Quote:
Originally Posted by parejkoj
No. Wrong again. An increase in the number of quasars around galaxies is a prediction of standard cosmology. You've had this explained to you before. It isn't a large increase, and it isn't monotonic (in fact, it's quite complicated), and it only comes out when looking at a very large number of objects. There are a number of causes, which combine in a nonlinear fashion:
...
|
You have referred to the number sen rather than the brightness (which is what I was referring to), but perhaps these are connected.
It does seem to me that the slices (taken according to galaxy redshift) do show a better correlation between quasar brightness and quasar redshift than the normal scatter diagrams. Of course that was what I was originally looking for as a result but expecting it to be more strongly correlated with the galaxy redshift distance.
That particular paper that goes with the catalog I think really resolves all the
observational issues at dispute between big bang and Arp. Of course the theoretical preferences will remain as to whether redshift is expansion or variable mass. I think that the Tifft discoveries deal better with that issue. But I am now reasonable open to the idea that quasar redshifts are not dominated by an internal component and not ejected by galaxies. They are observable though because of something close to galaxies and possibly ejected by them. One remaining thing of Arp's is not explained by this, and that is the pairs of quasars with similar redshift on opposite sides of a galaxy and on the galaxy axis. So not quite every issue is resolved.