Nico Benschop wrote:Dear Nereid and cosmo_uk,
Anomalous Quasar redshifts may arise due to the Wolf effect, involving a scattering medium - possibly the proposed intergalactic plasma. Please read the online paper "The Wolf effect and the Redshift of Quasars", at
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9807205v1 by D.James. The Quasar near NCG7319 (redshift z=0.0211) has a redshift of z=0.22 thus a factor of about ten larger, *without* being that much weaker due to its assumed 10x greater distance.
Re "What has redshift to do with the origin of the Universe" : everything, since the mainstream BB hypothesis (the 'Birth' of the universe) rests on the assumption that the measured redshift of stellar objects is solely a Doppler effect: these objects having a receeding speed proportional to 1+z at measured redshift z (hence 'expanding universe', and by time reversal: voilà, the BB). This is an assumption, proposed by Hubble in 1931, although he warns in a footnote that this has no proof: little was/is known about the intergalactic space between source and observer. In fact he himself was more in favour of a redshift proportional to distance (now called the tired-light theory) due to energy loss of light (photons). But he had no clue of such entropy process, so he was rather safe than sorry and assumed space to be 'empty' (hence no possible loss-process, in accordance with Einstein's prevailing doctrine).
While this may be interesting, I'm sorry to say that it seems to have almost nothing to do with the specific question I asked you ("
Perhaps you would care to explain how you consider that paper to be relevant to this thread, whose focus is the origins of the universe and observational cosmology?" - added bold)
Would you like me to clarify my question?
I also note that you seem to have repeated a common misunderstanding of modern cosmological theories ("Big Bang"), one which we have addressed, at considerable length already, in this thread.
If, after reading this thread, you have something new to offer, in regard to redshifts, please present it.
BTW, I was not able to download a copy of the James preprint you cite - do you have a link to the paper itself?
Re the six cosmic phenomena Nereid mentions, to be explained by a plasma universe: I am new here, so I'll have to peruse the present thread to find out what is meant. -- NB
No worries; here's a quick summary:
1) Olbers' paradox, in all wavebands of the EM spectrum, with a plasma cosmology model to provide a quantitative estimate of the diffuse background
2) the CMB, which you may consider a subset of 1 - both its blackbody SED and its angular power spectrum
3) large scale structure, e.g. as reported by the SDSS and 2dF teams
4) the Hubble relationship
5) the primordial abundance of light nuclides (H, D, 3He, 4He)
6) time dilation in high-z 1a SNe light curves.
Again, the specific question is: what paper(s), published in relevant, peer-reviewed journals, present a quantitative account of how a plasma cosmology model (or models) match the quantitative data, for each of the six sets of (independent) astronomical observations?
I'm also interested to know if you intend to try to answer my last question, or the questions of astro_uk and cosmo_uk - do you have such an intention?