Let’s talk about redshift and its causes from the perspective of the Neoclassical Physics and Quantum Gravity (𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚) model. 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 leads to an in-depth and insightful understanding of redshift, or more generally photon energy transactions.
Note: This post contains some new thinking and my confidence level is medium as of the first version. When I build models, it’s not unusual to imagine a solution that fits observations, only to come back later and refine it, or worst case, toss it and start over. I’ve noted in-line where I have follow-up questions (in red italics) and lines of investigation to tie-off. So keep that in mind while reading, and if you can help improve the insights, please comment! Also, remember, this is open source development, so it’s ok to put in tentative structure, even if it has to be revised later. Sometimes going through that exercise leads to discoveries that wouldn’t be seen without running out on branches that can’t hold the weight of nature.
Redshift of electromagnetic radiation. Redshift of light. Redshift of photons. These all mean EXACTLY THE SAME IDEA! A photon has transferred some energy to other particle(s) and now has less energy. That’s it! Now, a few questions.
What is the relevant information about EACH energy transaction?
Does science really understand redshift at the proper depth?
Clearly science does not yet fully understand redshift. For example, we do not yet have any science around redshift of a photon traveling through the 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 superfluid with temperature T (i.e., energy E, i.e., gravity strength g).
Does the superfluid drag depend on the parameters of the photon?
What additional factors are involved?
Photons are really good at exchanging energy. A photon traveling through superfluid may transfer energy if it encounters particle(s) of standard matter, including other photons. Let’s focus on the photon that traverses the superfluid without colliding with anything but low energy particles in the superfluid. The superfluid is very weakly interacting, with drag at such a small scale that it may be considered negligible for many processes. But for a photon traveling long distances, extremely small drag will eventually become a noticeable loss of energy.
Science terminology for the accumulated loss of energy is “redshift” which is a terribly non-intuitive term. First of all “redshift” is anthropocentric, relying as it does on the spectrum of radiation that is visible to humans. Likewise, blueshift, is the term for a photon gaining energy. Second, this terminology relies upon the consumer to remember which direction in the visible light scale is towards longer wavelengths and lower energy vs. shorter wavelengths and increased energy. Third, the terminology also applies to non-visible portions of the electromagnetic spectrum which is odd and confusing. It is much simpler and more accurate to simply say reduced energy photon, or increased energy photon.
Consider a photon lifecycle. Perhaps reaction energy is transferred to a nearby low energy photon in superfluid and zing – off it goes at local speed of light. That photon may experience many energy transactions, both decreases and increases, as permitted by the harmonic trading behavior of its wave function. At some point that photon may yield enough energy to transform back into the superfluid.
What is the composition and wave function of a photon?
What is the energy of the minimum energy photon, the lowest harmonic?
How do these ideas compare to that of “tired light”?
A photon that is created deep in the gravity well of a dense matter-energy object will experience GRAVITATIONAL energy loss (redshift) simply to escape the object. Then, it will experience SUPERFLUID DRAG energy change as it travels through superfluid as a function of superfluid flow, direction, and distance. The photon may also experience DOPPLER energy shift if the emitter and receiver distance was changing. A new consideration in NPQG is INFLATIONARY redshift from galaxy local inflation. Let’s discuss these forms of redshift.
A photon emitted nearby a dense matter-energy object will travel at local speed of light, as determined by the temperature of superfluid. Superfluid temperature is determined by gravitational energy waves emitted by the particles in the object since mass corresponds to the energy exchanged with nearby particles of superfluid. Those energy waves contribute a local root mean square energy to the photon. The photon’s total energy is the pre-emission photon energy, plus the energy from the reaction that was transmitted to the photon, plus the gravitational energy. As the photon travels away from the object and towards free space, the gravitational energy contribution lessens, and therefore the photon has less total energy and it experiences redshift. Note that as the temperature of superfluid falls on this journey out of the objects gravitational field, local speed of light increases slightly due to the changes in permittivity and permeability.
SUPERFLUID DRAG REDSHIFT
Modern physics does not account for superfluid drag redshift. Let’s imagine that based on the energy of the photon and the temperature of the superfluid, there is a probability that the photon will transfer extremely low energy harmonics to the superfluid as it passes. Note that this conjecture allows for the possibility that drag on photons is not simply linear with distance, but can be non-linear based on the energy of photon and superfluid. If so, this could be another consideration when determining if there is a net expansion outflow of superfluid.
N.B. It is significant new physics to discover that photons can heat the superfluid, no matter how small the quanta of energy transferred.
The cosmological microwave background, i.e., the superfluid, contains some of the oldest and most traveled photons we can detect, and scientists have determined a redshift factor of approximately z=1090. What are the implications? The formula astrophysicists use is age(then) = age(now)/(1+z). Is that formula correct in NPQG? How shall we determine the redshift factor, z, based on the number of superfluid particles passed, superfluid temperature, photon energy, and superfluid flow?
With this new insight, how does redshift relate to distance?
How does redshift relate to the interval since the photon departed the observed object?
How much does superfluid flow impact the movement of celestial objects?
What is the gradient of superfluid flow throughout the universe?
Does this change our thinking on distance and age calculations?
Note: How did we get into this circular expansion/outflow logic loop?
Did redshift lead to the idea of inflation?! N.B. This is important because it might differentiate between a finite and an infinite universe.
Let’s consider only linear motion in one dimension. The photon emitter has velocity Ve relative to superfluid, the photon receiver has velocity Vr relative to superfluid. We are considering redshift, so the distance between emitter and receiver is increasing. No matter what, we can be assured that the photon will travel at the local speed of light based on photon energy. Let’s assume the distance traveled is small enough that we do not need to consider redshift from superfluid drag. How does redshift occur in this case? Each photon must be redshifted either at the emitter or at the receiver. Redshift means less energy. If the emitter is stationary, no energy is required to change the initial momentum of the photon. If the emitter is moving away, partial energy must go towards reversing momentum of the photon which therefore leaves less energy for the photon itself and it is redshifted. Likewise compared to a stationary receiver, a receiver moving away must use some of the energy to equalize momentum which leaves less energy for the photon and it appears to be redshifted. This is a fascinating new way to think about this.
SUPERFLUID INFLATION/EXPANSION REDSHIFT
Redshift from inflation is not often discussed by science since most consider the Big Bang and one time inflationary redshift to be accepted science. However, 𝗡𝗣𝗤𝗚 predicts that there was no Big Bang and instead that inflation is a routine occurrence around Planck plasma jets and bangs. Inflationary redshift is related to gravitational redshift. The mathematics should be similar, although the turbulent reactions around Planck plasma likely are different than other typical celestial light sources. This is an area for ongoing research.
Expansion, if it is occurring, is a more subtle effect and would be difficult to map throughout the universe. Superfluid may be flowing in some regions and this would have an effect on photons. The superfluid in some regions may be flowing in a direction that is to some degree opposite the photon trajectory. Alternately, the superfluid may be flowing in a direction that is to some degree aligned with the photon trajectory. The end result is that a photon may pass by more or less superfluid particles than it would if superfluid were not flowing.
SUPERFLUID CONTRACTION BLUESHIFT
Is it possible that the superfluid can contact in some regions? What would this mean? It means that there would be a sink where superfluid is consumed. The logical place to look for this is around black holes and in particular around supermassive black holes. Superfluid is such low mass, almost non-existent, that it may not experience much gravitational force, even from a black hole. Let’s put this thought on hold for now, but keep it as an idea to contemplate.
A given photon may experience multiple types and degrees of redshift. Redshift is simply a loss of energy. A photon may experience many energy transfers in its lifetime.
SPECTRAL LINES: ABSORBTION AND EMISSION
We also see shifted absorption lines in redshifted spectrum.
How do we explain the shifting of reaction absorbtion spectral lines? Well, first of all, it’s nonphysical to talk about shifting nothing (an absense of photons), so instead let’s first look at both sides of the gap. We already know that redshift occurs. Therefore it is no surprise that the frequency gap is defined by its redshifted boundaries.
What about the shifting of emission spectral lines? In thise case we have an aboundance of photons to shift, and we know how redshift works, so it makes sense.
AXIAL ALIGNMENT AND CORRELATION OF DIVERSE REDSHIFT OBJECTS
Halton Arp observed a number of cases of young galaxies and galaxy precursors aligned axially with large galaxy AGN SMBH, but with a diversity of redshifts.
What causes this redshift diversity? , aka anomalous redshift.
Is inflation of the Planck plasma a factor?
“An “exotic” idea proposed by Viktor Ambartsumian was that new galaxies are formed through the ejection from older active galaxies. Galaxies beget galaxies, instead of the standard scenario in which galaxies stem from the evolution of the seeds derived from fluctuations in the initial density field. This idea is in some way contained in the speculative proposal that some or all Quasi-Stellar Objects (QSOs) might be objects ejected by nearby galaxies, and that their redshift is not cosmological (Arp, G./M. Burbidge and others).”Mart ́ın Lo ́pez-Corredoira arXiv:0901.4534
I’ll include references and excerpts about this controversial idea at the end of this post. Needless to say, if these correlations exist, they are perfectly explained by Neoclassical Phyics and Quantum Gravity.
PREDICTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
- Every photon causes a small amount of heating in the superfluid through which it passes. What are the implications of this hypothesis?
- A new model for Doppler redshift was introduced.
- The spatial distance and photon age depend on the interaction of superfluid flow in relation to celestial objects.
- The redshift diversity of AGN minor axis aligned QSO’s is consistent with a galaxy seeding narrative driven by Planck plasma jets.
- The redshift diversity of AGN minor axis aligned QSO’s is consistent with rapid inflation upon emission of Planck plasma.
- Scientists perform corrections on observations of superluminal jets by attributing superluminality to angle of observation. However, it is possible for Planck plasma jets to be superluminal since general relativity does not apply to them.
This post has introduced some new thinking about redshift in the context of NPQG. We have learned that the ideas of Ambartsumian and Arp appear to fit this emerging narrative. Yet many questions remain to be answered.
- Superfluid drag redshift, which may well be non-linear
- Gravitational redshift
- Doppler redshift
- Galaxy local superfluid inflationary or regional expansion redshift
- Regional superfluid contraction blueshift (if possible).
Items 2, 4, and 5 are new science!
J Mark Morris
June 13, 2019 San Diego v1
REFERENCES AND EXCERPTS
arXiv:0609514 : First tentative detection of anisotropy in the QSO distribution around nearby edge-on spiral galaxies, M. Lo ́pez-Corredoira, C. M. Gutie ́rrez, September 19, 2006. “Results. There is a clear excess of QSOs near the minor axis with respect to the major axis of nearby edge-on spiral galaxies, significant at a level 3.5σ up to angular distances of ∼ 3◦ (or ∼ 1.7 Mpc) from the centre of each galaxy. The significance is increased to 3.9σ with the z > 0.5 QSOs, and it reaches 4.8σ if we include galaxies whose circles of radius 3 degrees are covered by the SDSS in more than 98% (instead of 100%) of the area.
Conclusions. Gravitational lensing in the halo of nearby galaxies or extinction seem insufficient to explain the observed anisotropic distribution of QSOs. The anisotropic distribution agrees qualitatively with the predictions of Arp’s models, which claim that QSOs are ejected by galaxies along the rotation axis, although Arp’s prediction give a distance of the QSOs ∼ 3 times smaller than that found here. In any case, a chance fluctuation, although highly improbable, might be a possibility rather than a true anisotropy, and the present results should be corroborated by other groups and samples, so we prefer to consider it as just a first tentative detection.”
arXiv:0801.0423 : Analysis of possible anomalies in the QSO distribution of the Flesch & Hardcastle catalogue, M. Lopez-Corredoira, C. M. Gutierrez, V. Mohan, G. I. Gunthardt, M. S. Alonso, Jan 2, 2008. Summary: Did not find QSO background anomalies in 41 objects studied from the FH04 catalogue.
arXiv:0901.4534 : Apparent discordant redshift QSO-galaxy associations, Mart ́ın Lo ́pez-Corredoira, November 6, 2018. Excerpts: “There are plenty of statistical analyses (e.g., Chu et al. 1984; Zhu & Chu 1995; Burbidge et al. 1985; Burbidge 1996, 2001; Harutyunian & Nikogossian 2000; Ben ́ıtez et al. 2001; Gaztan ̃aga 2003; Nollenberg & Williams 2005; Bukhmastova 2007) showing an excess of high redshift sources near low redshift galaxies, positive and very significant cross-correlations between surveys of galaxies and QSOs, an excess of pairs of QSOs with very different redshifts, etc. An excess of QSOs near the minor axes of nearby parent galaxies has also been observed (L ́opez-Corredoira & Guti ́errez 2007); however, the discovered excess for position angles lower than 45 degrees is significant only at the 3.5-σ level (3.9-σ for zQSO > 0.5) with the QSOs of the SDSS-3rd release (L ́opez-Corredoira & Guti ́errez 2007) and somewhat lower [2.2-σ (2.5-σfor zQSO > 0.5)] with the SDSS-5th release”.
“There are plenty of individual cases of galaxies with an excess of QSOs with high redshifts near the center of nearby galaxies, mostly AGN. In some cases, the QSOs are only a few arcseconds away from the center of the galaxies. Examples are NGC 613, NGC 1068, NGC 1097, NGC 3079, NGC 3842, NGC 6212, NGC 7319 (separation galaxy/QSO: 8”), 2237+0305 (separation galaxy/QSO 0.3”), 3C 343.1 (separation galaxy/QSO: 0.25”), NEQ3 (see Fig. 1/left; a QSO-“narrow emission line galaxy” pair separated 2.8” from another emission line galaxy with a second redshift, and all of them lying along the minor axis of an apparently distorted lenticular galaxy at ∼17” with a third redshift), etc. In some cases there are even filaments/bridges/arms apparently connecting objects with different redshift: in NGC 4319+Mrk 205, Mrk273, QSO1327-206, NGC 3067+3C232 (in the radio), NGC 622, NGC 3628 (in X-ray and radio), NEQ3 (Fig. 1/left), etc. The probability of chance projections of background/foreground objects within a short distance of a galaxy or onto the filament is as low as 10−8, or even lower. The alignment of sources with different redshifts also suggests that they may have a common origin, and that the direction of alignment is the direction of ejection. This happens with some configurations of QSOs around 1130+106, 3C212, NGC 4258, NGC 2639, NGC 4235, NGC 5985, GC 0248+430 (Fig. 1/right), etc. Other proofs presented in favor of the QSO/galaxies association with different redshift is that no absorption lines were found in QSOs corresponding to foreground galaxies (e.g. PKS 0454+036, PHL 1226), or distortions in the morphology of isolated galaxies”.
“In my opinion, we must consider the question as an open problem to be solved. I maintain a neutral position, neither in favor of nor against non-cosmological redshifts. The debate has lasted a very long time, around 40 years, and it would be time to consider making a last effort to finish with the problem. However, the scientific community does not seem very interested in solving the problem because most researchers consider it already solved. Supporters of the standard dogma of all redshifts being cosmological do not want to discuss the problem. Every time it is mentioned they just smile or talk about ”a posteriori” calculations, manipulations of data, crackpot ideas, without even reading any paper on the theme. The Arp-Burbidge hypothesis has become a topic in which everybody has an opinion without having read the papers or knowing the details of the problem, because some leading cosmologists have said it is bogus. This means that it is very difficult to make any progress in this field, as is usual when a researcher is away from the mainstream (L ́opez-Corredoira & Castro-Perelman, eds., 2008). On the other hand, the main supporters of the hypothesis of non-cosmological redshifts continue to produce tens of analyses of cases in favor of their ideas without too much care, pictures without rigorous statistical calculations in many cases, or with wrong identifications, underestimated probabilities, biases, use of incomplete surveys for statistics, etc., in many other cases. There are, however, many papers in which no objections are found in the arguments and they present quite controversial objects, but due to the bad reputation of the topic, the community simply ignores them. In this panorama, it would be difficult for the problem to be solved soon. Mainstream cosmologists are waiting for the death of the main leaders of the heterodox idea (mainly Arp and the couple Burbidge) to declare the idea as definitively dead. However, as in the case of Ambartsumian, some challenging ideas could survive or even be revived after some time if we leave open problems without a clear solution. Therefore, I would recommend that the community either finds good arguments against the Arp-Burbidge hypothesis, or that it allows their ideas to cohabit within the possible speculative hypotheses in cosmological scenarios.”
arxiv:0401420v3 : Redshift of photons penetrating a hot plasma, Ari Brynjolfsson, January 21, 2004. N.B. I first encountered Ari’s work on June 18, 2019 and although there are major differences, I see that portions are remarkabily prescient and consistent with respect to my discoveries of NPQG. Excerpts: “Plasma redshift contributes also to the heating of the interstellar plasma, the galactic corona, and the intergalactic plasma. Plasma redshift explains the solar redshifts, the redshifts of the galactic corona, the cosmological redshifts, the cosmic microwave background, and the X-ray background. The plasma redshift explains the observed magnitude-redshift relation for supernovae SNe Ia without the big bang, dark matter, or dark energy. There is no cosmic time dilation. The universe is not expanding. […] This means that there is no need for Einstein’s Lambda term. The universe is quasi-static, infinite, everlasting and can renew itself forever. All these findings thus lead to fundamental changes in the theory of general relativity and in our cosmological perspective.“