Lyman Alpha forest

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>It is possible to visualize smaller and closer hydrogen gas clouds that are associated with the quasar and are being blown away from it by the local 'quasar wind'. These would also be moving at various speeds and so create a similar forest of absorption lines. I'm pretty sure, but not certain, that the lines would be shifted in the right direction. But I know of no evidence for such clouds associated with quasars.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In MM, one type of quasar is the supermassive star. Although quasar absorption systems with small redshifts are probably galaxy haloes or real hydrogen clouds of the type seen around our Galaxy, absorption systems with redshifts similar to the quasar's own are probably arising inside the chromosphere-like inner corona of these objects. The absorption systems would correspond to specific coronal layers. So they are part of the quasar, not nearby clouds. Their redshift differences would be entirely gravitational, with the strength of gravitational potential falling rapidly with altitude in the quasar's corona.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Is the data showing proper motion for some quasars still considered questionable?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That data is not yet accepted. However, some attempts to show that proper motions do not exist are way overdue for results. My suspicion is that the results are coming out non-zero, and confirmation is being sought. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[TVF]My suspicion is that the results are coming out non-zero, and confirmation is being sought.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>There's a problem with the observed proper motion itself. Such motion may have an illusory component delivered by refraction in the non-stationary medium somewhere between us and the quasar. Believe me, as soon as they "confirm" the proper motion, they can promptly account for that by the "dark matter" flows.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Believe me, as soon as they "confirm" the proper motion, they can promptly account for that by the "dark matter" flows.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Finding non-zero proper motions would upset many in the mainstream. One of the principals in the proper motion experiment was quoted in Nature magazine as saying that when the result comes out zero, it still won't convince the "true believers" who question the Big Bang. This guy will have to eat more than crow if non-zero proper motions are a reality! -|Tom|-

There are now so many different kinds of objects that generate quasar spectra there must be some that have confirmed proper motion. A lot of quasars were normal stars prior to measurements of radio spectrums from them. That group of quasars must have been measured at a prior time. Then there is the LAF lines that seem to be an add on to the quasar-how did this happen?