Re: What is the universe made of? Shedding light on the mystery of missing ordinary matter

Message-ID	<5664BB4C.6368@ix.netcom.com> (permalink)
Date	2015-12-06 14:48 -0800
From	The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: What is the universe made of? Shedding light on the mystery of missing ordinary matter
References	(3 earlier) <6653f6e7-3f2a-4109-beb7-2ba06ada1c34@googlegroups.com> <zJadnYHQvbdyYP3LnZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <0f9b2775-aacf-4519-8394-dbf79d3ef051@googlegroups.com> <9bc6a3d6-f9f4-4859-b5a6-e4f20a600b07@googlegroups.com> <6c9160ca-c377-4b8f-8c39-350309e44c5b@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> 
> On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 5:24:21 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 6:45:59 PM UTC-8, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > > On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 6:44:01 PM UTC-8, Sam Wormley wrote:
> > > > On 12/3/15 8:19 PM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote:
> > > > > This
> > > > > is in part the measurement effect, similarly the deeper
> > > > > we look into the well the more the blinders there are,
> > > > > that then see yet more space and mass and then about
> > > > > how current models using "WMAP is flat" are off by
> > > > > 10^120 orders of magnitude (all the way off).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >    You are not making any sense at all, Ross.
> > > >
> > >
> > > "Making cents" is for bean-counters,
> > > not conscientious physicists (who
> > > can be the same thing).
> >
> >
> > About Alma:  those clusters are more than 11 billion
> > light years away, thus that view is 11 billion years old.
> >
> > http://phys.org/news/2015-12-alma-monstrous-baby-galaxies-cradled.html
> >
> > "The shape of the cluster observed by the Subaru
> > Telescope indicates the presence of a huge 3D web
> > of invisible dark matter."
> >
> > "This finding supports the model that monstrous galaxies
> > form in areas where dark matter is concentrated. And since
> > modern large elliptical galaxies are simply monstrous galaxies
> > which have mellowed with age, they too must have originated
> > at nexuses in the large scale structure."
> >
> >
> > So, it seems the "dark matter" presence was computed off
> > the visible segment, then there's a difference with the radio
> > segment.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why galaxy arms instead of galaxy rings?
> >
> >
> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1510.08861
> >
> > "ALMA Deep Field in SSA22: A concentration of
> > dusty starbursts in a z=3.09 protocluster core"
> >
> > From the abstract, about the "nexus" is about  "at the
> > junction of the 50 Mpc-scale filamentary three-dimensional
> > structure traced by Lyman-alpha emitters (LAEs) in this field ...."
> >
> >
> > ("We find that four of the eight SMGs host
> > a X-ray luminous active galactic nuclei (AGN). "
> > I think that's interesting because it's half of them.)
> >
> > "The density distribution of dark matter is expected
> > to reï¬‚ect that of baryonic matter and consequently
> > that of galaxies (e.g., Kauï¬€mann et al. 1999)."
> >
> >
> > "Throughout this letter, we adopt a cosmology with
> > â„¦m = 0.3,â„¦Î› = 0.7, and H0=70 km sâˆ’1 Mpcâˆ’1."
> >
> > Kauffmann, Colberg, Diaferio, and White: 1999 MNRAS?
> >
> > arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9906493
> >
> > "In ï¬gures 15-17 we show ï¬ts to the data obtained
> > for the popular Î›CDM cosmology (â„¦ = 0.3, Î› = 0.7,
> > H0 = 70 km sâˆ’1 and Ïƒ8 = 1). We note that quasar
> > luminosity functions in the literature are almost
> > always computed assuming a cosmology with q0 = 0.5
> > and H0 = 50 km sâˆ’1. In order to avoid having to re-analyze
> > the real observational data, we choose to transform our
> > model predictions to the values that would be obtained
> > if the observations were analyzed assuming an Einstein-
> > de Sitter universe with Hubble Constant h = 0.5. Because
> > structure forms earlier in the Î›CDM cosmology, galaxy-galaxy
> > merging rates are substantially lower at z = 0 than in the high-
> > density CDM cosmology. As a result, we do not require an very
> > strong evolution in the cold gas content of galaxies to reproduce
> > the strong decline in quasar space densities from z âˆ¼ 2 to the
> > present day. Our best-ï¬t model has Î± âˆ (1 + z)âˆ’1 and tacc(z = 0)
> > = 2.5Ã—107 Gyr. In addition we assume that tacc scales in the same
> > way as the host galaxy dynamical time in a Î›CDM cosmology: tacc
> > âˆ (0.7+0.3(1+z)3)âˆ’1/2 (Mo, Mao & White 1998). As seen in ï¬gures
> > 15-17, the Î›CDM model can simultaneosly ï¬t the evolution of cold
> > gas inferred from the damped systems and the decline in quasar
> > space density from z = 2 to the present day."
> >
> > Oh, so you just adjust the parameters to fit the model, how neat.
> 
> More on "why galaxy arms instead of rings",
> just some Wiki-fodder, basically that spiral
> is the way of galaxies, then as of why.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_galaxy
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_sequence
> 
> There's a lot to be understood in this about
> the fractal (self-similar at any scales), about
> why barred spiral galaxies are like digital ones
> and pinwheel spiral galaxies are like analog ones.
> 
> This isn't so much about explaining the missing
> ordinary matter so much, as yet:  how are spiral
> galaxies formed, and, of the various sorts why,
> then, is it usual for all galaxies to be spiral
> galaxies, then, why variously barred and pinwheel
> spiral galaxies.




Pinwheel spiral galaxies purpose is to propell more stars.

Thread

csiph-web