Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvamundo
It's not just the only pain quasars present to BBT
* Quasar redshifts are quantized into descrete bands (46,400 data set)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu//abs/2006ApJ...648..140B
Sorry, but if the universe is expanding you are not going to get distinct banding of redshift in every direction
* Quasars are observed to be distributed along minor axes of active Seyfert's
http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/...rect=migration
Sorry the chances of these fluke alignments are statistically ridiculous
* Quasars are now being linked to ejection activity
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609514
Sorry, now you have high redshift objects and interconnecting gases interacting with low redshift objects. Markarian 205 anyone?
Quasars fit no where near the line of fit on a hubble diagram, granted hubble didn't know of them when he proposed it... but his assistant went on to observe these objects, in depth.... Halton Arp |
The most obvious explanation is that if quantizied Quasar redshifts exist without factoring in a Doppler (ejection) component, is that Quasar formation must have formed during specific periods in the Universes history.
Also if Quasars are ejected from Seyfert galaxies and the Doppler component is subtracted to reveal periodicity, why don't Seyfert galaxies exhibit the same effect?
But then people much more qualified than myself have asked the same questions and have concluded that redshift periodicity and quasers being ejected from galaxies is baloney.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/np...2ca922c9c10466
Regards
Steven