Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of oz

The following ABS describes what I mean.

[0809.5171] Evidence for powerful AGN winds at high redshift: Dynamics of galactic outflows in radio galaxies during the "Quasar Era"
Evidence for powerful AGN winds at high redshift: Dynamics of galactic outflows in radio galaxies during the "Quasar Era"

Authors: N.P.H. Nesvadba, M.D. Lehnert, C. De Breuck, A.M.Gilbert, W. van Breugel
(Submitted on 30 Sep 2008 (v1), last revised 13 Oct 2008 (this version, v2))

Abstract: AGN feedback now appears as an attractive mechanism to resolve some of the outstanding problems with the "standard" cosmological models, in particular those related to massive galaxies. To directly constrain how this may influence the formation of massive galaxies near the peak in the redshift distribution of powerful quasars, z~2, we present an analysis of the emission-line kinematics of 3 powerful radio galaxies at z~2-3 (HzRGs) based on rest-frame optical integral-field spectroscopy obtained with SINFONI on the VLT. HzRGs are among the most massive galaxies, so AGN feedback may have a particularly clear signature. We find evidence for bipolar outflows in all HzRGs, with kinetic energies that are equivalent to 0.2% of the rest-mass of the supermassive black hole. Velocity offsets in the outflows are ~800-1000 km s^-1 between the blueshifted and redshifted line emission, FWHMs ~1000 km s^-1 suggest strong turbulence. Ionized gas masses estimated from the Ha luminosity are of order 10^10 M_s, similar to the molecular gas content of HzRGs, underlining that these outflows may indicate a significant phase in the evolution of the host galaxy. The total energy release of ~10^60 erg during a dynamical time of ~10^7 yrs corresponds to about the binding energy of a massive galaxy. Geometry, timescales and energy injection rates of order 10% of the kinetic energy flux of the jet suggest that the outflows are most likely driven by the radio source. The global energy density release of ~10^57 erg s^-1 Mpc^-3 may also influence the subsequent evolution of the HzRG by enhancing the entropy and pressure in the surrounding halo and facilitating ram-pressure stripping of gas in satellite galaxies that may contribute to the subsequent mass assembly of the HzRG through low-dissipation "dry" mergers.

[FRIPRO]

Originally Posted by Erasmus00

For very distance objects, the only way we have of inferring distance is redshift. Relativistic effects (doppler+expansion) are built into the models we use to discern distance.
-Will

What about the Blue Shift? If red shift is doppler shifter as moving away from Earth, then what about the Blue Shift coming towards the Earth?

I still Hypothesize that it means that the Universe is rotating and the source of our Universes gravity.(Gyroscopic)

As it Universe turns it is red shifted and as the other side revolves towards us it is Blue shifted?

[Pluto]

G'day Fripro

I'm just thinking aloud here, I do not know where its going to take me.

Why should everything be moving away?

According to the BBT, it occured everywhere from random points infinetly. So logically you would think that expansion is occuring from those points and therefor you would have an equal red and blue shift.

Does that work out with maths?

Maybe we need to research more of the intrinsic properties.

[astro-ph/0408383] The Fueling and Evolution of AGN: Internal and External Triggers
The Fueling and Evolution of AGN: Internal and External Triggers

Authors: Shardha Jogee (Space Telescope Science Institute)
(Submitted on 20 Aug 2004 (v1), last revised 10 Jul 2008 (this version, v2))

Abstract: In this chapter, I review the fueling and evolution of active galactic nuclei (AGN) under the influence of internal and external triggers, namely intrinsic properties of host galaxies (morphological or Hubble type, color, presence of bars and other non-axisymmetric features, etc) and external factors such as environment and interactions. The most daunting challenge in fueling AGN is arguably the angular momentum problem as even matter located at a radius of a few hundred pc must lose more than 99.99 % of its specific angular momentum before it is fit for consumption by a BH. I review mass accretion rates, angular momentum requirements, the effectiveness of different fueling mechanisms, and the growth and mass density of black BHs at different epochs. I discuss connections between the nuclear and larger-scale properties of AGN, both locally and at intermediate redshifts, outlining some recent results from the GEMS and GOODS HST surveys.

[FRIPRO]

Pluto

I believe you are geting the message! I accept your premis.

Believe me everything in the Universe is not moving away. Deep space photos show red and blue shift. It is the local area that is red shifted away from Earth's arm in the Milky Way.

If the Big bang did occur it did not create the Universe--period. Some of us Hypothesis that the Universe is eternal. Thus it could roatate and stay the same size in infinate nothing.

If there are other Universes out there (I believe there is only one) we may as well accept that--as we would never see them.

[Pluto]

G'day Fripro

Mate you will need to define "The Universe"

I take the definition to be "Total"

That means that if we start defining objects such as the Local Universe, than we bring in Muti-units. Where do we stop?
Do we stop at super dooper cluster of galaxies or clusters of super dooper clusters of galaxies.

So saying if there is another universe out there means universe units that leads to muti-unverse units.

I feel that I'm going around in circles.........smile.

As for the BBT, what can I say I keep on scratching my head and wonder how it became the standard model. Is there something that I'm missing, am I lacking the brain capacity to undertand.

Years gone by I would read papers with assumption that the BBT was correct than they would proceed to fit the data. This is the theory that if one is correct than making it fit is also correct.

Recent papers are more scientific although you get the odd paper.

Maybe I'm wrong.

[Pluto]

G'day fripro

I do not know if you read, but! if you do.

This is interesting reading

Discovery of a Very Bright Strongly-Lensed Galaxy Candidate at z ~ 7.6
Authors: L. D. Bradley, R. J. Bouwens, H. C. Ford, G. D. Illingworth, M. J. Jee, N. Benitez, T. J. Broadhurst, M. Franx, B. L. Frye, L. Infante, V. Motta, P. Rosati, R. L. White, W. Zheng
(Submitted on 18 Feb 2008 (v1), last revised 13 May 2008 (this version, v2))

Abstract: Using HST and Spitzer IRAC imaging, we report the discovery of a very bright strongly lensed Lyman break galaxy (LBG) candidate at z~7.6 in the field of the massive galaxy cluster Abell 1689. The galaxy candidate, which we refer to as A1689-zD1, shows a strong z-J break of at least 2.2 mag and is completely undetected (<1 sigma) in HST/ACS g, r, i, and z-band data. These properties, combined with the very blue J-H and H-[4.5] colors, are exactly the properties of an z~7.6 LBG and can only be reasonably fit by a star-forming galaxy at z=7.6 +/- 0.4. Attempts to reproduce these properties with a model galaxy at z<4 yield particularly poor fits. A1689-zD1 has an observed (lensed) magnitude of 24.7 AB (8 sigma) in the NICMOS H band and is ~1.3 mag brighter than the brightest-known z-dropout galaxy. When corrected for the cluster magnification of 9.3 at z~7.6, the candidate has an intrinsic magnitude of H=27.1 AB, or about an L* galaxy at z~7.6. The source-plane deprojection shows that the star formation is occurring in compact knots of size ~<300 pc. The best-fit stellar population synthesis models yield a median redshift of 7.6, stellar masses (1.6-3.9) x 10^9 M_sun, stellar ages 45-320 Myr, star-formation rates ~<7.6 M_sun/yr, and low reddening with A_V <= 0.3. These properties are generally similar to those of LBGs found at z~5-6. The inferred stellar ages suggest a formation redshift of z~8-10 (t~<0.63 Gyr). A1689-zD1 is the brightest observed, highly reliable z>7.0 galaxy candidate found to date.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzz

Why is there so much confusion between expansion and acceleration and no expansion or acceleration?

You would think that the scientists can reslove such simple issues.

[0809.0537] Cosmographic Hubble fits to the supernova data
Cosmographic Hubble fits to the supernova data

Authors: Celine Cattoen (Victoria University of Wellington), Matt Visser (Victoria University of Wellington)
(Submitted on 3 Sep 2008)

Abstract: The Hubble relation between distance and redshift is a purely cosmographic relation that depends only on the symmetries of a FLRW spacetime, but does not intrinsically make any dynamical assumptions. This suggests that it should be possible to estimate the parameters defining the Hubble relation without making any dynamical assumptions. To test this idea, we perform a number of inter-related cosmographic fits to the legacy05 and gold06 supernova datasets. Based on this supernova data, the "preponderance of evidence" certainly suggests an accelerating universe. However we would argue that (unless one uses additional dynamical and observational information) this conclusion is not currently supported "beyond reasonable doubt". As part of the analysis we develop two particularly transparent graphical representations of the redshift-distance relation -- representations in which acceleration versus deceleration reduces to the question of whether the relevant graph slopes up or down. Turning to the details of the cosmographic fits, three issues in particular concern us: First, the fitted value for the deceleration parameter changes significantly depending on whether one performs a chi^2 fit to the luminosity distance, proper motion distance or other suitable distance surrogate. Second, the fitted value for the deceleration parameter changes significantly depending on whether one uses the traditional redshift variable z, or what we shall argue is on theoretical grounds an improved parameterization y=z/(1+z). Third, the published estimates for systematic uncertainties are sufficiently large that they certainly impact on, and to a large extent undermine, the usual purely statistical tests of significance. We conclude that the supernova data should be treated with some caution.

[FRIPRO]

Defining the Universe?
Pluto
A great question. If I were to answer it I would have to write a book on the subject (which I did).

Google it!

Buffy will not let me reference it--after all I am infamous arround these parts!

The confusion between expansion and acceleration and no expansion or acceleration is that we humans here on Earth have a limited number of brain networks.

When you consider our size here on earth, we really don't count when it comes to placing in that memory the whole of the Universe.

There is just no room in an individual's brain ;however put millions of us on the internet and connect all our brains together we might understand some hypothesis of defining "The Universe"

[modest]

Originally Posted by FRIPRO

Believe me everything in the Universe is not moving away. Deep space photos show red and blue shift.

Your claim contradicts all cosmological observations done since 1920 and earlier. The redshift and brightness of millions of astronomical objects have been measured, all of it agreeing with Hubble's Law and disagreeing completely with what you've just said.

Cosmologically distant objects are NOT blueshifted. The whole sky is evenly filled with distant redshifted galaxies. Further and further galaxies are more and more redshifted. The very few examples of blueshifted astronomical objects are those in our own galaxy and those galaxies such as Andromeda which are very near us.

~modest

[modest]

Originally Posted by Pluto

Why is there so much confusion between expansion and acceleration and no expansion or acceleration?...

[0809.0537] Cosmographic Hubble fits to the supernova data

What does this mean? How is the link confused?

~modest