshift, which would dominate the quasar's spectrum.

Maybe it's a baby.

[ohioGOP]

Certain subatomic particles appear to be able to move faster than the speed of light, but then again, the Theory of Relativity has not been applied successfully to the quantum world, at least not entirely.

[jennyp]

Hmm. Both Burbidges appear in the film too. (FWIW.)

[stylin_geek]

If you really want to get your mind going, ask yourself this: "What, exactly, is space expanding into?"

[UCANSEE2]

The redshift dilemna is caused by a misapplicaton of the Doppler principle.

A train approaches you and passes blowing it's whistle.
The pitch of the whistle increases as the train approaches and decreases as it passes.

This is due to the Doppler effect.

The redshift in the light spectrum is due also to the Doppler effect, and used as measurement for distance.

The problem? The measurement of this effect, on Earth, works because the train is moving, and the person is standing still. Both are on the surface of the Earth, so the person is NOT MOVING in relation to the train.

Our tracking equipment for stars, quasars, etc. is used the same way. The stars are moving, but to have an accurate and dependable measurement, the tracking equipment must not be moving. There is no spot in space that one can point to and say there is that non moving spot.

Our sun, our solar system, our galaxy, are all moving.

Another factor is that we assume all objects are moving away from us, and that we are the center of the universe.

The only way to know where the center is, is to know where the edges are. We do not know either thing.

Some galaxies, quasars may be moving laterally, from our viewpoint, and therefore any apparent redshift means nothing.

I am expecting some expert in this field to tell me I am wrong, but first they must address the issue of this article.

Remember, experts who insist they are correct about the distance and speed of something like a quasar or galaxy, are violating the very principles of science. They cannot go to another galaxy, and measure the distance from here to there to back up their claims, so basically, it is all just theory, and since repeated trials show different results, their theories are very questionable indeed.

What I find interesting is that the most basic things are the most understood.

Magnestism, for instance. Many iron bearing rocks are magnetic. The earth has a magnetic field and poles. Ask someone what causes the mag field and poles. Ask a scientist how one object can affect another object, with an invisible force, at a distance.

Remember, scientists said telekinesis was impossible, because nothing can affect another object, from a distance, with an invisible force.