Milky Way gas cloud causes multiple images of distant quasar

Aug 28, 2013 by Dave Finley
Artist's Diagram of the refraction event (not drawn to scale), showing how radio waves from the distant quasar jet are bent by a gas cloud in our own Galaxy, creating multiple images seen with the Very Long Baseline Array. Credit: Bill Saxton, NRAO/AUI/NSF

For the first time, astronomers have seen the image of a distant quasar split into multiple images by the effects of a cloud of ionized gas in our own Milky Way Galaxy. Such events were predicted as early as 1970, but the first evidence for one now has come from the National Science Foundation's Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) radio telescope system.

The scientists observed the quasar 2023+335, nearly 3 billion light-years from Earth, as part of a long-term study of ongoing changes in some 300 quasars. When they examined a series of images of 2023+335, they noted dramatic differences. The differences, they said, are caused by the radio waves from the quasar being bent as they pass through the Milky Way , which moved through our line of sight to the quasar.

"This event, obviously rare, gives us a new way to learn some of the properties of the turbulent gas that makes up a significant part of our Galaxy," said Matt Lister, of Purdue University.

The scientists added 2023+335 to their list of observing targets in 2008. Their targets are quasars and other galaxies with at their cores. The of the black holes powers "jets" of material propelled to nearly the speed of light. The quasar 2023+335 initially showed a typical structure for such an object, with a bright core and a jet. In 2009, however, the object's appearance changed significantly, showing what looked like a line of bright, new radio-emitting spots.

"We've never seen this type of behavior before, either among the hundreds of quasars in our own observing program or among those observed in other studies," Lister said.

The multiple-imaging event came as other telescopes detected variations in the radio brightness of the quasar, caused, the astronomers said, by scattering of the waves.

The scientists' analysis indicates that the quasar's were bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas nearly 5,000 light-years from Earth in the direction of the constellation Cygnus. The cloud's size is roughly comparable to the distance between the Sun and Mercury, and the cloud is moving through space at about 56 kilometers per second.

Monitoring of 2023+335 over time may yield more such events, the scientists said, allowing them to learn additional details both about the process by which the waves are scattered and about the gas that does the scattering. Other quasars that are seen through similar regions of the Milky Way also may show this behavior.

The monitoring program that yielded this discovery is called MOJAVE (Monitoring Of Jets in Active galactic nuclei with VLBA Experiments), run by an international team of scientists led by Lister. The analysis of this rare event was spearheaded by Alexander Pushkarev of the Max Planck Institute for Radioastronomy in Germany. The researchers recently published their results in the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.

Explore further: Image: Multicoloured view of supernova remnant

Related Stories

Quasar observed in six separate light reflections

Aug 07, 2013

(Phys.org) —Quasars are active black holes—primarily from the early universe. Using a special method where you observe light that has been bent by gravity on its way through the universe, a group of physics ...

A strong magnetic field around the Milky Way's black hole

Aug 14, 2013

(Phys.org) —Astronomers have made an important measurement of the magnetic field emanating from a swirling disk of material surrounding the black hole at the center of our Milky Way Galaxy. The measurement, ...

Measuring the black hole environment of a quasar nucleus

Oct 22, 2012

(Phys.org)—Quasars are among the most powerful energy sources known—some are as luminous as one hundred thousand Milky Way galaxies. Astronomers know that quasars have massive black holes at their cores ...

Extremely rare triple quasar found

Mar 12, 2013

(Phys.org) —For only the second time in history, a team of scientists—including Carnegie's Michele Fumagalli—have discovered an extremely rare triple quasar system. Their work is published by Monthly No ...

Recommended for you

Image: Multicoloured view of supernova remnant

2 hours ago

Most celestial events unfold over thousands of years or more, making it impossible to follow their evolution on human timescales. Supernovas are notable exceptions, the powerful stellar explosions that make ...

Ultra-luminous X-ray sources in starburst galaxies

2 hours ago

Ultra-luminous X-ray sources (ULXs) are point sources in the sky that are so bright in X-rays that each emits more radiation than a million suns emit at all wavelengths. ULXs are rare. Most galaxies (including ...

When a bright light fades

3 hours ago

Astronomer Charles Telesco is primarily interested in the creation of planets and stars. So, when the University of Florida's giant telescope was pointed at a star undergoing a magnificent and explosive death, ...

Image: Horsehead nebula viewed in infrared

3 hours ago

Sometimes a horse of a different color hardly seems to be a horse at all, as, for example, in this newly released image from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope. The famous Horsehead nebula makes a ghostly appearance ...

The Milky Way's new neighbour

3 hours ago

The Milky Way, the galaxy we live in, is part of a cluster of more than 50 galaxies that make up the 'Local Group', a collection that includes the famous Andromeda galaxy and many other far smaller objects. ...

Image: Hubble sweeps a messy star factory

4 hours ago

This sprinkle of cosmic glitter is a blue compact dwarf galaxy known as Markarian 209. Galaxies of this type are blue-hued, compact in size, gas-rich, and low in heavy elements. They are often used by astronomers ...

User comments : 37

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rug
2.3 / 5 (9) Aug 28, 2013
hmmm where are the trolls on this one? I'm sure they would have picked up on it by now.
Q-Star
4 / 5 (8) Aug 28, 2013
hmmm where are the trolls on this one? I'm sure they would have picked up on it by now.


I'm waiting for them to "point out" that this is a better explanation for gravitational lensing. (When they say things like scattering and refraction could explain gravitational lensing it let's ya know right off the bat that have no clue as to physics. Watch.)
vacuum-mechanics
1 / 5 (15) Aug 28, 2013
The scientists' analysis indicates that the quasar's radio waves were bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas nearly 5,000 light-years from Earth in the direction of the constellation Cygnus. The cloud's size is roughly comparable to the distance between the Sun and Mercury, and the cloud is moving through space at about 56 kilometers per second.


Unfortunately they do not say anything about the mechanism which makes the waves bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas! It seems that once this phenomenon was explained by 'curve space-time', but problem is how empty space could be curved….
http://www.vacuum...18〈=en
jsdarkdestruction
3.5 / 5 (8) Aug 28, 2013
The scientists' analysis indicates that the quasar's radio waves were bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas nearly 5,000 light-years from Earth in the direction of the constellation Cygnus. The cloud's size is roughly comparable to the distance between the Sun and Mercury, and the cloud is moving through space at about 56 kilometers per second.


Unfortunately they do not say anything about the mechanism which makes the waves bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas! It seems that once this phenomenon was explained by 'curve space-time', but problem is how empty space could be curved….
http://www.vacuum...18〈=en

there one is, cantdrive must be out right now.
Q-Star
3.7 / 5 (9) Aug 28, 2013
Unfortunately they do not say anything about the mechanism which makes the waves bent by a turbulent cloud of charged gas! It seems that once this phenomenon was explained by 'curve space-time', but problem is how empty space could be curved…


Unfortunately if ya read the article they told ya exactly what was bending the light. The gas cloud is scattering it.

This phenomena was never explained with spacetime curvature. This is the routine centuries old phenomenon of light scattering.

What does empty space being curved have to do with this?

Are ya mixing this up with gravitational lensing? Any first year astro student or well read layman can tell exactly how we know when it is gravitational lensing and when it's refraction/scattering,,,,, it is the simplest of things to determine. Ya can perform the definitive test with a 1000 dollar instrument and five minutes of your time.

@ rug,,, what did I tell ya,,,, see I found one already
rug
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2013
lol good call, I'm still waiting for the bad driver to show up and complain about how this is plasma and the standard model doesn't use plasma experimental evidence.
rug
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2013
but problem is how empty space could be curved….

I just have four things to say. I will NOT argue. I will NOT reply back to any comment you make on them because you are a troll and I'm just trying to point out to the rest of the people the facts you are missing.
1) You obviously did NOT read the article.
2) space that is apparently empty could easily been bent by a black hole, dark matter, or a way over abundance of dark energy in one place. Although that isn't really possible.
3) The link you provided talks about aether which has been proven false many, many, many times in the past century. You might want to catch up with the times. We don't wear the funny wigs anymore either.
4) Supposedly this aether theory of yours goes against General Relativity but I think in essence dark matter and dark energy in the standard model is similar to the aether crap you blab about. Maybe if you actually looked at the theory instead of just bashing it you might come to realize it as well.
Gmr
3.7 / 5 (6) Aug 28, 2013
Now guys - its going to ruin the overall game if you interfere and/or lure folks on your bingo card into posting at the right position.

Besides, my next match is Hannes Alfven.
rug
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 28, 2013
sssshhhhh your gonna let them in on the secret. Oh wait, thats right they don't really read the post. Just a line or two of them.
Q-Star
3.8 / 5 (10) Aug 28, 2013
sssshhhhh your gonna let them in on the secret. Oh wait, thats right they don't really read the post. Just a line or two of them.


More often or not they skip from the title and go immediately to comment section with some great string of jargon and gobbledygook, which is why at times Zephyr has been known to show applying his AWT to global warming or Obama's problems with the Tea Party.

Now the vacuum man, all he has is: "maybe this will help answer the question". It doesn't matter what the question is about,,,, or even if there is a question at all,,,, it's always "maybe this will help answer the question". But I will give him this it's a versatile theory he has,,,,,, his theory is truly a theory of everything, because the same answer he links to answers every single question ever asked since O'Adam fell out of his tree.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (13) Aug 28, 2013
lol good call, I'm still waiting for the bad driver to show up and complain about how this is plasma and the standard model doesn't use plasma experimental evidence.

That doesn't change the fact they rely "on models we know are wrong".
rug
3.4 / 5 (10) Aug 28, 2013
What model would that be? What model does your pet theory have that does a better job explaining this completely odd ball thing in this article?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2013
Ideal MHD
IMP-9
4.7 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2013
Ideal MHD


Instead of quoting Alfven, the creator of MHD, for the thousandth time maybe you could make and original argument on why it's wrong. MHD is not universally applicable but that does not mean it is never applicable. Ideal MHD is a limit, in many situations it's a good approximation.
rug
3.4 / 5 (8) Aug 29, 2013
How exactly would Ideal MHD give you "a distant quasar split into multiple images"? I see nothing on the subject of Ideal MHD and multiple images.
Hat1208
3 / 5 (4) Aug 29, 2013
I know I know neutron repulsion!
rug
3 / 5 (6) Aug 29, 2013
Yup, that makes about as much sense as Ideal MHD
julianpenrod
1 / 5 (10) Aug 29, 2013
Such determined and pitiless mockery of those who question the "official story", even before they do. Note the hostility is so venomous, vacuum-mechanics asks how a charged cloud can bend light and Q-Star acts like vacuum-mechanics didn't even read that a cloud of gas is explained to be causing it. Incidentally, that's not "scattering". "Scattering" or "scintillation" is caused by microscopic but mechanical, not charged electrostatic interference with light. And, as for this being so settled because the New World Order demands that it be settled, if this is so explainable and usual a circumstance, why does the article itself say this was never seen to happen before?
Q-Star
3.9 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2013
Q-Star acts like vacuum-mechanics didn't even read that a cloud of gas is explained to be causing it.


Hey julesthepenhead, where ya been? Haven't seen ya around much lately..... No I didn't act like the vacuum man didn't even read the article, the vacuum man, as he does 100% time, commented as if he had not read the article. That's very deep and counter intuitive I know, but ya'll get it if think about it a little.

"maybe this will help with the answer",,,, gee wizz the vacuum man's posts even applies to ya, how about that?

Incidentally, that's not "scattering"


And I see ya are still commenting as if ya haven't read the article either,,,,, at least ya are self-consistent. All good science is founded on that ya know.
Q-Star
3.7 / 5 (6) Aug 29, 2013
And, as for this being so settled because the New World Order demands that it be settled, if this is so explainable and usual a circumstance, why does the article itself say this was never seen to happen before?


What's settled? Basic geometric optics? Or,, Why this has never been seen to happen before? That's two separate unrelated questions, not an "either"/"or" question.

Which would like me to answer first? But please frame your question in a concise rational manner without your preferred answer wrapped up in it. (See some of us pay attention, and that one ya will have to spring on someone who doesn't know ya.) Gotcha word games are no fun.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (12) Aug 29, 2013
How exactly would Ideal MHD give you "a distant quasar split into multiple images"? I see nothing on the subject of Ideal MHD and multiple images.

Never said it does, the comment I responded to seemed a general statement.
show up and complain about how this is plasma and the standard model doesn't use plasma experimental evidence.

I responded with a general statement, not necessarily directed to this phenomena. I have used that quote many times, to no avail.

Instead of quoting Alfven, the creator of MHD, for the thousandth time maybe you could make and original argument on why it's wrong.

Why do I have to explain that which has been explained clearly and concisely by "the creator of MHD".
in many situations it's a good approximation.

Approximation is now the goal? Kinda sorta, but not really. That sure sounds like science to me.
MHD models do not describe double layers, instabilities, or birkeland currents among other ubiquitous plasma phenomena.
rug
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 29, 2013
How exactly would Ideal MHD give you "a distant quasar split into multiple images"? I see nothing on the subject of Ideal MHD and multiple images.

Never said it does, the comment I responded to seemed a general statement.

Seems rather specific to me. You just don't have an answer because your sources do not provide you with one. Put up or Shut up.
show up and complain about how this is plasma and the standard model doesn't use plasma experimental evidence.

I responded with a general statement, not necessarily directed to this phenomena. I have used that quote many times, to no avail.

That's just bull and you know it.
Instead of quoting Alfven, the creator of MHD, for the thousandth time maybe you could make and original argument on why it's wrong.

Why do I have to explain that which has been explained clearly and concisely by "the creator of MHD".

Because you are the one that is claiming it's wrong and a quote is not evidence or proof.
IMP-9
5 / 5 (3) Aug 29, 2013
Why do I have to explain that which has been explained clearly and concisely by "the creator of MHD".

Because all you do is take what he said out of context, he urged caution with MHD, not rejection as you claim. All you do is quote mine, you never show the slightest hint of understanding.

Approximation is now the goal? ...MHD models do not describe double layers, instabilities, or birkeland currents among other ubiquitous plasma phenomena.

Does an engineer or a scientist use relativity to do basic dynamics? No, approximations are not a bad thing when considered. MHD does describe instabilities and can be used to model birkeland currents. It does not describe double layers but you wouldn't use MHD to describe them, that's the point. The fact it doesn't describe everything is a limitation not a failure. Newtons laws don't include a vast sum of phenomena, as long as as it's limits are considered it is useful and effective.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (12) Aug 29, 2013
You clearly don't understand the statement, let's do a play by play so you can understand.

My "general" statement;
That doesn't change the fact they rely "on models we know are wrong".

Your question;
What model would that be?

My answer;
Ideal MHD

Yours was a two part question, I answered the former, not the latter. If your don't understand the objection of using MHD models to describe astrophysical plasma behavior you just aren't paying attention or smart enough to understand. I have made that point repeatedly, ad nauseum, plasma is not an ideal ionized gas, yet these are the models that are being used. Hell Imp seems to have caught on, his statement was relevant to the point I was trying to make.
As far as this phenomena, I don't know enough about this unique situation to make an informed opinion.
rug
3 / 5 (6) Aug 29, 2013
As far as this phenomena, I don't know enough about this unique situation to make an informed opinion.


Now you finally get my point, you don't have the information. AKA you haven't been told what to say. You clearly don't really have an understanding of this theory. Mainly because it's not understandable.

If your plasma universe really covered everything as you claim it does (judging by all the post you have made) then it would have a explanation for this as well. Wouldn't you think?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (12) Aug 29, 2013
Because all you do is take what he said out of context, he urged caution with MHD not rejection as you claim

The success of Alfven's Plasma Cosmology and it's major departure from mainstream cosmology is how the plasma is modeled. The standard theory sees the plasma as an ideal ionized gas, ALL plasmas are treated this way from the dense solar plasmas to the rarefied interstellar and intergalactic medium.
PC uses a classical physics approach via electric discharge and particle/circuit models, it is absolutely vital to use this approach to accurately describe plasma. Even this approach is a mere approximation, yet a far more accurate one. It is the only approach that can explain the complexity of the observed magnetic fields. It is this approach that is used to describe galactic rotation without inventing dark matter among so many other items.
When Alfven began using pseudo allegations, he was beyond "urging caution". He was removing his glove and slapping them across the face.
rug
3.3 / 5 (7) Aug 29, 2013
The success of Alfven's Plasma Cosmology and it's major departure from mainstream cosmology is how the plasma is modeled.

Dumbass
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (11) Aug 30, 2013
Now you finally get my point, you don't have the information.

Shame on me for being ignorant.
That being said, if Arp and his compatriots are correct about redshift, it's unlikely this quasar is at the distance claimed. Thusly, their explanation may be moot, based upon a false set of presumptions. The radio sources may have originated in the jets or the Birkeland currents connected to the quasar or elsewhere. Birkeland currents are known to be prodigious emitters of radio waves. Temporary instabilities can arise in BC's, causing a full range of EM radiation. This is where;
"Earthbound and space telescope data must be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics and circuit theory, and of course with modern plasma theory."

To be fair, it may be far away and their description correct. I tend to think something simpler, but I don't know, haven't really looked into it much.
rug
1 / 5 (3) Aug 30, 2013
Their explanation was a lot simpler. Occam's razor comes to mind
jsdarkdestruction
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 30, 2013
"Shame on me for being ignorant."
don't forget all the acting by you that you are not. you should probably feel more shame for that too.
"if Arp and his compatriots are correct about redshift, Thusly, their explanation may be moot, based upon a false set of presumptions. "
which they are not ,
if halton arp is so great and all of that (which he must be to you since you bring him up every other post or more)then how come he doesn't support pc/eu? how can such a brilliant mind firmly against the "mainstream" not see your "truths"?
IMP-9
5 / 5 (5) Aug 30, 2013
My "general" statement;
That doesn't change the fact they rely "on models we know are wrong".

This is I asked you to make an argument and not regurgitate quotes. Alfven said this when accepting his prize for developing MHD, this quote was not directed at MHD. All you are doing is taking him out of context. Make or find an argument, not an calim to authority because he's a Nobel laureate.

The success of Alfven's Plasma Cosmology

Never happened. Plasma cosmology failed to explain large scale structure and was abandoned.

ALL plasmas are treated this way from the dense solar plasmas to the rarefied interstellar and intergalactic medium

Not true. For example double layers are studied in magnetospheres, yet they don't appear in MHD so the treatment is not universal.

he was beyond "urging caution"

Please show us that instead of the same quote you give us every time.
yyz
5 / 5 (7) Aug 30, 2013
"Birkeland currents are known to be prodigious emitters of radio waves. Temporary instabilities can arise in BC's, causing a full range of EM radiation."

Then why don't we see Birkeland currents connecting *every single galaxy* in the nearby Coma Cluster?

http://en.wikiped...d%29.jpg

"if halton arp is so great and all of that (which he must be to you since you bring him up every other post or more)then how come he doesn't support pc/eu? how can such a brilliant mind firmly against the "mainstream" not see your "truths"?"

An excellent question and one for which I've heard no satisfactory answer.
kelman66
3.3 / 5 (4) Aug 31, 2013
Is it gravitational lensing or is it refraction?
Q-Star
3.9 / 5 (7) Aug 31, 2013
Is it gravitational lensing or is it refraction?


Well it's not gravitational lensing.

So that leaves refraction, scattering, or electro or magnetic deflection. It's not refraction, the medium is not of uniform density or a fluid. It's not electromagnetic deflection, the medium is net neutral.

That leaves scattering, as the article states.
Q-Star
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 31, 2013
Is it gravitational lensing or is it refraction?


@kelman66

I just got a PM from someone regarding your question, & thought I would add this for what it's worth. Why did I gloss over the gravitational lensing reference saying nothing about why not.

Gravitational lensing has a unique property that sets it apart from the others, it is the simplest property to assess.

When light is refracted, reflected or scattered, each color of the spectrum is bent at a slightly different angle. Reds have a different incidence angle than blues. Easily shown with a spectrograph. It's why ya see rainbows, why the sky is blue, why pollution causes beautiful sunsets, etc, and it a problem to users of optical devises who must look through lens or air.

Gravitational lensing all wavelengths of light "bend" at the same angle, red bends the same as blue. Light is not being bent or refracted, it's on a straight line in curved spacetime. All photons experience the same condition equally.
julianpenrod
1 / 5 (6) Aug 31, 2013
Q-Star demonstrates a commonality of liars, pretending what the other said is wrong or even misquoting them, when not outright lying. In fact, despite their desperate attempt to whitewash their actions, Q-Star's comments were those of someone who felt vacuum-mechanics had not read the article. vacuum-mechanics asked what about the cloud scattered the light so much and Q-Star, like so many liars, doesn't answer the question asked, Q-Star says the gas cloud scattered the light.
And note Q-Star's bald assertion that gravitational lensing isn't at work. How does Q-Star know lensing couldn't have bent light before it reached the gas cloud? And note Q-Star's assertion that the gas cloud is "net neutral" while the article itself states a cloud of "ionized gas", which is not neutral. To be ionized means there is a net non zero charge, since, in a cloud, positive and negative charges would recombine.
Q-Star
3.9 / 5 (9) Aug 31, 2013
And note Q-Star's bald assertion that gravitational lensing isn't at work. How does Q-Star know lensing couldn't have bent light before it reached the gas cloud?


Hey julesthepenhead, don't ya wish ya had waited to post your wisdom? I just answered that.

And note Q-Star's assertion that the gas cloud is "net neutral" while the article itself states a cloud of "ionized gas", which is not neutral.


Ionized gas MEANS net nuetral. Wow julesthepenhead, ya are on a roll today. Want to try for the trifecta?

To be ionized means there is a net non zero charge, since, in a cloud, positive and negative charges would recombine.


Why would they recombine if they're having so much fun sipping around banging into each other? (Ya know, it's really hot in there.) Ya won the trifecta in a single post.

Are ya the vacuum man in disguise? I'm here to help ya, but ya must put in more effort.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.