by Charles Weber, MS

For a hypothesis explaining the Cosmological Red Shift click on >"RED SHIFT"


This is a hypothesis which attempts to explain the characteristics of QSOs (quasi stellar objects) as an optical illusion created by lensing of the photons from the opposite jet emanating from a huge [Gaskill] mass at the center of an active galaxy the axis of which is oriented toward [Berthel] the earth, by the emission of atoms and reflection of ultraviolet and X-rays from a dense plate of ions on the surface of an accretion disk, and by infrared rays emitted from dust and gas further out. BL Lac objects (BL Lac objects are extragalactic, highly variable, polarized sources with significant emission from radio to X-ray wavelengths) are perceived as QSOs from which primarily rays emitted or reflected by the ions on the accretion disk are seen. BAL QSOs and infrared QSOs are perceived as active galaxies viewed from 90 degrees to the side of the axis.


QSOs (quasi stellar objects) are point sources of light with such enormous red shifts that they can’t possibly be stars. There are 120,000 in one fourth of the sky known so far or more out of the 125 billion or so galaxies in the Universe. The distances are so vast (up to 13 billion light years) that the quasars (QSOs high with radio waves) can not even be conventional galaxies similar to those nearby since they seem to radiate as much energy as hundreds or even a thousand galaxies would at their distance. Astronomers have tried to get around this paradox by proposing that they may be magnified by gravitational lensing from intervening mass. A major problem with this is that an intervening mass would not create a point source, but a ring, similar to the one shown half way down in this site. This explanation is now very unlikely because it has been found that light does not bend in a gravitational field. Also see this link from it.What has not been proposed is that maybe they are lensed by refraction in the gas around a huge mass within their parent galaxy. Indeed, if a huge mass is furnishing the light as most now believe because of the difficulty of envisioning any other source, the gas around the mass should act as a lens for the light from the opposite jet.


Gravitational energy created by an enormous mass equivalent to billions of suns has been proposed as a plausible source of the energy of QSOs’ emissions. Quasars are QSOs which have significant radio waves. If such a mass exists, it follows that the mass would of necessity have effects on the light from the opposite side which would explain some of the characteristics of QSOs.

As stars, planets, comets, dust and gas fall down toward such a mass they would accelerate to enormous velocities. As they approach the enormous mass and the mass of the disk to be proposed, those spinning would start to disintegrate. As they collide with each other they would heat up. In addition, photons from the near vicinity of the huge mass would heat the outer edges of the whirling debris and evaporate it, something like a comet approaching our sun. As this material approached closer yet, it would become so broken up and so much denser that it would have to start to rotate in a fairly narrow disk. This is because after half a revolution the material would try to move to the other side of the whirling debris but would not be able to get through. Very close to the huge mass this material should become so hot from the combined effects above that it would largely be ionized by ultra violet and x rays. Ions there would be generated in what astrophysicists call a torus [Chen]. If intense magnetic fields are generated by the huge mass, oppositely charged ions should move to opposite sides of the disk whenever their random motion propelled them in line with the magnetic field. The magnetic field increases inversely to the cube of the distance (Sokoloff). Thus the magnetic effects should start to predominate. This predominance could conceivably be further assisted by the gravitational inverse square law becoming less than a power of two as masses become enormous in size. This is necessary if the jet to be discussed shortly originates on the surface of the huge mass and particles move out at high velocity. Such a phenomena of diminishing returns is plausible if gravity is transmitted by gravitons as some suggest and as was first proposed by Le Sage in the mid 18th century. Gift has proposed that Einstein’s theory of relativity has been falsified [Gift], thus making the existence of gravitons plausible. If gravitons exert their force by some of them impinging on the mass, then gravitons forcing a small mass toward the huge mass would be presumably finite in number while the gravitons blocked by the huge mass coming toward the small mass from the opposite direction could never sink below zero [Lesage] [Breitner] and also see this site. . The existence of gravitons as creating the cosmological red shift is made plausible by the periodicity of galaxy distances [Gribbon]. The existence of gravitons is also hinted at by the sudden stepwise accelerations of cold neutrons falling in a gravitational field [Van Flandern]. Alternately there could be a repulsive component to gravity generated by spinning magnetic dipoles within the atom as also suggested by Breitner, which declines according to the inverse of the distance to the fourth power, or by virtue of distortions of a solid ether. The quantum effects in the red shift would seem to deny this possibility though. That there is a deviation from the inverse square law is plausible in light of the change in the decrease in deceleration of the satellites moving away from the sun as if there was an acceleration force coming from outer space [Seife] [Anderson & Nieto]. An attempt has been made to propose a prosaic explanation [Murphy], but that explanation is not adequate. However there is a plausible explanation, which proposes that the deceleration is due to hitting dust particles in the Kuiper belt. This has been disputed. LaViolette has proposed the change in acceleration as well as the cosmological red shift can be explained by a “subquantum” time dependant phenomenon taking place when gravity is present within a galaxy or, for the red shift, it is absent between galaxies. It seems like a far out hypothesis, but not nearly as far out as the big bang or warped space (ether) hypotheses.

If the Pioneer measurements are valid and not explained by dust, the implication is that a singularity is not possible because the repulsive forces become huge at close range. However, nothing I know of for sure precludes a huge mass of neutrons occupying a space too small to be seen by a distant telescope for the mass in a QSO. There has also been proposed different state of matter, which would convert the mass into a “gravastar” [Musser]. The discovery of a neutron star thought to have been derived from a star of more than 40 solar masses hints at this possibility [Verbunt]. Black hole theory precludes any possible visibility since the limits of resolution are a thousand to one hundred thousand times the diameter of the proposed event horizon [Begelman p269]. However, a huge mass of neutrons remains a viable candidate also, given diminishing returns for gravity, since such a mass would easily fit inside our sun and would also be visually not resolvable. After all, a jet gets out. Also I see no reason why a considerable part of the mass of the QSOs could not be neutrons, etc. in the inner part of the disc.

If one of these phenomena obtains, the ions could start to move out from the disk along the magnetic lines of force and form a bulge (also called a torus, but not necessarily shaped like a torus in this case, but probably a complicated shape more like a hyperboloid at first and seeming to look like a torus. As the orbits of the ions move closer yet to the huge mass, decayed very slowly by what little friction they have with each other, it is conceivable that they would be so far out from the disk that they would be relieved of some of the centrifugal forces keeping them aloft and start to spiral in toward the poles of the whirling huge mass along the magnetic lines of force. When this "tornado" touched down on the neutrons or whatever other material they found at the poles, the ions should be moving so rapidly that they could annihilate the material. The resulting surge of energy could then give the huge mass additional spin if there were a bias in the direction of the effect of the energy in addition to the spin of the "tornado". The annihilation could account for the generation of the jet which astronomers think they see and do see clearly out of nearby AGNs and radio galaxies. If matter and anti matter ions of a charge opposite to that of the incoming ions were generated at the same time it is conceivable that those of the correct charge could be propelled out through the center of the tornado by their own energy as well as by push of photons and constrained by magnetic forces to form a narrow jet. Even many ions propelled in such a direction such as to contribute to the spin of the mass would be bent along the magnetic lines such as to contribute to the jet. It is conceivable that heavier proton ions would be a little less likely to be propelled out so that the huge mass could conceivably end up with a net positive charge at the equator after billions of years and thus account for the magnetic field.

These jet ions would not usually be able to collide with each other because of electrostatic repulsion. They have been proposed to be electron – positron pairs because of circular polarization [Wardle 1998]. This does not seem possible to me, but I can not refute it for sure. In any case, any unpaired ions would drift apart and widen the jet slowly, further out, as the magnetic constraints weaken, and indeed observable jets do widen somewhat [Thomson]. Therefore both matter and antimatter could be involved thus making the jets on opposite sides look similar. It has been concluded that the highest energy cosmic rays may be protons from active galactic galaxies in the nearby Universe based on statistical analysis of their direction of travel [Abraham]. So if so, and if pairs are produced, one of the jets must be producing proton-antiproton pairs as well. If the antimatter ions collide with matter oppositely charged ions which had been generated by the host galaxy’s stars and by the jet itself feeding the outer space in the preceding billions of years, and sent into an oblique orbit by the magnetic field further out [Thomson], it would account for the jets being visible at great distances from the source, some distances being tens of thousands of light years long. That hard x-rays are thought to be largely from the jets while soft x-rays from the disc supports this possibility. Something like this would be necessary because atoms could radiate light for only a short time because of high temperature alone and ions could not radiate light at all. If it happens this way, some of the antimatter must survive because there is a small amount of antimatter in cosmic rays, which is possibly attributed to quasars [Adriani].

The photons generated by anti matter degeneration would scatter out or be reemitted in all directions. These photons would be largely a continuum since they would come largely from sources other than atoms. Indeed, broad lines make up only about 2% of the total [Elvis] and most of these probably come from the accretion disc.

Those photons directed back toward the galaxy at a narrow angle to the jet but wide enough an angle so that they would miss the whirling gas and dust near the huge mass would be bent in toward that mass by refraction in gas far enough from the huge mass as t be transparent and would be visible to a distant observer, O, who happened to be approximately aligned with the axis of the mass, M. Figure 1 shows how the rays would behave. The jets are not shown, but the source S, is meant to be near the surface of the jet opposite to the observer. To observers located perpendicular to the jets, "S" would appear to be on the surface of the accretion disk or whirling debris. QSOs aligned at a 45-degree angle would be usually almost invisible. Keep in mind that the vertical scale is exaggerated up to millions of times. If it were to scale, it would require a microscope to view it. The cone that I envision is a very thin, long cone indeed and the angle that the light bends is very tiny. Lines B and B’ of the diagram figures show the behavior of rays destined to reach a distant telescope. The sum of such lines would appear to a distant observer as an infinity of thin overlapping halos up to a light year or more across or so, each magnified trillions of times. Schild estimates that the source of quasar Q0957+561, A+B is 0.3 light years from microlensing evidence [Schild].

A is the path of light destined to hit the orbiting debris or accretion disc and be blocked, C-C’ is a path of light so far from the mass that it can not be bent into the telescope, "O" is the eye of the observer, the focal circle is in a plane perpendicular to the focal line (also called "the optical axis" or "caustic"), O-S, and containing the center of the huge mass along with the accretion disk and whirling debris and S is a point source on the opposite jet. The magnification obtains because all the light in an almost complete cone reaching a focal circle trillions of meters long is bent into the aperture of the telescope instead of going elsewhere, as it would have in the absence of the refraction of gas at a distance from the huge mass. The further along the jet the source of light is from the mass, the greater the magnification, but not directly proportional because, although the focal radius changes, so does the width of the beam destined to enter the telescope when it is opposite the mass.

Fig. 2

A sufficiently accurate approximation of the amount of magnification of any one point source is given by the expression: , where D is the distance OS of the observer from the source, R is the radius of the focal circle (or halo), d is the distance MS of the huge mass from the source, and A is the diameter of the telescope aperture in meters as designated in figure 2 (the second figure above was accidentally labeled “Fig. 1” inside the gif). This diagram shows a single beam of light from a point source which beam has a circular cross-section. This expression is derived as follows: is the circumference of the focal circle, is the apparent width of the halo opposite the huge mass. Therefore is the apparent approximate area of the halo. The area of a circular beam destined to completely enter the telescope at a point where the beam is opposite the huge mass is given by . If the area of the circular beam is divided into the area of the halo, is obtained. Thus the magnification is an inverse function of the size of the telescope (but not directly proportional because of stray light spilling in from outside the focal line or caustic).

If a QSO 5 billion light years away which has a point source emitting light 10 light years past the huge central mass from the observer which mass is such that the focal circle has a radius of ¼ light year and the telescope’s mirror is 1 meter across, the magnification for that point would be 9.46 times 10 to the eighteenth, or 10 trillions of trillions less a factor introduced by the relativistic motion of the source in the jet away from the observer. Adjacent focal lines also deliver some light to the telescope, but their magnification drops off very rapidly. If they could be isolated from the main halos, they would appear as an almost infinite series of halos resembling a parenthesis mark, becoming smaller and smaller away from the focal line until they became a pair of dots at a magnification of two and eventually become undetectable. The overall net magnification is much less than the above maximum number but is still impressive since the drop off from the focal line is fairly rapid. The magnification is obtained because light rays not far outside these lines are for practical purposes undetectable, similar to the dark area around the spot of light under a magnifying glass, which is magnifying the sun. Some light focused before and after the observer would also enter the telescope but these rays are still diverging and converging, so that only a fraction of them are perceived. The net effect would be a wide circle of light for those quasars appearing to be millions of kilometers wide (wider than the outer limits of the dense part of the orbiting debris), but seeming to be almost a point source at such vast distances. There would be no dark dot in the center of the circle partly because the halos are fuzzy and partly because the whirling debris, accretion disk, and near jet also furnish light. The difference in perception of large aperture telescopes from small would also be reduced from the maximum derived above because of the varied nature of the lensing effects. It should be considerable though.

Nearby telescopes would see little or nothing of the halos of the opposite jet since the whirling debris would block the photons. Lines A,A’ of Fig. 1 shows this situation for one of the points on the focal line. This could explain why there are no nearby quasars seen, only Seyfert galaxies with an active nucleus (AGNs). This is one monumental coincidence in the absence of an optical illusion. It would also explain why the number of Seyfert galaxies that are in the form of a spiral galaxy declines steadily in number as the viewing angle to the plane of the galaxy becomes smaller until it reaches zero, non at all, within 9 degrees of the plane. This can not be explained by absorption by the galaxy's gas and dust [Keel]. There would be very little magnification of the light from the near side of the accretion disc within the 9 degree viewing angle and it is possible that little light from the far side of the disc would be able to get through the "torus" (or actually probably an approximate hyperboloid, but looking like a torus) if the "torus" extended far enough out. At the same time the apparent area of all parts of the disc would decrease viewed edge on to the galaxy due to a trigonometric affect. The reason why there is a dramatic drop in galaxy number when the viewing angle is within 9 degrees of the axis of rotation, which is 90 degrees from the plane of the galaxy[Keel], could be explained by absorption of disc light by the bulge in the outer portion of the jet in some cases.

Extremely distant observers would also see less and less of the opposite jet of QSOs the further away they are because eventually the light cannot be bent enough to focus on the telescope. Lines C, C’’ show this situation. Of course a small fraction of light from the nearby portion of the opposite jet goes into the observer’s telescope, but not enough eventually to make distant QSOs visible. This could explain why few QSOs have been discovered beyond about 10 billion light years or so. This is a graph of the statistical number of quasars with distance.


Precisely what the QSO looked like across the spectrum would depend on what angle the line of sight made with the axis of rotation. I assume the brightest quasars would be those that were aligned so that the focal line just grazed the opposite jet and even more so if it were also aligned with the large bulge in the jet at its outer end. I assume that if the line of sight missed the opposite jet completely but intersected the radio wave generating area past the bend in the jet, the QSO would tend to have a high radio to light ratio, because only a small amount of light would be visible from the near edge of the distant part of the jet and the QSO would be visible primarily from light from the near side, making the QSO appear small visibly. This light would occupy the interior portion of the circle of light.

The jet on the near side of all QSOs would be visible, but light coming toward us would not be magnified other than what little is implied in its relativistic motion and much of the light would be absorbed by material in the jet, something like looking at a fluorescent tube toward the end. However, if the accretion disk has closely packed ions on its outer surface as suggested above, then light from the sides of the near jet and the hyperboloid ("torus") which beams back toward the disk should bounce back off as if the disk were a huge mirror because of the closely packed ions. Thus x-rays and ultraviolet light generated in that region should predominate in the center of the QSO. This is plausible because active galaxies viewed this way (along the axis) have their 6.4 EV spectral line skewed toward a red shift, whereas viewed from the side a blue shift is much more prominent [Tanaka]. I suspect that it is from this region that most of the variations in visible energy come from. Most of the infrared, I suspect, comes from the whirling debris distant from the huge mass. While it is not magnified, the fraction of light it contributes would be similar to the other sources since its area is enormous. Even so it could not be usually be resolved in distant QSOs by optical telescopes since it would be only a few light years across [Mitchell p147-149, 400]. One would suspect at first that nearby QSOs would be more visible in the short wave lengths, if reflections from the mirror are a large part of their source. However, if the mirror starts to bend from magnetism at a fair distance from the mass, and is therefore slightly concave, this would be less of a circumstance. In that case the rays would tend to be focused into the same telescopes as were receiving the light from the opposite jet. However, if the angle with the axis were an intermediate one viewed by a somewhat closer telescope, a slightly concave mirror might be able to act as a slightly concave emitter as well. Rays hitting this region from the hyperboloid ("torus") could be striking at a perpendicular angle. Thus largely only continuum rays would be seen by this telescope and the opposite jet’s halos would be almost invisible. These emitted rays would derive their magnification from the concavity of the emitter. Thus BL Lac objects or blazers would be accounted for. Some of the characteristics of BL Lacs support this concept. They often show superluminal phenomena, strong polarization, rapid optical variability, radio rays, and featureless optical continuum [Dermer][Kulshrestha]. It would also explain why BL-Lacs tend to be nearer objects and have their axes oriented toward us [Gopal-Krishna]. The orientation would have to be off of parallel by a few degrees. The X-ray selected BL-Lacs should be more degrees further off lined up from the axis and are [Gear 1993] since there should be more of a curve in the accretion disc surface near the strong magnetic field of the huge mass. The emitter could only have a small concavity in this region if this is happening in order to focus on telescopes at what are still rather large distances. The rays would also have to largely leave the surface perpendicularly. This may be possible when both the density of the ions is great as well as the number of photons emitted with possible similarities to a laser. This density effect could be reinforced by the reflected rays arriving and leaving at a perpendicular angle also, conceivably. Well under a fourth of the disk would be visible if this is the case so that future very accurate telescopes may be able to pick up a bias in the light of BL Lacs shaped something like a quarter moon and with no halos of the far jet visible. Rapid surges in short wavelengths of as little as 40 minutes [Kulshrestha] reinforce the concept that only a fraction of the disc is contributing much of the light. If the rays can not be constrained into a perpendicular exit by some mechanism or other, then this explanation is not possible for the object would be too dim at large distances. If BL Lacs should prove not to look like a quarter moon, this explanation would be impossible. However resolution would have to be many times the resolution of the best current telescopes.

The broad lines in the spectrum can also be accommodated by this explanation. This is because the light from molecules and ions moving away from the observer in the opposite jet would be red shifted relative to the light from the near side of the QSO from a Doppler affect. If the spectrum of the associated galaxy can be determined, the section of the line caused by the opposite jet should be more red shifted than its speed away would cause. This is because the photons have to move through a gas containing ions, since light moving through ions should lose a little energy. Ganguly, et al take note that only one nearby QSO has narrow absorption lines [Ganguly]. I suspect that this is because the continuum light from the opposite jet has to pass through the gasses in the debris of the inner transparent part of the accretion disc for nearby quasars. The broad absorption lines, I suspect, are created from this and maybe by the light of the inner opaque part of the accretion disc passing through hot gases in the plume at the end of the near jet. Michalitsianos, et al, suggest, from quasar pair evidence, that some of the light of quasars passes through the disc [Michalitsianos], thus supporting a concept that we see light from the opposite jet. Ten per cent of QSOs have broad absorption lines and these are almost all radio quiet. Since the radio waves are probably generated in the jets, most parts of which are distant from the central mass, they would not be magnified much, and thus explain the radio quietness. These may be primarily QSOs viewed perpendicular to the axis and thus should be high in infrared, I should think. It also could explain why they are low in X rays [Goodrich 1997] since X rays are probably generated at the inner portions of the disc and would be absorbed by gases on the sides of the outer part of the disc. That there seem to be a lesser number of distant broad absorption line QSOs [Goodrich 1997] would be explained by lesser absorption of light magnified from the far end of the jet by rarified gases in the outer regions of the disc. That is, that the gases just outside of where the accretion disc starts to compact would be dense, while the greater area of the more distant part of the whirling debris would be very rarified with respect to gas.

The light from the jet of the near side of a quasar should show a little lower blue shift than its actual speed would create from a Doppler affect because it is moving away from the huge mass and thus would lose some energy from direct gravitational loss. The net effect should make the QSO seem a little further away than it is. Attributes such as polarization would tend to be smeared in the light from the opposite jet because light from the near part of the opposite jet would be bent into the distant part. This has been observed in one-sided jets [Garrington]. This phenomenon is strongest in distant quasars. Precisely what the quasar or QSO looked like would be a considerable function of the angle the line of sight made with the axis [Barthel, 1989], how far away it is, whether the host galaxy is spiral or elliptical and how it was lined up with the bend in the jet. Also, different concentric rings should give somewhat different spectrographic readings if they can ever be resolved. There may be QSOs exactly lined up which show knots in the opposite jet as rings. Objects 3C270 and 3c272.1 may be such QSOs. These rings should move very slowly out from the center in the future. Most of the bluer section of the broad lines should come from the center. If the spectrum from the associated galaxy can be separated it should lie somewhere near to the center of the broad line, probably skewed toward the high frequency side of the broad lines. Narrow lines should be primarily on the outer periphery.

Nearby QSOs should show a smaller average apparent diameter than distant ones. Their spectra should tend to reflect the characteristics of the infrared of the debris and the distant part of the far jet and show stronger absorption lines for that part of the light from the distant jet. Because light from the near part of the opposite jet is blocked, there should be an increase in luminosity with distance at first, and this has been observed [Barthel, 1988]. There is a decrease in radio loudness with distance. This is logical, since the distant part of the opposite jet is the source of a large part of the radio waves. Nearby QSOs should show more discernible fuzziness from the associated galaxy. Any statistical differences based on distance would tend to give support to an optical illusion, as should large changes in appearance from small changes in inclination. Baker found some correlation of the viewing angle with characteristics of quasars [Baker]. However the viewing angle was determined by indirect means. Surges in the outermost halos should tend to be small or non existent and be of equal intensity and appear almost instantly around the whole circumference. If the bulk of the soft X-rays are coming from the near side of the QSO it seems to me that they would be less visible when the line of sight is exactly lined up with the axis because the wide outer end of the jet would tend to block the rays and such QSOs should not have a visible jet or at best just show the bent tip of the outer end.

Laing also proposes that one-sided jets are on our side [Laing]. If this can be proved, it would be strong indication of an optical illusion.

Since the magnification of the light is a function of the aperture size, large telescopes should show a QSO which is a little less bright relative to nearby stars or the visible part of the jet or its galaxy than small telescopes. I suspect that this is one of the reasons why the ratio of intensity of the central bright spot to the intensity of the jets viewed as radio waves seems much less than the same ratio viewed as light since radio telescopes have very wide apertures. Cygnus A may be an example. Observation of such a phenomenon in the SAME wavelength would be proof of an optical illusion.

The light from the far side of the disk and orbiting debris should also be capable of magnification when the line of sight is perpendicular to the axis of spin. Thus there may be nearby predominantly infrared QSOs from which equal, long opposite jets are visible as light if the infrared is not blocked by dust. If so, the infrared should resemble nearer to an ellipse rather than a circle with the long radius perpendicular to the jets. Twin peaks in infrared emission lines should be closer together. The peaks should be low and to the side of the primary peak if visible and be almost the same height. This kind of QSO, if it exists, should be dim in X-rays. Since radio rays are generated far out from the mass, they should not be magnified. Such a quasar may have been discovered [Vader].

Keep in mind, though, that optical telescopes have much too poor a resolution to detect most of the phenomena above at present, some of which phenomena in distant QSOs would be as much as millions of times too small [Mitchell p147-149, 400].


----You may see pictures of quasars and AGNs here. or links to other sites here.
----The Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) has links to images of quasars and galaxies in this site.
----For a society organized to discuss avant garde hypotheses click on; Natural Philosophy Alliance
--- A group that disputes the big bang and its newsletter.
----Lerner lists numerous contradictions to the big bang hypothesis here.
----You also may find useful a site which gives abstracts of journal articles in the physical sciences.
----For a fascinating site which views the Universe in steps of a factor of ten (or 1000 if you consider volume) see this site.
---- For a hypothesis that explains the large volcanoes of Mars and the bulges associated with them. They are proposed as the disruption from the antipode (opposite side of a sphere) of a huge meteorite or comet impact.
----Cause of Indian Decca lava flows. Did disruption at the antipode (opposite side of a sphere) of a meteorite or comet impact cause the Decca (or Deccan) lava flows near the Cretaceous close and also other large lava flows?
----For views of the Universe from increasing distances try this site.
----For an explanation of astronomy in Laymen’s terms and with numerous colorful pictures, see this site.
----For some dramatic views of a virtual travel to Mars and then to outer space, a trip which would take thousands of years even inside our own galaxy, but compressed into 12 minutes, see this site.
----For a hypothesis that explains the gullies and canyons of Mars as erosion by rivers of silicone dust, click here.
----See here for a site that gives weekly information about the night sky for amateur astronomers, including positions of planets, comets, star clusters, etc. and some informative articles.
----Another amateur astronomer site that shows how to view distant galaxies, including how to find and links to suppliers is here
----Also a site that explores amateur spectroscopy including technique and sources of materials is here.
----You will probably be entranced by very beautiful pictures of objects in space.
----For a site that proposes a thin plate hypothesis to explain the plates in the crust of the earth, see this site. It has a link that explains the formation of ocean trenches.
----All you need to know about physical constants.

----If you would like to read a science fiction yarn about five women who blasted out into outer space to establish a colony on the planet of a distant star, read this.

----For acquiring a book called “POTASSIUM NUTRITION – as involved in Heart Disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Gout, Diabetes, and High Blood Pressure” click here.

----For a list of several articles about health and nutrition access this site.

There is a free browser called Firefox, which is said to be less susceptible to viruses or crashes, has many interesting features, imports information from Iexplore while leaving Iexplore intact. You can also install their emailer. A feature that lists all the URLs on a viewed site can be useful when working on your own site and its source view color codes the html code.

There is a free program available which tells on your site what web site accessed your site, which search engine, statistics about which country, statistics of search engine access, keywords used and their frequency. It can be very useful.


Abraham J, et al 2007 Correlation of the highest-energy cosmic rays with nearby extragalactic objects. Science 318; 938-943.

Adriani O, et al 2009 An anomalous positron abundance in cosmic rays with energies 1.5 – 100 GeV. Nature 458; 607-609.

Aharonian F et al 2006 Fast Variability of Tera–Electron Volt Rays from the Radio Galaxy M87. Science 314; 1424-1427.

Anderson JD Nieto MM Laing PA Lau EL Liu AS Nieto MM Turyshav SG 1998 Indication from Pioneer 10/11, Galileo and Ulysses data of an apparent anomalous weak, long range acceleration. Physical Review Letters 81; 2858-2861

Baker JC 1997 Origin of the viewing angle dependence of the optical continuum emission in quasars. Astronomical Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 286;23-37.

Barthel PD Miley GK 1988 Evolution of radio structure in quasars: a new probe of protogalaxies? Nature 333; 319-325.

Barthel P 1989 Is every quasar beamed? Astrophysics Journal 336; 606-611.

Begelman MC Blandford RD Rees MJ 1984 Theory of extragalactic radio sources. Reviews of Modern Physics 56; 255-352.

Breitner, private communication

Chen K Halpern JP 1989 Structre of line emitting accretion discs in active galactic nuclei : Arp 102b. the Astrophysical Journal 344; 115-124.

Dermer CD Schlickeiser. Science 257; 1642-7.

Elvis M 1987 Models of quasars reappraised. Nature 328; 762-3.

Ganguly R Bond NA Charlton JC Eracleous M Brandt WN Churchill CW 2001 On the origin of intrinsic arrow absorption lines in 2<~1 QSOs. The Astrophysical Journal 549; 133-154 and 198-208.,

Garrington ST Conway RG 1991 The interpretation of asymmetric depolarization in extragalactic radio sources. Royal Astronomical Society 250; 198-208.

Gaskill CM 1984 What triggers a quasar? Nature 310; 102.

Gear W.K. 1993 “Are There Two Populations of Bl-Lacertae Objects”, R.A.S. MONTHLY NOTICES V.264, NO. 4/OCT15, P. 919.

Gift, S.J.G., 2001 A Negation of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity and a Return to Newtonian Gravitation, Physics Essays, 14; 320,.

Goodrich RW 1997 On the fraction of broad absorption line quasi-stellar objects. The Astrophysical Journal 474; 606-611.

Gopal-Krishna Wiita PJ 1993 Reconciling the magnetic field structure seen in variable active galactic nuclei with the unified scheme. Nature 363; 142-144.

Gribbin, John; "Galaxy Red Shifts Come in Clumps," New Scientist, p. 20, June 20, 1985.

Keel WK 1980 Inclination effects on the recognition of Seyfert galaxies. Astronomical Journal 85; 198-203.

Kulshrestha AK Josshi UC Deshpande MR 1984 Rapid variability in optical polarization of the quasar-like object OJ287. Science 311; 733-734.

Laing RA 1988 The sidedness of jets and depolarization in powerful extragalactic radio sources. Nature 331; 149

Lesage G-L, lucrece Newtonien; Nouveaux Memoires De L’Academie Royal de Sciences et Belle Letters, 1747, pp404-431.( there may be no English translation)

Michalitsianos, A. G.; Dolan, J. F.; Kazanas, D.; Bruhweiler, F. C.; Boyd, P. T.; Hill, R. J.; Nelson, M. J.; Percival, J. W.; van Citters, G. W. 1997 Ly alpha Absorption-Line Systems in the Gravitational Lens Q0957+561. Astrophysical Journal v.474, p.598.

Mitchell WC 2002 Bye Bye Big Bang, Hellow Reality. Cosmic Sense Books, PO Box 3472, Carson City Nevada 89702 USA.

Murphy EM 1999 Prosaic explanation for the anomalous accelerations seen in distant spacecraft. Physical Review & Physical Review Letters, Jan., Dec L83; 1890, 1891, 1892, 1893.

Musser G 2003 Frozen stars. Scientific American 289; 20-21.

Schild, Rudolph E. 1996 Microlensing Variability of the Gravitationally Lensed Quasar Q0957+561 A,B Astrophysical Journal v.464, p.125.

Seife C 1998 If the force is with them. New Scientist No 2151; Sept. 12 p4

Sokoloff D. and Shukurov A. 1990 Regular magnetic fields in coronae of spiral galaxies. Nature 347, 51.

Tanaka Y 1995 Gravitationally red shifted emission implying an accretion disk and a massive black hole in the active galaxy MCG-6-3a15. Nature 375; 659-660.

Vader JP Simon M. 1987 Nature 327; 304-5..

Van Flandern T 2002 Possible detection of gravitational quantum. Meta Research Bulletin 11;16.

Verbunt F2005 Surprise neutron star suggests black holes are hard to make. Science 310; 956.

Wambsganss J 2001 Gravity's kaleidoscope. Scientific American 285; 65-71

Wardle JFC Homan DC Ojha R Roberts DH 1997 electron-positron jets asociated with quasar 3c279. Nature 395; 457-459.

Mail to Charles Weber; isoptera at - or phone with 828 692 5816 (USA)

This article updated in April 2014. If you see any errors in it, please contact the author.

This page has been visited times