Quote:
Originally Posted by Amber Robot
My suggestion to "look at the picture" was to point out that the quasar host galaxies look like distant galaxies. And that there are no local analogues to these galaxies that don't contain quasars. After looking at the picture, you should look at the spectra, analyze their redshifts, metal contents, ionization structure, star-formation histories, and stellar populations. All of these will give you some clue as to whether these are local objects or not.
I am not explicitly stating that quasars aren't local objects spat out of galaxies and creating mini-spirals, I'm arguing that you can't make that the statement that are local based solely on their relative positions to nearby galaxies. There is a virtual cornucopia of spectral and photometric information about the quasars themselves and their host galaxies that need to be taken into account and formulated into a coherent picture of what these objects are.
|
Don't get so nervous,
Amber Robot, I posed only a question of
method.
But, as you turned it to
merit, I would like to ask if you do think that a layman has to content himself with this assertive statements about quasars (read
here; some my bolds added):
Quote:
Astronomers have found the first direct evidence that some quasars fuel their bright energy emissions by feeding on gas from external sources, probably neighboring galaxies.
(...)
Discovered in 1961, quasars consist of supermassive black holes, each surrounded by a vortex of gas. The gas spins with increasing speed as it falls toward the black hole and experiences ever greater gravitational pull. The spinning causes the gas vortex's temperature to rise until it shines hundreds of times brighter than the galaxy in which it resides.
|
Or may any issue on quasars be posed only on the right side?