Topic002: Redshift Banding, Substructure and Gravity, Bill Tifft 12/13/14
My first posting, Topic001, introduced the discovery of redshift-magnitude bands in clusters of galaxies, beginning with the Coma cluster. There were three unexpected correlations shown in Figure 1 of the introductory ASP paper posted as a starting point for the blog. 1) tightly clustered bands of galaxies sloping fainter with redshift, 2) a distinct separation morphologically by redshift, and 3) convergence of the bands toward zero redshift implying the bands were related by scaling factors. None of this was consistent with the scatter diagram expected if conventional dynamical gravity was responsible for the patterns. In the first post I jumped ahead to demonstrate that these patterns repeat in other clusters, and that the data and analysis is reliable and repeatable. The data is drawn from many independent and reliable sources and appears to point consistently in one direction. Large scale cosmology is apparently not built on a conventional gravitational dynamical model, although the model clearly must contain individual dynamical components called galaxies. My book “Redshift Key to Cosmology” attempts to develop such a model. (For book information or acquisition see Post001 and Post002.)
The first step was to improve and extend data quantity and quality. Studies tracked banding into the outer regions of the Coma cluster and demonstrated coincidence of banding patterns between clusters as finer structure emerged within the bands. This is shown in much better detail in my book (Figures 1.9 and 1.11 for example) which could not fit into the short ASP paper. The upper left frame of Figure 2 in the ASP paper (figure 1.18 in the book) shows the finer structure which emerged in the improved and extended Coma cluster pattern. This structure was discussed in the ApJ in 1979 which contains an editorial disclaimer to the effect that although much effort was made to discredit the structure it was noted that the structure could not be dismissed and could be of “considerable importance”. The upper part of the right split frame in Figure 2 (1.19 in book) shows the corresponding structure in the A1367 cluster (originally called X groups, now cross-bands). The lower split frame shows the direct correspondence of the cross bands between the Coma and A1367 clusters.
The right frame of Figure 2 also shows that the structure in the slightly lower redshift A1367 cluster is more developed toward lower redshift. This growth is continued with the superimposition of still lower redshifts from the Perseus cluster (open circles in the lower left frame of Figure 2 (1.34 in book) where a completely new cross band extension appears. Does this imply that bands continue to develop as time passes (lookback time decreases)? Was the redshift evolving with time? From the short, rolled over, structure in Coma the structure developed fully in A1367 and then the band extended as a new cross band appeared. What do you think is involved? It looked like structural evolution with time to me (later I will call this redshift decay with time). More structure, more patterns. Where is the dynamics that should totally blur all this out? And there is more to come, in Topic003 I will look at morphology and radio/emission activity which appears to confirm and relate to what we see. This is real data collected from multiple sources. Should this sort of evidence be ignored? What happened to gravity?
|← Topic001||Topic003 →|