Largest structure in the universe discovered so far

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhysicsDad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Structure Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the discovery of a quasar group measuring approximately 4 billion light-years in length, raising questions about its implications for current cosmological models and the understanding of the universe's structure. Participants explore the potential impact on theories of homogeneity and inhomogeneity in the universe, as well as the definitions and criteria for what constitutes a "structure" in cosmology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express curiosity about how the discovery of the quasar group challenges existing cosmological theories, particularly regarding the size limits of structures in the universe.
  • One participant notes that the size of the quasar group is at the near limit of what is considered homogeneous, suggesting it may not significantly affect current models related to homogeneity and inhomogeneity.
  • Another participant highlights a discrepancy in the understanding of the Cosmological Principle, noting that the newly discovered structure is much larger than previously accepted limits.
  • Concerns are raised about the definition of a structure, including factors such as the number of galaxies, matter density, and the evolutionary history of the bodies involved.
  • A participant mentions the possibility that the standard \LambdaCDM model may not have allowed sufficient time for such a large structure to form from an initially homogeneous state.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that while gravitationally-collapsed structures may not exceed certain sizes, coherent strings of collapsed objects could exist on larger scales.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as multiple competing views remain regarding the implications of the discovery and the definitions of structures in cosmology. The discussion reflects uncertainty and differing interpretations of the findings.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include unresolved definitions of structures, the dependence on assumptions about the evolution of the universe, and the potential for varying interpretations of the implications of the quasar group's size.

PhysicsDad
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Just saw this http://www.space.com/19220-universe-largest-structure-discovered.htmlarticle about a quasar group that's 4 Gly long. Not to speculate too much, but any thoughts on how much of an impact this could have on our current models and understanding of the formation of the universe? The article says it "challenges modern theory" but I am curious, to what extent could it change how we look at the universe?

Moderators: if this becomes too speculative, I apologize, and please shut it down if that is the case.

Thank you all ahead of time.
 
Space news on Phys.org
Ahh, I must have missed that... Thank you
 
no problem. Some good info on the other thread should answer your earrlier question.
The size is at the near limit of homogeneous, which is usually described as above 100 Mpc.
Below 100 Mpc we already know the universe in inhomogeneous. So I don't believe this will have any significant affect on current Homogeneous/Inhomogeneous related issues.
 
This is a quote from another article on the same site, describing the size of this formation.

http://www.space.com/19227-biggest-structure-universe-explained-infographic.html

Quote:
The currently accepted Cosmological Principle, based on the work of Albert Einstein, suggests that the largest structures we should be able to find would be about 370 megaparsecs across (more than 1.2 billion light-years). The newly found quasar group is 1,200 megaparsecs across, a distance that would take four billion years to cross at the speed of light.
End quote

Unless I am misunderstanding what you mean, this seems to be A LOT bigger than 100 Mpc

Am I just not understanding something correctly?
 
No you didn't miss anything I did, lol my turn. I found a full paper linked to one of the links in the other thread I posted. They are being cautious understandably so.

If you look in the conclusions on this paper it best describes some of the concerns. Also as Pointed out we also have to be cautious as to what constitutes a structure.
http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/01/07/mnras.sts497.full.pdf+html

Chronos mentioned that last bit.

Another problem you run into with large scale structures is what constitutes a structure? Is it the number of galaxies in a certain volume, the matter/energy density contained within that volume, or something else? It surely must be something you can objectively quantify. Another issue is the evolutionary history of the bodies involved - are they related? Is it a grouping of bodies with a common history, or a chance alignment between two unrelated overdense regions that happen to be wandering across our line of sight? I think these are among the reasons Clowe is guarded in his conclusions.

Guess we will have to wait and see.
 
It may be that in the standard [itex]\Lambda[/itex]CDM model there simply has not been enough time for such a large structure to form from an initial homogeneous (+ CMB anisotropies) state.

It would then be another example of old structures in a 'young' universe such as discussed in my old (and now locked thread) Is There An Age Problem In The Early LCDM Model?
.

Garth
 
PhysicsDad said:
Quote:
The currently accepted Cosmological Principle, based on the work of Albert Einstein, suggests that the largest structures we should be able to find would be about 370 megaparsecs across (more than 1.2 billion light-years). The newly found quasar group is 1,200 megaparsecs across, a distance that would take four billion years to cross at the speed of light.
End quote

Unless I am misunderstanding what you mean, this seems to be A LOT bigger than 100 Mpc

Am I just not understanding something correctly?
The original paragraph isn't really accurate. There are expected to be structures at all scales. In fact, the highest-amplitude perturbations produced by inflation are at around 250Mpc.

The main point here is that inflation set up initial density perturbations at every length scale. At smaller scales, those density perturbations become mixed-up by the effects of local gravity, but at large scales those initial perturbations hang around. Go much about 250Mpc, and structures should become increasingly rare, but should never entirely disappear.

Edit: Note that you don't expect to have gravitationally-collapsed structures, like galaxy clusters or superclusters, that are larger than about 80Mpc, because they won't have had time to collapse. But there's no problem with having a coherent string of such collapsed objects on much larger scales.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K