Aren't Quasars just the Big Bang?

[AbnormallyHonest]

I just always assumed that's what they were. As you look out at the Universe at large, eventually you come to a place that we are unable to see beyond. A resonant block. This is not only the farthest out we can see, not only the furthest back we can peer, but also the "smallest" form of the expanding Universe... but at that far out, the sphere of view has the largest area? So if you were the "Big Bang" what do you think your little singularity of creation would look as the view of it became the most inflated perception of the entire Universe we are capable of perceiving.... I always thought it was understood it might look something like a quasar... and they'd probably be all over the outer reaches of the Observable Universe. I mean even if they once were all connected and represented the whole of existence, I suppose the fractal expansion of space would break up the view and eventually diminish their apparent capacity, not because they shrunk, but because they just became less proportionate to a larger expanding Universe. Well, at least that's what I always thought.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Moved to speculations. If you are going to proclaim what you think, you will be expected to defend it with some rigor

[Delta1212]

You'd expect it to look like the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, not a bunch of little points.

[MigL]

Yes the expansion has diminished the apparent TEMPERATURE of the universe.

The temperature has decreased by three orders of magnitude as the universe has expanded by three orders of magnitude, and what was a temperature of several thousand degrees, 300 mil yrs after the Big Bang, is now less than 3 deg, the temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background.

 

Why would you think it would diminish to a multitude of extremely high energy, star like objects, visible only in the early universe ?

[AbnormallyHonest]

I think of the CMB as just the background echo from the expansion "inflation" of the Big Bang. That's why I don't see it as having a source or distance away from us, it's just everywhere and has varying "degrees" of energy. And what does that energy tell us about the distribution of energy and matter at the beginning of measurement? That things were unevenly distributed. So, if the current theories are accepted, that there may be black holes aat the root of of quasars... so an unevenly distributed Universe with packets of gravity stronger than the inflation, couldn't preserve portions of the Big Bang in little pockets that might look something like quasars?

[Janus]

Another factor to consider is that the distance to quasars varies over a fairly large range. If they were an "echo" of the big bang they would all be at the same distance from us. The modern interpretation for quasar are that they are the active nuclei of galaxies from a period when the super-massive black holes at their centers still had a lot of close by material to feed on. Later, as they cleared out the region around them, they quieted down.

[AbnormallyHonest]

Another factor to consider is that the distance to quasars varies over a fairly large range. If they were an "echo" of the big bang they would all be at the same distance from us. The modern interpretation for quasar are that they are the active nuclei of galaxies from a period when the super-massive black holes at their centers still had a lot of close by material to feed on. Later, as they cleared out the region around them, they quieted down.

Yes, exactly. Although, I was not aware that the idea that matter and energy has been changed to be more evenly distributed... I mean if they should all be exactly the same distance from us.

[imatfaal]

I think of the CMB as just the background echo from the expansion "inflation" of the Big Bang. That's why I don't see it as having a source or distance away from us, it's just everywhere and has varying "degrees" of energy. And what does that energy tell us about the distribution of energy and matter at the beginning of measurement? That things were unevenly distributed. So, if the current theories are accepted, that there may be black holes aat the root of of quasars... so an unevenly distributed Universe with packets of gravity stronger than the inflation, couldn't preserve portions of the Big Bang in little pockets that might look something like quasars?

 

The inflationary epoch was around 10^-36 of a second to 10^-34 of a second after the big bang - ie a frightening short period in the very very first instances after the big bang. The CMB was formed 380,000 years after the big bang in the era of recombination / the surface of last scattering (I just love those two oh-so poetic names).

 

The variations in the CMB are tiny by the way - one part in about ten thousand would cover all variation; that is pretty homogeneous.

 

Any black holes formed way way after the era of recombination ( the universe was almost homogeneous then - see above on CMB which is a reflection of the universe at that point.) Until an enormous time had passed we didn't even have hadrons - they only formed at the earliest estimation around a millionth of second after the big bang - the universe didn't see stars until 150 million years or so after the big bang. The earliest black holes were just so long after inflation that we cannot envisage them in the same context

[Strange]

I think of the CMB as just the background echo from the expansion "inflation" of the Big Bang. That's why I don't see it as having a source or distance away from us, it's just everywhere and has varying "degrees" of energy.

The CMB comes from much later than inflation. About 360,000 years later.

 

A good way of understanding what we see, even though it happened everywhere, is the surface of last screaming

https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March03/Lineweaver/Lineweaver7_2.html

[Mordred]

surface of last screaming. I think your spell checker entered the wrong word lol.

 

Though it is something every crack pot model tends to scream about lol

[Strange]

surface of last screaming. I think your spell checker entered the wrong word lol.

 

 

Actually not. It is a very clever analogy ...

[imatfaal]

Actually not. It is a very clever analogy ...

 

Indeed - on an amazing resource/website*. I have used that page to help explain before as well; for some reason, the analogy works even though it is not really any simpler than the real world scenario it is mirroring.

 

* Will we lose this sort of thing under the present/proposed cutbacks - it can't be expensive to run but also it will not be costless. Sorry very [ot]

[beecee]

I just always assumed that's what they were. As you look out at the Universe at large, eventually you come to a place that we are unable to see beyond. A resonant block. This is not only the farthest out we can see, not only the furthest back we can peer, but also the "smallest" form of the expanding Universe... but at that far out, the sphere of view has the largest area? So if you were the "Big Bang" what do you think your little singularity of creation would look as the view of it became the most inflated perception of the entire Universe we are capable of perceiving.... I always thought it was understood it might look something like a quasar... and they'd probably be all over the outer reaches of the Observable Universe. I mean even if they once were all connected and represented the whole of existence, I suppose the fractal expansion of space would break up the view and eventually diminish their apparent capacity, not because they shrunk, but because they just became less proportionate to a larger expanding Universe. Well, at least that's what I always thought.

Your thoughts from my perspective, seem more like confusion.

We see numerous Quazars [active galactic nuclei] at varying distances from us, and all when the universe was comparitively young.

This supports the theory that in early times, the SMBH's at galactic cores were in a "feeding frenzy", having plenty of matter of all type to gobble up.

It is also thought that at one time the Milky Way would also have been seen as a Quazar in the same sort of feeding frenzy.....That now has subsided after many billions of years of sweeping out a zone around our SMBH that is somewhat devoid of much of the matter that it once had and that obviously Quazars that we observe still do.