Topic005: The Redshift Is Quantized, Bill Tifft: 3/27/15
I have discussed the structure of redshift-magnitude bands in Topic001 and the substructure of crossband regions within the bands in Topic003. As redshift quality continued to improve a still finer structure emerged. The redshift itself appeared to assume a periodic quantized pattern. The discovery diagram in the upper left frame of figure 4 in the ASP paper (my book figure 1.41) shows that the upper Coma band breaks into apparently quantized steps. A further improved and extended sample in figure 2.1 of my book includes a power spectrum inset showing a quantized periodicity near 222 km/s at power 10. By 1975 a more fundamental period at 1/3 of the longer period (72.45 km/s) was shown to permeate the entire cluster. Section 2.2 of my book provides further details related to the discovery period. (For book information or acquisition see Post001 and Post002.) Before going further I should clarify what the periodic pattern seemed to imply. If the redshift of a galaxy appears as specific multiples of a periodic interval it can be described as occupying a specific energy level in a decay or excitation process described by a quantum wave function. Such a wave function has a characteristic energy state (the interval) and may occupy different steps in a cumulative wave train (the redshift). The interval is an intrinsic property of a galaxy, the redshift is the location within the wave train. If this was actually the case my next step was to convince myself that the redshift really was quantized, and if so, what is a galaxy! How is such an intrinsic redshift/energy interval imposed upon a galaxy?
In the ASP paper space required me to quickly describe major tests of redshift quantization involving double galaxies and global quantization. In fact there was an intermediate evaluation of the question posed above, and to be sure no earlier work in the literature was inconsistent with quantization of the redshift. The most accurate information available in the 1970 period involved differential studies such as rotation studies of galaxies or differential states of excitation in specific objects. Figure 2.4 in my book, reproduced as the figure leading this topic on my blog, is a rotation curve for NGC 2903 from data by Burbidge et al, which provided an apparent answer to the key question noted above. The rotation curve appears to contain two ‘intrinsically’ opposed spiral arms originating at the nucleus. The pattern suggests generation by an ‘intrinsic dipole’ embedded in the nucleus, which produces two intrinsically different redshift streams wound up by galactic rotation. This model, now central to QTC, was applied to several local galaxies by removing expansion and rotation patterns as a function of radius to yield distributions of redshift residuals demonstrating the fit to the dual redshift pattern. My book’s cover diagram shows the fit to the spiral arms of the giant Andromeda spiral from figure 2.5 in my book. Figure 2.7 shows periodic residuals from several data sets. In QTC the two streams can resolve the matter anti-matter anomaly in cosmology, discussed in seminar 7, by allowing both forms of matter to exist simultaneously if sufficiently isolated by a suitable aspect of the intrinsic property of the dipole. More fundamentally, the demonstration that redshift quantization between galaxies occurs in such intrinsic interval steps places extreme limits on any role gravitationally induced motion can play on cosmological scales. Gravitation is an obvious continuous acting internal property of galaxies but the redshift is not. If matter anti-matter can be isolated from ‘continuous’ interaction perhaps the same step can isolate matter from other ‘continuous’ forces. Understanding what that redshift dipole interval really is should provide the key to answering such questions. My book tells the story of that quest, QTC, which was just beginning at this point.
In 1976 I submitted three papers to the Astrophysical Journal to formally introduce redshift quantization and its implications. The first paper concerned internal dynamics of individual galaxies, introducing the nuclear dipole structure and the two stream outflow concept. The second work discussed systems of galaxies introducing the apparent lack of gravitation on the large scale. Paper three involved effects within active galaxies and evidence applicable to the stellar and interstellar content of galaxies. The series was highly controversial involving numerous refereeings with final publication delayed until 1977. The second paper was published with an editorial disclaimer which reads as follows: “Editor’s note.- The referees of this paper neither could find obvious errors with this analysis nor felt that they could enthusiastically endorse publication. The subject matter is interesting and perhaps very important. A more complete assessment of this analysis is beyond the role one normally expects of referees”. A different aspect, involving the difficulty of introducing new ideas which conflict with an ‘established’ model was well stated by one referee, a professional friend from our graduate years, who waived anonymity and sent me an open report including the following.
“This [refereeing] matter has caused me considerable soul-searching, …. . It bothers me that Copernicus probably could not have gotten “De Revolutionibus” …. published in the ApJ, while I suspect that Herschel would have found no difficulty publishing articles describing his theory that the sun is hollow and inhabited. I am convinced that the vast majority of the theoretical material in the ApJ is either wrong or irrelevant; why should we worry about publishing another [such] paper …. ? Of course the answer is that Bill’s paper is unconventional — off the path of our modern collective wisdom — it violates the scientific “establishment’s” accepted views. I have finally come to realize that there is indeed such a thing as “academic prejudice” on the part of a “scientific establishment.” That is why I, and [editors], have such a hard time over papers like Bill’s, and, [certain others], (but for some reason, less trouble with Hoyle’s).”
I am quite sure several of my papers were not published in the ApJ basically for the above reason. Two especially important ones, a test demonstrating the existence of the intrinsic nuclear dipole in galaxies, and the other redshift variability properties. These two papers are included in my book as the first two appendices. The second also contains one response to referees to further illustrate the problem. As Professor Bok once told me, in the final analysis you may need to write a book to present your views. Topic006 will return to the double galaxy and global redshift material presented in the ASP paper.
|← Topic004||Topic006 →|