Most recent discourse has focused upon whether
redshift surveys of
quasars (QSOs) produce evidence of quantization beyond that explainable by
selection effect. This has been assisted by advances in cataloging in the late 1990s that have increased substantially the sample sizes involved in astronomical measurements.
Karlsson's formula Historically, K. G. Karlsson and G. R. Burbidge were first to note that quasar redshifts were quantized in accordance with the empirical formula :\log_{10}(1 + z) = 0.089n - 0.0632 where: • z refers to the magnitude of redshift (shift in frequency as a proportion of initial frequency); • n is an integer with values 1, 2, 3, 4 ... This predicts periodic redshift peaks at z = 0.061, 0.30, 0.60, 0.96, 1.41, and 1.9, observed originally in a sample of 600 quasars, verified in later early studies.
Modern discourse A 2001 study by Burbidge and Napier found the pattern of periodicity predicted by Karlsson's formula to be present at a high
confidence level in three new samples of quasars, concluding that their findings are inexplicable by spectroscopic or similar selection effects. In 2002, Hawkins
et al. found no evidence for redshift quantization in a sample of 1647 galaxy-quasar pairs from the
2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey: :"Given that there are almost eight times as many data points in this sample as in the previous analysis by Burbidge & Napier (2001), we must conclude that the previous detection of a periodic signal arose from the combination of noise and the effects of the window function." In response, Napier and Burbidge (2003) argue that the methods employed by Hawkins
et al. to remove noise from their samples amount to "excessive data smoothing" which could hide a true periodicity. They publish an alternate methodology for this that preserves the periodicity observed in earlier studies. In 2005, Tang and Zhang found no evidence for redshift quantization of quasars in samples from the
Sloan Digital Sky Survey and 2dF redshift survey. A 2006 study of 46,400 quasars in the
SDSS by Bell and McDiarmid discovered 6 peaks in the redshift distribution consistent with the decreasing intrinsic redshift (DIR) model. Bell and Comeau (2010) concur that selection effects give rise to the apparent redshift peaks, but argue that the correction process removes a large fraction of the data. The authors argue that the "filter gap footprint" renders it impossible to verify or falsify the presence of a true redshift peak at Δ
z = 0.60. A 2006 review by Bajan
et al. discovered weak effects of redshift periodization in data from the
Local Group of galaxies and the
Hercules Supercluster. They conclude that "galaxy redshift periodization is an effect which can really exist", but that the evidence is not well established pending study of larger databases. A 2007
absorption spectroscopic analysis of quasars by Ryabinkov
et al. observed a pattern of statistically significant alternating peaks and dips in the redshift range Δ
z = 0.0 − 3.7, though they noted no statistical correlation between their findings and Karlsson's formula. ==References==