Topic009: Redshift Variability, Quantum Evolution, Bill Tifft: 7/10/15

Topic009: Redshift Variability, Quantum Evolution, Bill Tifft: 7/10/15

Book figures 2.31 and 2.36

Book figures 2.31 and 2.36

In any expanding evolving cosmology, based on continuous or quantum physics, the redshift must evolve with time. As we currently think we understand the universe it would seem very unlikely we could actually see any such systematic changes within a human lifetime, although in the QTC quantum case, since the redshift must `decay’ in quantum jumps, we might just happen to see one if one happened to occur. Well, I never expected to see one, but QTC is full of the unexpected and it appears that quantized redshift decay is proceeding very rapidly. It appears that the concept of what our universe is and how it is evolving is going to require some drastic changes.

The initial study of 21-cm redshifts carried out by John Cocke and I included 625 galaxies observed with the 300-foot NRAO telescope during five major observing runs between May 1984 and March 1986. The study was published in May 1988 in the ApJ Supplements. The objective, aside from investigating global quantization of the redshift, was to evaluate the quality and precision of 21-cm redshifts. This involved comparisons between multiple observations and older surveys. Figures and discussions refer to our study as `TC’. Older surveys discussed in this topic include Fisher-Tully (1973-77), supplemented by Dickel and Rood (1974-75), Lewis (1983), and the oldest very early work by Roberts (1963-64). From the viewpoint of redshift precision results of the TC study, first reported in 1987 at a symposium in Venice, indicated that at high S/N redshifts were consistently repeatable at better than 1 km/s. In 1987-88 I made a study inter-comparing data obtained at the Green Bank 300 and 140-foot telescopes and the 100-meter telescope in Bonn, Germany. This study by Tifft and Huchtmeier, published in 1990, fully confirmed and extended the 1987 findings. For details refer to my book and the original paper. (For book information or acquisition see Post001 and Post002.)

The first indication that the redshift appeared to be changing with time became apparent when the new TC redshifts were compared with the older surveys. The upper left frame of Figure 6 in the ASP paper (figure2.32 in my book) shows redshift differences (new minus old) for the older surveys noted above. It is quite clear that there are systematic deviations toward lower redshift. Some redshifts appear unchanged, others distinctly shifted. The figure was first published in the 1987 symposium in Venice noted above. The shifts are much larger than any known redshift uncertainty. The left hand frame of the lead figure in this topic (figure 2.31 in my book) shows the comparison with the Fisher-Tully (FT) data symbolically divided at W=100 km/s, indicating that both narrow and wide profile galaxies are affected. This implies that our galaxy can undergo such shifts, and time intervals involved are less than 10-20 years! I should note that very early in studies it was found that there were certain profile widths where behavior appeared to change, the most notable being near 100 km/s where double peaked profiles (associated with the 72.5 km/s period) appeared. Other breaks also appeared near 200 and 400 km/s. This will be discussed in later topics where profile width and periodicity is related to morphology. The first clear periods were found outside these limits in Topic008. To proceed with variability we need to carefully examine the 24.15 km/s period which involves narrow profiles which have especially precise redshifts.

At this point we we need to introduce a new type of diagram, a phase-deviation diagram. Deviation for an individual object is the redshift difference (new minus old) for individual observations spaced in time. The difference can be caused by redshift uncertainty or any real change, and we know that the uncertainties are very small. If you divide a redshift by a proposed period you generate a number n.p, where n is the number of complete cycles of the period in the redshift interval, and p is the leftover fraction or `phase’ of the galaxy within that period at the time it was observed. If the redshift is variable and the period is fixed and correct, phase will scatter only because of measurement uncertainty. Begin with a class of homogeneous objects, a specific range of profile width or morphology which, if variable, may be presumed to have essentially the same (or harmonically related) periods. Each deviation interval has two phase values, one from each end of the deviation interval a small phase step apart. If you plot deviations for an older set of observations compared against the new TC set, using the phase calculated from the TC set, the pattern will show how or if things changed looking back in time. If the period used is correct, or nearly so, and there is no harmonic mixture or small real changes in periods, deviations will distribute in a nearly horizontal line at constant phase. The deviation contains phase information only to the extent that the period is incorrect or complex, information you can use to tune the period or look for harmonics or changes. If the time flow contains detectably closely spaced harmonically scaled or phase shifted periods there will be several parallel or near parallel lines spaced in phase (the deviation will contain the additional fractional phase for harmonically scaled or shifted periods). If the phase of the older redshift is used in plotting the diagram, deviation now includes both phase and periodicity information. From old toward new you will be working forward in time, but the only difference is periodicity lines will be sloped since points contains both phase shifts and periodic timing information.

The upper right frame of Figure 6 in the ASP paper (the left frame of figure 2.33 in my book) shows the phase-deviation diagram for narrow profile (30 < W < 75) km/s dwarf galaxies at the 24.15 km/s known period. The pattern is sloping down toward lower phase. The older, large deviation, points appear to associate with a slightly older very slightly longer or phase shifted period. This was the perfect sample to look for harmonics. The 24.15 km/s period appeared to be a 1/3 sub-harmonic of the 72.45 km/s period, perhaps 24.15 also had sub harmonics or was otherwise structured. If redshifts are really precisely quantized, and we know the redshift precision is excellent, why are the known periods so broad in phase? Is the pattern really a set of closely bunched parallel or near parallel lines which represent harmonics or very slightly shifted periods? That indeed appears to be what the 24.15 km/s period seems to be. The right hand frame of figure 2.33 in my book shows that the 24.15 km/s phase-deviation diagram, very slightly tuned to 24.00 km/s splits into three distinct parts, sloped patterns periodic at 8.00 km/s. The population distribution within each sloped pattern also appears to shift up toward zero deviation as one moves up between the three patterns to produce the nonuniform sloped pattern at 24.15 km/s. This clearly suggests that real changes were occurring as time progressed. This work was initially published in my paper at the Venice symposium. Somewhat later I recognized that the 8 km/s period (finally tuned to 7.997 km/s) also included a 1/3 pattern. The pattern which superimposed the two major thirds of the original 24.15 km/sec pattern, using a period of 15.994 km/s, had 6 clear horizontal lines at what seemed to be a quite basic period of 2.6657 km/s. The right hand frame of the lead picture in this topic (figure 2.36 in my book) shows the phase-deviation diagram at the 1/3 period, 5.3313 km/s of 15.994 km/s, clearly showing a double cycle of the 2.6657 km/s period. The tiny scatter in this diagram clearly shows that the precision obtainable using 21-cm redshifts enables one to detect such periods. Such short periods appear to provide very rapid decay cascades between longer, much more stable, periods which make cosmic quantization readily detectable.

The analysis of the 24.15 km.s periodicity was published in the ApJ in 1991. The 5.33 and 2.67 km/s periods appeared to be quite basic, but showed no direct relationship to the original 72.5 km/s period. There was no question in my mind at this point that the redshift was indeed variable, however, there was still much to learn. We did not yet understand the periodicity structure at intermediate profile widths (although the 1991 paper examines that issue), and could not detect patterns at higher redshift, in the Virgo cluster for example. By 1993 both of these problems would be solved. We were about to learn how to predict periods, including the 2.67 km/s period we had found empirically. In the meantime the 2.67 km/s period was about to tell us how to extend our work to higher redshift by accounting for cosmic curvature, our first baby step into cosmology. I will discuss this in Topic010.

If we accept the reality of entire galaxies changing their redshift in quantum steps, the fact that we can see the steps means there can be no transit time in the transmission of redshift information. A sudden redshift change does not mean that something has suddenly changed in the body of a galaxy, the galaxy still displays its `spatial' structure and motions including normal transit timing. It is only its widely distributed `temporal' structure that contains the shift. Active (photons) and passive (matter) energy must age in different ways but remain in contact. Time passes continuously for a body in space, we call it aging. Passive energy has internal processes (chemistry) for aging in a continuous process. Active pure energy, must follow a quantum process, time for photons must pass in quantized steps as they move forward to maintain contact. QTC refers to this issue as maintaining `temporal commonality' within passive energy (matter) and between matter and active (photon) forms of energy. The issue here is the structure and passage of time. QTC accomplishes (or represents) what we perceive as the passage of time as the `flow' of 3-d space, as individual particles where matter resides, through 3-d stationary time (it is not time that is flowing, the universe of spatial particles is what is expanding). Timeless photons, timeless since they are not moving in the `aging' coordinate direction along which space is flowing (call that cosmic or radial time), but do move agelessly laterally in 3-d time (call that lateral time), which adjusts transit time (spatial location between other spatial particles) as the universe expands. I might call such photons `dark photons' since they have passed beyond the quantum bounds of what QTC defines as 'spatial particles' and are traveling in lateral time, not space (at constant conserved radial time). (And yes, the boundary must be the same bound that defines dark matter in QTC. Continuous forces cannot transmit across time, only space, although the boundary is a fuzzy one — that will be discussed later). The conserved radial cosmic time link remains in common, however, and is what must be periodically updated in quantum steps to retain instant communication between dark photons and their parent spatial structure. How this appears to be possible will be discussed in later topics as QTC develops, in some ways passing beyond or extending my book.

Topic008       Topic010

6 responses to “Topic009: Redshift Variability, Quantum Evolution, Bill Tifft: 7/10/15

  1. Pingback: Topic008: Global Quantization, The Galactocentric Rest Frame, Bill Tifft 6/30/15 | The William Tifft Blog·

  2. Pingback: Topic010: The Cosmological Correction, Curvature In Time, Bill Tifft, 8/15/15 | The William Tifft Blog·

  3. Pingback: Topic012: The Quantum Periodicity Structure, Energy Level Decay, Bill Tifft, 10/12/15 | The William Tifft Blog·

  4. Pingback: Topic013: Quantum Periodicity Uniqueness, Completeness, Bill Tifft, 11/15/15 | The William Tifft Blog·

  5. Pingback: The Nature of Redshift Variability, Bill Tifft 1/21/16 | The William Tifft Blog·

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s