[Dave Lev (OP)]

In the following article it is stated that:
https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a20351/quasar-temperature/
"the latest measurements made possible by Spektr-R show that some mysterious mechanism brings the effective temperature at the core of the quasar to a seemingly impossible range from 20 to 40 trillion degrees?at least 10 times above the theoretical ceiling. And this particular quasar may not even be the most intense."
It is also stated:
"Astronomers Can't Explain How These Trillion-Degree Quasars Got So Hot."
 "To put it simply, all four explanations have problems," Kovalev says.
This article is from 2016.
Do we know by now why Quasars are So Hot?

[Bored chemist]

The temperature was estimated from the brightness.
That's unreliable unless you have a black body radiator.
Quasars are not BB.

So, mainly, you just have bad journalism.

[paul cotter]

The thermostat broke!

[Kryptid]

Tell us what your new theory is, Dave.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

The temperature was estimated from the brightness.
That's unreliable unless you have a black body radiator.
Quasars are not BB.

So, mainly, you just have bad journalism.

What about the following article?
https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.05806
"We present observations of the quasar 3C273, made with the space VLBI mission RadioAstron on baselines up to 171,000 km, which directly reveal the presence of angular structure as small as 26 μas (2.7 light months) and brightness temperature in excess of 10^13 K. These measurements challenge our understanding of the non-thermal continuum emission in the vicinity of supermassive black holes and require a much higher Doppler factor than what is determined from jet apparent kinematics."
Do you consider arxiv as one more bad journalism?
Why is it so difficult for you to accept the observation / facts as is?

Could it be that that as the observation / facts don't fit the theory, then you prefer to ignore / change the facts.?
Source: https://quotepark.com/quotes/1786579-albert-einstein-if-the-facts-dont-fit-the-theory-change-the-fact/
The quote "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." is famous quote attributed to Albert Einstein (1879?1955), German-born physicist and founder of the theory of relativity.
Source: https://quotepark.com/quotes/1786579-albert-einstein-if-the-facts-dont-fit-the-theory-change-the-fact/

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Tell us what your new theory is, Dave.

Sorry
I have no authorization from you to tell my personal theory.
Therefore, I would like to understand the current theory for this observation /fact

[Kryptid]

I have no authorization from you to tell my personal theory.

Then why did you start a thread in the board called "New Theories"?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

I have no authorization from you to tell my personal theory.

Then why did you start a thread in the board called "New Theories"?

Well, please set it at any category as you wish.

[Bored chemist]

What about the following article?

brightness temperature in excess of

The temperature was estimated from the brightness.
That's unreliable unless you have a black body radiator.
Quasars are not BB.

[Origin]

Do we know by now why Quasars are So Hot?

I would say there are many things that are not known about quasars.  Do you want to discuss quasars in general or specifically how hot they may be?  Or is this just a starting point for you to go on some sort of anti-science rant claiming, "we don't know anything about quasars"?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

The temperature was estimated from the brightness.

What's wrong with that?
Don't you thrust the measurements of those scientists?
Sorry, as they claim that "brightness temperature in excess of 10^13 K" then this is the observed temp.
We all must accept it as real fact!

Do you want to discuss quasars in general or specifically how hot they may be?

Only on the hot issue.
I do believe that this quasar' ultra-high temp issue is critical for our understanding.

As for the measurements taken, it seems they are unexpected, so they don't match that of any particular mathematical model. This is how science progresses.

That is perfectly OK.
However, first we must accept the facts that the quasar temp is over 10^13K.

 

It would help to first understand why they thought there was a theoretical limit, and exactly how they concluded that this limit was exceeded.

It would help to first realize that this fact contradicts our current theory.
Therefore, we have the following options:
1. Neglect the observation/fact and claim that: "The temperature was estimated from the brightness"
2. Hope that the current theory is still ok, although those scientists clearly claim that the current theories don't work.
3. Looking for better theory for that ultra-high temp.
What would you prefer?

[Kryptid]

Therefore, I would like to understand the current theory for this observation /fact

You say that, but I very strongly suspect (based on your past behavior) that your goal here isn't really to learn. Rather, it is more likely that you are looking to find fault in modern science.

The quote "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." is famous quote attributed to Albert Einstein (1879?1955), German-born physicist and founder of the theory of relativity.

Did you actually read your own link?

The earliest published attribution of this quote to Einstein found on Google Books is the 1991 book The Art of Computer Systems Performance Analysis by Raj Jain (p. 507), but no source to Einstein's original writings is given and the quote itself is older

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Rather, it is more likely that you are looking to find fault in modern science.

Well, don't you agree that based on the observed quasar temp there is a fault in the current theory for that specific issue?

[Kryptid]

Well, don't you agree that based on the observed quasar temp there is a fault in the current theory for that specific issue?

If, (1) the temperatures are accurately recorded, and (2) modern theories truly cannot account for them, then yes, we need a new theory. I'm researching this matter right this moment.

[Origin]

I noticed all the trillion degree numbers come from articles written in 2016, none later than 2017.  Current articles discuss the largest quasars with temperatures in the range of 350 million degrees.

[Bored chemist]

Rather, it is more likely that you are looking to find fault in modern science.

To be fair, that's what scientists should do.
The problem is that the OP does not understand science.

[Origin]

However, first we must accept the facts that the quasar temp is over 10^13K.

Don't be silly, one paper making a proposal does not mean the proposal is a fact.
It has been 7 years since that paper was written and it doesn't seem to have gotten much traction.

[Kryptid]

To be fair, that's what scientists should do.

True. In Dave's case, however, it's not a question asked in good faith. He has ulterior motives based on the fact that... well...

OP does not understand science.

But we already knew that.

Don't be silly, one paper making a proposal does not mean the proposal is a fact.
It has been 7 years since that paper was written and it doesn't seem to have gotten much traction.

That's raised my eyebrows as well. I also came across this quote: https://www.livescience.com/space/what-is-the-hottest-place-in-the-universe

So far, the hottest place in the universe on record is the quasar 3C273, a brightly-shining region around a supermassive black hole roughly 2.4 billion light-years from Earth, Palumbo said. This region has a core temperature of about 10 trillion kelvin (more than 10 trillion degrees Fahrenheit and Celsius), according to the Greenbank Observatory in West Virginia. However, there is still uncertainty surrounding this temperature estimation, Palumbo added.

So it seems there are questions as to the accuracy of the measurement.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Rather, it is more likely that you are looking to find fault in modern science.

To be fair, that's what scientists should do.

Thanks

The problem is that the OP does not understand science.

Why?
Is it because I don't accept the dark matter imagination or is it because I claim that EM is the ultimate force of the Universe?

So far, the hottest place in the universe on record is the quasar 3C273, a brightly-shining region around a supermassive black hole roughly 2.4 billion light-years from Earth, Palumbo said. This region has a core temperature of about 10 trillion kelvin (more than 10 trillion degrees Fahrenheit and Celsius), according to the Greenbank Observatory in West Virginia. However, there is still uncertainty surrounding this temperature estimation, Palumbo added.

So it seems there are questions as to the accuracy of the measurement.

Do you agree that there is a possibility that the accuracy of the measurements is perfectly OK?
Unfortunately, currently our scientists can't explain that quasar' ultra-high temperature.
Therefore, instead of looking for better theory for this observation, they push this fact under the table by claiming that it seems that there are questions as to the accuracy of the measurement.
Is this the correct science' approach to the fact that contradicts their theory?
Why they can't assume that what they see is what we have?
Why they don't even think that there is a possibility that the observation is correct and they have an obligation to explain it?

 

[Bored chemist]

Before we get to "Why Quasars are So Hot?"
We need to check
"are Quasars So Hot?"

Why?

I have no idea why you persistently fail to understand science.

Do you?

But the evidence shows that this claim

I claim that EM is the ultimate force of the Universe?

is wrong.
Gravity beats the EM force.
That's why light doesn't get out of black holes.

That's obvious, but you refuse to accept it.