![\"\"](\"http:\/\/starburstfound.org\/superwaveblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/11\/X-ray-fluxJ164449.3+5734511.gif\" "\\"X-ray")
<\/a>X-ray flux for source J164449.3+573451<\/p><\/div>\n
The average x-ray luminosity during its first day (up to s = 104<\/sup> seconds) was estimated to be 2.5 X 1047<\/sup> ergs\/s (see earlier posting<\/a>) source Almeida and De Angelis. \u00a0Since then, seven and a half months have elapsed and its intensity has declined about 30 fold. \u00a0So its luminosity can now be stated to average around 1046<\/sup> ergs\/s.<\/p>\n This is still in the energy range of a quasar, quasars typically having luminosities in this part of the x-ray spectrum ranging from 1043<\/sup> to >1047<\/sup> ergs. \u00a0To counter an opinion posted in August on physorg, this point should be further clarified. \u00a0One person claimed that I was overstating to term this source a quasar having an x-ray luminosity at the upper end of the quasar luminosity range. \u00a0I still stand by this. \u00a0To give a reference published in Monthly Notices<\/em>,\u00a0James Reeves and Martin Turner (2008)<\/a> state on page 5 of their paper that the quasar x-ray luminosity extends from “1041<\/sup> erg\/s for the least luminous Seyfert 1 to ~1047<\/sup> ergs\/s for the most luminous quasars.” \u00a0The intensity of\u00a0GRB 110328A has declined considerably from what it was during its first day, but still at 1046<\/sup> ergs\/s it should rate as a moderately strong quasar.<\/p>\n Also the criticism was aired that the the high energy spectrum for this source does not match that of a quasistellar object. \u00a0In fact, Bloom et al. (2011)<\/a> compare the emission of GRB 110328A\u00a0to that of a blazar<\/a> which is a particular kind of quasar. \u00a0So, again my original claim still stands.<\/p>\n The main point to consider is that this source is still active now after seven and a half months. \u00a0Almeida and De Angelis who first proposed that this was a black hole snacking on a star predicted that the source should fade out after at most a few months. \u00a0Indeed, its intensity is dimishing, but it has now lasted more than three times longer than what the snack theory had expected and is still going strong as a moderately luminous quasar. \u00a0I think it is time that the black hole snack theorists should admit defeat. \u00a0Invoking a repeating series of ongoing snacks also seems far fetched considering that this source is emitting a wind of\u00a0relativistic particles. \u00a0Also, in August 2011<\/a> the radio-emitting region was reported to be expanding at half the speed of light implying a rapid matter outflow from the source.<\/p>\n The power source for quasars remains a mystery in conventional astrophysics given its inability to explain how matter would accrete against the force of such a wind. \u00a0To date the only feasible explanation is that proposed over 25 years ago by the subquantum kinetics<\/a> physics methodology.<\/p>\n Paul LaViolette<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The X-ray flux graph below shows the latest update for gamma\/x-ray source GRB 110328A (J164449.3+573451). The average x-ray luminosity during its first day (up to s = 104 seconds) was estimated to be 2.5 X 1047 ergs\/s (see earlier posting) source Almeida and De Angelis. \u00a0Since then, seven and a \u2026 Continue reading