0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yes PhysBang, but as I understand it this 'flickering' is measured before adjusting for time dilation.
After adjusting for that, that is, all quasars shown from their own 'frame of reference' their 'flickering's' will differ, if that assumption of mine is correct. That as the redshift seen seems to be correct, and considering that all quasars before this adjustment, if I got it right, all flicker the same according to our observations.
You could say that all quasars 'eat' differently. We can't really say if all quasars accretion disks are the same, can we? It seems very reasonably to assume that they aren't and if that would be then you will have a different 'brightness' to them. And after adjusting for distance and time this is what we will see too, isn't it? That they then 'flickers differently' when seen from their own frame.
The other way to treat it is of course to somehow invalidate the research's methodology and say that it isn't really clear. And to speak about microlensing introduces a he** of a lot of VMO:s (Very Massive Objects) everywhere. I read someone saying that if that was correct, then you don't need any dark matter or dark energy to explain the' missing mass', as those VMO:s will do perfectly well.
And assuming that his methodology is as good as I would expect it to be after so many years, the mystery, if I understand his measuring right, isn't that they 'flicker' the same, because they don't, not from their own frame, only when seen from us without adjusting for their redshift. But I might have got this wrong though? It's a very murky read to us non- astronomers