Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site brl-vgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-vgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-vgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.astro.expert
Subject: Re: quasars and the history of the universe
Message-ID: <2440@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 24-May-84 17:18:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.2440
Posted: Thu May 24 17:18:57 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jun-84 03:39:20 EDT
References: <2156@brl-vgr.ARPA>, <339@noao.UUCP>, <7790@lanl-a.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 12
Xref: 274 53

Yes, the original idea was that the pulsar period was too fast for
sensible explanation.  However, I am willing to drop that issue as
not necessarily related to cosmology.

I would like to see more information on this quasar that is known
to be behind a galaxy due to "lens" effect.  Are there multiple
images?  If so, is this explainable by a lens effect?  If it can
really be shown that only by being behind the galaxy can this be
explained, then indeed at least one quasar is extra-galactic.
What does Burbidge have to say about this one?  etc.

Nice to see another contributor to the discussion!