Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Quasar Found 420 Trillion Times Brighter Than Our Sun
Astronomy Trek ^ | 2016 | Astro Trek

Posted on 07/29/2016 3:23:48 PM PDT by blam

Quasar Found 420 Trillion Times Brighter Than Our Sun

An international team of astronomers have discovered a huge quasar 420 trillion times brighter than our sun around 12.8 billion light years away from Earth, placing its formation around 875 million years after the big bang. The ancient object is powered by a massive black hole and contains a staggering 12 billion solar masses, surprising scientists who had not expected such a huge bright quasar so close to the dawn of time. The quasar was found using telescopes located in China, Hawaii, Arizona, and Chile, and as Xue-Bing Wu, of Peking University, explains:

“How could we have this massive black hole when the universe was so young? We don’t currently have a satisfactory theory to explain it.”

(snip)

(Excerpt) Read more at astronomytrek.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: astronomy; quasar; sun; trillion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: blam

21 posted on 07/29/2016 3:37:38 PM PDT by lacrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby
"works in the drawer worked on more than a few the knew some of the components would fail so that's how they made the money"

Our TV Repairman was like part of the family I can still remember the smell of the pipe he smoked as he fixed our TV

22 posted on 07/29/2016 3:39:43 PM PDT by Donglalinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: blam

I wonder if the majority of mass in the universe is in these things. If so, I believe it would eliminate the need for dark matter theories.

IMHO, there’s more than enough mass in galactic centers, which, combined with very dense concentrations of matter not yet absorbed by black holes therein, to hold the galaxies together without invoking “dark matter” to correct some phantom insufficiency.


23 posted on 07/29/2016 3:40:11 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Donglalinger

My fave was Borkum Riff


24 posted on 07/29/2016 3:42:02 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Donglalinger

25 posted on 07/29/2016 3:43:38 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Disestablishmentarian

His data?


26 posted on 07/29/2016 3:44:11 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Disestablishmentarian
The great astrophysicist Halton Arp has explained all of this. The problem is that the red-shift theory is wrong, meaning all mainstream cosmology is wrong.

Maybe time/distance are not totally uniform throughout the universe?

Arp's evidence is very hard to dispute.

27 posted on 07/29/2016 3:46:56 PM PDT by The Cajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blam

What’s more likely... that a quasar 420 trillion times as bright as the sun existed 12.8 billion years ago... or that scientists are misinterpreting the data using a flawed theory?


28 posted on 07/29/2016 3:47:32 PM PDT by thoughtomator (This message has been encrypted in ROT13 twice for maximum security)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eddie01; Allegra; big'ol_freeper; Impy; SevenofNine; Cletus.D.Yokel; Rummyfan; Liberty Valance; ...

29 posted on 07/29/2016 3:47:46 PM PDT by Bender2 ("I've got a twisted sense of humor, and everything amuses me." RAH Beyond this Horizon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blam

Actually, it should read this way:

“A quasar, recently ejected from its relatively nearby parent galaxy, has such an extreme intrinsic redshift that, if indicative of recessional velocity rather than age, would put it at such a distance that its intrinsic brightness would make it appear to be 420 trillion time brighter than our sun.”

Funny how much trouble the simple but wrong interpretation of redshift as indicative of recessional velocity in the early days of modern astronomy can cause.


30 posted on 07/29/2016 3:50:29 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

When I smoked a pipe, my choice was Mixture 79.


31 posted on 07/29/2016 3:54:49 PM PDT by 60Gunner (The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. - Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: blam

Global warming without SUV’s?


32 posted on 07/29/2016 3:57:48 PM PDT by TruthWillWin (The problem with socialists is that you eventually run out of other peoples money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

You don’t want to be in the same galaxy as that thing.


33 posted on 07/29/2016 4:03:34 PM PDT by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

>>His data?<<

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I will summarize multiple books, some of which I have read:

Arp photographed many, many galaxy-quasar pairings where the red shift of the quasars make them appear to be in a vastly different place than the galaxies with which they are clearly associated.

This can only mean that the red shift DOES NOT translate to distance and velocity, but perhaps to some other properties of matter, space and light.

The traditional red-shift interpretation would indicate the quasars are MUCH FURTHER away than they really are, making it seem they must be much larger and more energetic.

This is the basis of the absurd claim in the title of this thread.

Incidentally, this faulty theory is the basis of all academic cosmology. It is going to be almost impossible for the academics to give up on it.


34 posted on 07/29/2016 4:08:47 PM PDT by Disestablishmentarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

You joke, but what’s the measurement error on something like this?

My rough calculations are that the sun has an apparent brightness 1.6 x 10^15 times larger than the quasar, with the quasar having an absolute brightness 4.2 x 10^14 times larger than the sun.


35 posted on 07/29/2016 4:18:40 PM PDT by scrabblehack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Disestablishmentarian

Where can I get one of those little diode flashlights that bright?


36 posted on 07/29/2016 4:27:16 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: blam

Mindless politically-addicted Leftist reply: “We need a government 420 trillion times the size of what we have now to deal with it.”


37 posted on 07/29/2016 4:28:49 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Disestablishmentarian

I would ask, as red and blue shift measurements are consistent at closer distances where other measurements can be made along with them to test their agreement, at what distance, do these “other” effects appear? And wouldn’t a variance suggest first an inconsistency with the new model, rather than a rejection of the earlier, well established physical standards?

And that being relatively alone in the physics community - not that that’s always the sole criterion as to the validity of an idea by any means - though it usually means that one’s work has been “weighed, and found wanting”.


38 posted on 07/29/2016 4:40:47 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: blam

Whichever> The EPA is right on it. Pretty soon the quasar will be fined, put on eternal supervised probation, and dimmed to the level of a 25 Watt bulb.

Big Government - looking out for the universe whether you want it to or not!


39 posted on 07/29/2016 4:47:30 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

>>And wouldn’t a variance suggest first an inconsistency with the new model . . . ?<<

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I am not aware that Arp has presented a new model, just refuted the old one, for anyone willing to look with their own eyes at the photographic evidence.

Incidentally, his credentials are impeccable.

Of course referring to Thomas Kuhn in such discussions is almost a cliche . . . but, I happen to think his “Structure of Scientific Revolutions” is one of the great books. It clearly identifies the phases for overthrow of old theories beginning with ammassing of anomolous observations. SUMMARY of the process: IT AIN’T EASY.


40 posted on 07/29/2016 5:06:07 PM PDT by Disestablishmentarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson