Part 5 (chapters 5-1 –› 5-4) argues that AGNs may be shrunk galaxies/g-galaxies.

If quasars descend from (shrinking) galaxies or g-galaxies (4-1) or even superclusters, then quasars represent, in a way, a certain piece of space in the universe. Thus perhaps the universe can be divided in regions, see Fig. 5-4-I (see also 5-4).

Of course Fig. 5-4-I is only 2-dimensional. If you want to know how it works 3-dimensional: buy marbles (and you will find that you can choose between 2 or 3 different layers of marbles).
I will only go briefly in to this, for working this out probably takes years of research. I only want to show an example of how quasar quantization may be caused in a very simple way, so that quasar quantization can be something that no longer has to be denied (as right now in conventional science), because it can be explained very easily. Again: the example I give is just a simple example, probably the real situation is (much) different.

[June 2003: This region related quantization, or: region redshift quantization, may only be part of the reason of quasar redshift quantization. The other part may come from the gravitational redshift of quasars that is discussed hereafter (5-4). End June 2003]

There is a difference between radio quasars redshifts in the Right Ascension = 0 hour region (peaks at .30, .60, .96, 1.41, 1.96) relative to the Right Ascension = 12 hour region (peaks at .34, .65, 1.02, 1.48, 2.05)²⁹. Perhaps this tells us something about the velocity of our Galaxy, Local Group or Local Supercluster relative to “the rest of the Universe”. (Considering “our peculiar velocity” relative to “the rest of the Universe” may be possible (too) by studying the dipole moment of the cosmic background radiation, 4-2.)
[February 2004: Perhaps it can also tell us something about the position of our Galaxy in Fig. 5-4-I, i.e. of course our Galaxy may not be in the exact center of the 19 small(est) circles in Fig. 5-4-I. End February 2004]

Arp²⁹ writes about a problem concerning peculiar velocities of galaxy clusters. A number of observers have reported about galaxy clusters having peculiar velocities of from 1000 to 2000 km/s. If this were true, Arp reasons, then the whole lower third of the Hubble diagram, with its small dispersion from the theoretical line, would blow up as indicated in Fig. 5-4-II.

In April 2003 my eye I fell on a picture in the cosmological book by Harrison⁶ that is so much like Fig. 5-4-I that I like to show it here:

[June 2003: For decades Arp has argued that high redshift objects interact with low redshift objects^{29, 72}. He may be right (though I doubt it).

In 6-2 it is argued that white dwarfs are not “degenerate gas” objects. Instead they are presented as objects consisting of very heavy cores with heavy elements (with relatively little or no gas surrounding the heavy element core). White dwarfs, being very compact, thus have high gravitational redshift (measured gravitational redshifts of white dwarfs range from 20 to 90 km/s⁸).
It is also argued in 6-2 that the excess redshift of bright blue stars (in the order of 20 - 30 km/s²⁹) too is due to big cores of heavy elements surrounded by a lot of gas.
(Bright blue stars have relatively more gas than white dwarfs, which makes the redshifts of bright blue stars smaller then the redshifts of white dwarfs.)
Quasars may have an extremely big heavy metal core (5-2) and thus may cause extremely strong gravitational redshift.

When old galaxies or old g-galaxies turn into extremely concentrated hydrogen deficient assemblages of old blackened stars (4-1) then the gravitational redshift of such assemblages of many objects may become extremely strong. Part of the redshift of extremely compact assemblages of many objects therefore may be caused by gravitational redshift.

When AGNs descend from old galaxies or old g-galaxies (5-1) then part of the redshift of many AGNs (as well as other objects that originate from old galaxies or old g-galaxies, as may be the case with NGC 7603B, 5-4) may be due to gravitational redshift.
(Quasar redshift being due to gravitational redshift has been argued before by conventional science⁷¹.)

In 5-1 it is argued that there is a reason why the Broad (Emission) Line Regions (BLRs) of AGNs have physical characteristics remarkably similar to the photoionized extended envelopes of stars such as red giants and supergiants: because AGNs have a compact source, a “big ball”, that consists of many heavy element cores. This “big ball” (consisting of many smaller balls/objects) may be surrounded by a gas mantle (BLR) that acts as the photoionized extended envelopes of red giants and supergiants.
Such “big balls” may show enormous gravitational forces and hence may produce extremely strong gravitational redshift. Thus quasars, having very strong concentrated “big balls” may have very large gravitational redshift (much larger than the gravitational redshift by bright blue stars and white dwarfs) and thus discordant redshift may be explained. In other words: (many) quasars may be much more nearby than expected so far (by conventional science). (In 5-3 I reason that quasars may be much further away than conventional science thinks right now. With tired light redshift and gravitational redshift both may be true, 5-4, 5-4.)
[October 2003: Some quasars may be relatively small while very compact and relatively close to us, having low tired light redshift and high gravitational redshift, and some quasars may be relatively big while less compact, having high tired light redshift and low gravitational redshift. Perhaps that big quasars are often or always found far away and not nearby, because of the state of our Chappell (5-4). Therefore big quasars with low tired light redshift combined with low gravitational redshift may be unlikely.
High tired light redshift and high gravitational redshift may be something unlikely too when such quasars are too small to be seen at very large distances. But perhaps there is also the possibility that very large quasars can be so compact that they have high gravitational redshift.
With many smaller objects orbiting in the compact central sources of quasars/AGNs those compact central sources may have all kind of magnitudes and thus also very large magnitudes (the central compact sources of AGNs may be much larger then expected by their light flux variations so far, 5-1); this in contrast with one single compact object like a black hole or a very large star.
Conventional scientists doubt the gravitational redshift by quasars because the “fuzz” surrounding certain quasars is of the same redshift as the quasars. Mitchell has opposed this argumentation by saying that “reflection” of quasar radiation from surrounding dust may cause the fuzz⁷⁵.
Actually, if it turns out that there is no gravitational redshift in the case of quasars then the on this website suggested AGN model does not have a problem. On the other hand: on this website quasars are considered to be AGN types with strongly concentrated compact sources, so one may expect a certain gravitational redshift.

One may compare big/small quasars having high or low gravitational redshift with stars. Both big and small stars can have a big heavy element core (high gravitational redshift) or a small heavy element core (low gravitational redshift) relative to the amount of surrounding gas (6-2). Quasars can have a large “big ball” (5-1) (big quasar) or a small “big ball” (small quasar) and the more concentrated the masses (less space between the objects) in the “big ball” the higher the gravitational redshift.

When quasars of high redshift are close to a galaxy with low redshift and clustering around the galaxy then this may mean that the galaxy by coincidence lies in front of a cluster of quasars (with high tired light redshift) far away or it may mean that the quasars (with high gravitational redshift) are close to the galaxy.
If the quasars have high gravitational redshift then this may mean that the quasars are shrunken universal engines slowly moving to the low redshift galaxy because clusters of universal engines shrink (4-1). But perhaps there is also the possibility that the quasars are old universal engines that have been thrown out of the galaxy (5-1). Such universal engines then may contract relatively fast because the gravitational shielding (3-2) in the low redshift galaxy has stopped, thus developing quasar features where they did not have quasar features while they were still in the low redshift galaxy. End October 2003]

If very strong gravitational redshift exists then objects with different redshifts can be at the same distance, as may be the case in the following image of the Seyfert 1 galaxy NGC 7603 and its smaller companion NGC 7603B, taken by M. López-Corredoira and C. Gutiérrez⁷³ in 2002.

NGC 7603B (object 1) may originate from a hydrogen deficient galaxy or g-galaxy that may have been fuelled (and may still be fuelled: the luminous filament) with gas from NGC 7603. When AGNs originate from old hydrogen deficient galaxies or g-galaxies that have shrunk to spherical or disk shaped objects (consisting of old blackened stars or rather: dark matter objects) that get fuelled by hydrogen (5-1) then it may be a matter of time before a Broad Line Region in NGC 7603B (i.e. broad emission lines) shows up.
Thus NGC 7603B may be a “ball” of dark matter objects that has shrunk very much and so it may not be a coincidence that NGC 7603B is smaller than NGC 7603 and (appears to be) more spherical (because it is in a further “shrunk” state, see also 4-3).

The smaller quasar like objects 2 and 3 may be in an even further “shrunk” state and therefore may have even higher redshifts (in the case they turn out to be part of the system indeed, which would make them quasars with high gravitational redshift and low tired light redshift, 5-4). Because of being in a further “AGN evolutionary state” a Broad Line Region may have showed up in objects 2 and 3, which then may explain the by López-Corredoira and Gutiérrez measured broad emission lines⁷³.

With Seyfert NGC 7603 having the same redshift (.029) as the luminous filament (.030 ± .001) NGC 7603 may be an example of an AGN that has not become so strongly concentrated/shrunk (yet) that light is strongly redshifted by gravitational redshift. The fact that NGC 7603 is more a disk system rather than a spherical system may be an indication for this “not much shrunk yet” state (4-3, 5-3).
When the redshift of the luminous filament turns out to be a little higher than the redshift of NGC 7603 then NGC 7603B may be closer to us than NGC 7603 and then the gas may be blueshifted because of its velocity from NGC 7603 to NGC 7603B (which would mean that NGC 7603 may be a little redshifted by gravitational redshift too, i.e. when the blueshift by the velocity of the gas would be higher han .001).
If the light in the luminous filament is blueshifted then perhaps small redshift variations can be found in the luminous filament due to different velocities of the gas in the filament while moving from NGC 7603 to NGC 7603B.

If gravitational redshift causes part of the redshift of NGC 7603B then the redshift of the outward parts of NGC 7603B may be lower than the redshift of light coming from the nucleus of NGC 7603B. It may be interesting to try and measure this.

If the 4 objects of the NGC 7603 system are all part of one interacting system then the NGC 7603 may be likely to be a g-galaxy as described in 4-1 in order to be a stable system. This may mean that the system may have dynamics as shown in Fig. 5-4-VI.

The Sun is rotating faster around its axis than the planets are orbiting the Sun and the nucleus of our Galaxy may be rotating faster than the spiral arms (4-3). This also may be a necessity for astronomical systems to be stable. Thus object 3 may orbit NGC 7603 slower than NGC 7603 is rotating around its axis, which then may explain why we see gas moving to object 3 from object 3's right side in Fig. 5-4-VI.

The curve in the luminous filament may be explained by objects 2 and 3 respectively orbiting NGC 7603B and NGC 7603 as indicated in Fig. 5-4-VI.

Perhaps it is possible to verify this way of looking at the dynamics of the NGC 7603 system in the same way the orbiting directions of galaxies were measured recently with the Chandra X-ray Observatory³⁰: by imaging the “tail” a galaxy gets by moving through intercluster gas. Object 3 may show a gas tail at its north-west, though perhaps it is hard to find a tail for object 3 when it is fuelled with much gas coming from the right side. It may be more likely that object 2 shows a gas tail at its south-west side (though here also is the problem with gas that may be more abundant at the north-west side of object 2 when object 2 orbits NGC 7603B slower than NGC 7603B rotates around its axis).

One may wonder about quasars orbiting NGC 7603 at such relatively short distances. In 3-2 it is argued that with pushing gravity high-density objects, like the X-ray pulsar Centaurus X-3, may orbit their companions at relatively short distances.
When quasars descend from shrunken galaxies or g-galaxies as advocated on this website (5-1) then they are extremely compact objects and then quasars may orbit companions at relatively close distances.

Arp, Burbidge, Chu et al (2002)²⁸ argue that quasars may be as near as the starburst/AGN galaxy NGC 3628. In Fig. 5-4-VII conspicuous many QSOs (8) and objects that are suspected to turn out to be QSOs (7) are close to the main galaxy NGC 3626.

If the circled X objects turn out to be quasars indeed then we see 5 pairs of quasars: E and D; B and z = 1.75; z = .995 and z = 2.15; z = .408 and z = 2.43; C and z = .981.
If we take a look at our Local Group we also see pairs, but then pairs of galaxies, like Leo I and II, LMC and SMC, Sculptor and Fornax, Draco and Ursa Minor, NGC 185 and NGC 147, NGC 205 and M32.
Perhaps that later on those galaxy pairs become quasars when the galaxies shrink and concentrate. [July 2004: I guess the smaller galaxies surrounding the Milky Way rather will be cannibalized by the Milky Way. Still, the pairs of galaxies in our Local Group do show that galaxies may be likely to come in pairs. End July 2004]

In Fig. 5-4-VII we see 4 objects that lie in a certain position with respect to 4 pairs, i.e. with the line between the more distant objects and the pairs (more or less) perpendicular to the line that connects the pairs: F with respect to E/D; A with respect to B/1.75; z = 1.94 with respect to .408/2.43; z = 2.06 with respect to .995/2.15. They form 4 “T-bones”.
Only one object (z = 1.46) is positioned far from the rest (though it may be seen as being in a system with z=.981/C; a system that more or less may have been ripped apart because of gravitational forces by the main galaxy NGC 3628 and other quasars).

Such T-bones may be 2-to-1 systems (4-3). If quasars descend from galaxies then our Local Group may be interesting in an other way. Both the top view of our Local Group as well as the side view of our Local Group show a T-bone: our Galaxy versus M31/M33. Thus perhaps that in the very far future our Galaxy and M31/M33 may have shrunk very much and may have come to lie as a T-bone 2-to-1 quasar system around a main galaxy as in Fig. 5-4-VII.

Perhaps that the small galaxies of our Local Group are not big enough to become quasars, but also: perhaps they do become quasars and perhaps that much later (when the quasar states of the smaller galaxies have vanished) our Galaxy and M31 and M33, being bigger, become quasars.

The redshift quantization of quasars (5-4) may be due to galaxies or g-galaxies being in certain regions of space (5-4) (thus their distances may cause certain quantized amounts of tired light redshift). But also: the redshift quantization of quasars may be due to galaxies or g-galaxies (that later shrink into quasars) being quantized with respect to the amounts of mass those galaxies or g-galaxies have (thus their quantized amounts of mass cause certain quantized amounts of gravitational redshift, 5-4) or/and: galaxies or g-galaxies may be quantized with respect to their “evolutionary state” (see hereafter at Chappells). Thus, their “shrunken” or “compact big ball” state may cause certain quantized amounts of gravitational redshift. End June 2003]

There may be chappells in all kind of magnitudes, parallel with clusters that may exist in larger and larger (super)clusters. I call the region of space that is connected to our Local Group our Local Chappell, the region that is connected to our Local Supercluster our Local Superchappell and the region that is connected to the Great Attractor the Great Chappell and a region that goes (far) beyond that a Major Chappell.
The space connected to the Hercules cluster I call the Hercules chappell, and the space connected to the Coma cluster the Coma chappell, etc. The space connected to the Hercules supercluster I call the Hercules superchappell, and the space connected to the Coma supercluster the Coma superchappell, etc. Perhaps that quasars with high redshifts (i.e. high tired light redshift, low gravitational redshift, 5-4) can be centers of major chappells.
The region of space connected to our Galaxy I call our Galaxy Chappell, and the region connected to M31 the I call the Andromeda chappell.

Thus there is a difference between, for instance, a supercluster and a superchappell: speaking about a supercluster is addressing a particular assemblage of matter, speaking about a superchappell is addressing a particular region of space.
A chappell is often tied to a particular assemblage of luminous matter, but a chappell may also be a certain region in space without luminous matter but with (perhaps very little) dark matter. Very many little dark matter amounts spread over an enormous big empty region may collect hydrogen and thus (over extremely long times) a large nonluminous void may become a (luminous) supercluster.
[October 2003: Perhaps galaxies originating this way may be the low surface brightness (LSB) galaxies that have been found the last decade.
LSB galaxies are faint blue diffuse galaxies that are deficient in heavy elements. LSB galaxies seem to outnumber the more familiar galaxies. Astronomers so far seem to have been missing them because they contain few stars and are intrinsically dim⁷⁵. End October 2003] [July 2004: Such galaxies may also be very old galaxies that are at the brink of becoming completely dark. End July 2004]

There is strong evidence that the accretion of cluster galaxies triggers starbursts. A major question for astronomers is that this type of activity declines so rapidly from z= .5 to the “present”. This question may be answered by the state-of-our-Chappell.
The Universe may be homogeneous on extremely large scales, but with all kind of chappells in all kind of magnitudes and (astronomical evolutionary) phases, it is not homogeneous on smaller scales at all. When superclusters (4-1) shrink to g-galaxies (4-1) then there are early type superclusters/g-galaxies and late type superclusters/g-galaxies. Or: certain matter assemblages, like universal engines and g-galaxies, galaxies, clusters and superclusters, in certain regions of space may be in certain “evolutionary states”.

The region within z= .5 may be relatively young (or, at least, be in a certain evolutionary phase) and thus starbursts by accretion of clusters may not occur that much.
But also: with tired light redshift instead of expansion redshift (and no relativity) larger “z-distances” will be much further away than thought so far (5-3). Thus the declination from z= .5 may be an apparent declination.

[June 2004: When radio loud activity by AGNs is the major hydrogen production mechanism in the Universe (5-2) then the environment close to the radio loud AGN may profit most by the production of hydrogen. In other words, a supercluster in a certain chappell may shrink until at a certain point the central region of the supercluster has been accumulating that much matter that AGN radio loud activity starts in the center of the supercluster. This then may fuel a lot of systems within the chappell, which brings new star formation within the (luminous/dark) galaxies/universal engines and (luminous/dark) clusters/g-galaxies within the chappell (in which the supercluster resides but in which a lot of non-luminous dark matter systems too may reside). This way a (super)cluster may slowly shrink and become depleted while every now and then new hydrogen (by AGN radio loud activity) is produced bringing new starbursts. (Though, I rather think that the major amount of hydrogen produced in the Universe comes from the enormous big radio loud quasars and that such hydrogen may be spit out with such an enormous force that the hydrogen flows to other (super)chappells in extremely long journeys through inter(super)cluster/chappell space.)
One thus can imagine that chappells can be in certain states like the seasons we experience: winter (a lot of dark matter/dark galaxies/dark g-galaxies), spring (radio loud activity within the cluster producing hydrogen or hydrogen coming in from intercluster space), summer (star bursts because dark matter gets fuelled by new hydrogen) and fall (stars becoming depleted and blackening). End June 2004]

[June 2003: I have come to think different about this, because now I think that quasar redshifts may be due to gravitational redshift too (5-4). Perhaps that gravitational redshift can be differentiated from tired light/distance redshift one day. For instance, gravitational forces by AGNs will have certain effects on the reverberation mapping of AGNs and the widths of the emission lines. Thus perhaps it is possible to differentiate between:
- gravitational redshift (by correlation with, for example, reverberation mapping and/or widths of emission lines)
- distance redshift (by knowing the (distance) redshift of a (only distance) redshift companion)
- Doppler redshift (by subtracting the gravitational redshift and distance redshift) End June 2003]

The upper part of Fig. 5-4-VIII shows the positions and redshifts of the 5 quasars as they are observed in the sky.

The lower part in Fig. 5-4-VIII shows with arrows how the quasars may orbit each other. For the sake of simplicity it is presumed that all quasars have orbits that are in the plane that is determined by the line-of-sight and the line (perpendicular to the line-of-sight) in the lower part of Fig. 5-4-VIII on which all 5 quasars (are presumed to) lie, i.e. all quasars (only) either move towards us or from us away.

Thus the whole system may be looked at as follows:

Velocities like 16,500 km/s are high velocities. Quasars are likely to be compact systems, i.e. high density systems. Such systems may be able to move at high velocities because of relatively small inertial forces by gravity particles (3-2). A normal galaxy, having a much lower density, may not be able to reach such high peculiar velocities.

Perhaps there is quantization in the cosmic background radiation (CBR) restframe (there is according to Tifft²⁷), if parts of the CBR are bound to certain regions/chappells in space which may have certain peculiar velocities (4-2).

Current conventional science thinks that the Einstein cross is the result of gravitational galaxy lensing. Arp opposes this strongly²⁹.
[June 2004: More and more evidence concerning gravitational lensing comes up lately and therefore I give it quite a good chance that the Einstein cross may be 4 different images of the same object^140,141,185. I am not totally convinced though, I still look at gravitational lensing as something to be sought out further. It may turn out that some of the images that are thought to be multiple images by gravitational lensing are actually two or more quasars, especially because in my way of looking at the Universe one would expect to find some quasar clustering every now and then. RXS J1131-1231 for instance is supposed to show 4 images of the same quasar, but one of image turns out to be one magnitude (a factor of 2.5) brighter than expected. This brighter image very well indeed may be caused by microlensing by a single star (or several stars) within the lensing galaxy, as suggested by big bang astronomers^91,185. They may be right, perhaps the 4 quasars at z=0.66 indeed are 1 quasar that is gravitationally lensed by a foreground galaxy at z=0.30. Though very convincing indeed there is still little doubt in me, there still may be a chance that the 4 images are not 4 images of one and the same object. Four different quasars at z=0.66 too would explain one quasar being brighter by a factor of 2.5. End June 2004]
[August 2004: Right now I'm convinced that there is gravitational lensing. This means that there may be many gravitational lenses in the form of dark galaxies or g-galaxies (4-1), lenses that are not luminous. End August 2004]
[May 3 2005: In April 2005 astronomers announced they had found a near perfect “Einstein ring”³²⁷. Also measurements concerning quasars seem to confirm gravitational lensing³³². End May 3 2005]
Perhaps the 4 quasars (with z=1.70) of the Einstein cross is an example of quasar tetrahedron clustering (see Fig. 5-4-IX).

[June 2003: I now agree with Arp that it may be possible that the 4 quasars are at the same distance from us (because of gravitational redshift, 5-4; Arp connects redshifts to the age of mass²⁹) as the central 14th magnitude galaxy of z=.04 (not shown in Fig. 5-4-IX) that is in the middle of the 4 (z=1.70) quasars and which seems to show evidence of interacting with the quasars on images²⁹.

I hope it turns out that high redshift quasars are extremely far away (5-3). It feels fine when you can see far. End June 2003]
[December 2003: Recently observations of eight distant clusters of galaxies, the furthest of which is around 10 billion light years away, were studied by an international group of astronomers led by David Lumb of ESA's Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC) in the Netherlands⁷⁷. They compared these clusters to those found in the nearby Universe and found that clusters of galaxies in the distant Universe are not like those of today, they seem to give out more X-rays than today, which makes the conventional astronomers think that the density of clusters of galaxies in the early universe has been higher than today. I think the measurements easily can be explained with the far away galaxies being further away than thought right now because of tired light redshift. In that case those far away clusters may turn out to have the same density as the clusters found in the nearby Universe. I think it will turn out that objects in the Universe are much further away than thought so far, and so: right now I would choose for quasars being extremely far away because of tired light redshift rather than quasars being much nearer because of gravitational redshift. Though, both tired light and gravitational redshift may contribute to the redshift of quasars, it is something to be sought out. End December 2003]
[March 2004: Jesse Greenstein and Maarten Schmidt showed that it may be unlikely that (at least certain) quasars have large gravitational redshifts. Many of the emission lines come from the gas clouds surrounding quasars and are formed at different depths in the gas clouds. If the redshifts were mainly gravitational the emission lines would be spread over a continuous range of redshifts⁶. Perhaps there can be 2 types of quasars in this respect: small compact nearby quasars with high gravitational redshift, and big not compact quasars with low (or no) gravitational redshift that can be very far away. End March 2004]

[August 2004: Scientists from the University of Nottingham have been investigating the properties of quasars and nearby galaxies. As part of this study, they have overturned previous analyses by alternative thinking cosmologists, which suggested that quasars fling out of nearby galaxies. The researchers concluded that quasars are not thrown out of nearby galaxies²³². In this chapter it is suggested that quasars may be nearby because of gravitational redshift, but instead of being flung out of galaxies they are suggested to (sometimes) slowly spiral towards galaxies. Still, I rather see quasars as very far away. End August 2004]

[March 19 2005: A team of astronomers, including Halton Arp, have found a high redshift quasar within a nearby spiral galaxy (the galaxy is 300 million light years away). The quasar has a redshift of 2.11 and the researchers found that the quasar appears to be interacting with the interstellar gas within the galaxy²⁸⁸. Still, I am not convinced, I think the quasar lies far behind the galaxy and does not interact with the gas within the galaxy. End March 19 2005]