From: njzy@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (T. Joseph Lazio, Cornell University)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Re: Quasars and Meta
Date: 27 Jul 92 08:57:09 EDT
Distribution: sci
Organization: Cornell University

 TVF writes (in explaining the Meta model):

     So stable supermassive stars can exist in the Meta Model.  See some of
the other current posts about what these would look like for intermediate
cases, which are extensions of the normal H-R diagram.  The earliest
deviations would seemingly take the form of blue stragglers and Wolf-Rayet
stars, which are not easily explained in standard stellar evolution theory.
But when we get to much larger masses which eventually explode as supernovae,
the collapsed remnant will *not* be a black hole because the external gravity
field cannot build up without limit, as it can in the standard model. Natural
limits occur from the trapping of C-gravitons which prevent singularity
formation.  Instead we would get compact objects of high gravitational
redshift, often ejected from galaxies at high velocities.  These objects are
predicted to look very much the way quasars actually look, which raises again
the much-debated question of whether quasar redshifts are cosmological (from
the expansion of the universe) or mainly gravitational in origin.  I.e. are
quasars "far" or "near".

 TVF writes (as part of his near vs. far list):

(19) Absorption lines Caused by intervening Lines are due to
in the spectra of     hydrogen clouds.      layers in the massive
quasar light are      Implied cloud         stellar object or its
quite narrow (Smith   temperatures (5,000-  surrounding
1990).                10,000 degrees) are   nebulosity, not
                      below predicted       intervening clouds.
                      30,000 degrees.

(20) The number of    The hydrogen clouds   The absorption
absorption line       doing the absorbing   systems are due to
systems seen in Lyman are not uniformly     layering in the
alpha is not          spread through space, quasar and its
linearly, or even     and are more abundant surrounding
monotonically,        at recent (therefore  nebulosity.  No
correlated with       close) epochs.  Lack  linear or monotonic
redshift.  3C 273 at  of metal lines makes  relationship with
z = 0.16 and other    galaxy halos unlikely redshift is expected.
low-redshift quasars  candidates for most
have as many          absorbers.
absorption systems as
high-redshift quasars
(Morris 1991).


 Now I question:

 Again, I'm not understanding something.  If (some?) QSOs are really 
 massive stellar remnants (MSRs), then why do we see absorption lines
 at all?  White dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes with 
 accretion disks are all quite efficient sources of ionizing radiation.
 Thus, the nebulosity surrounding MSRs should be highly ionized, i.e. no 
 HI absorption lines.  
-- 


 T. Joseph Lazio                | Why relativity? and Why  
 514 Space Sciences             | turbulence?  I really believe   
 Ithaca, NY  14853              | [God] will have an answer for the
 (607) 255-6420                 | first [question].
 lazio@astrosun.tn.cornell.edu  |   -- W. Heisenberg, on his death bed
ICBM:                           |
 42 deg. 20' 08" N              |              STOP RAPE
 76 deg. 28' 48" W              |