cosmological large-scale structure on the orientation of galaxies

Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:6H%Yf.82075$oL.35169@attbi_s71...
Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the
orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

I beat ya to it!

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:gW%Yf.82099$oL.27775@attbi_s71...
atm2020 wrote:
"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:6H%Yf.82075$oL.35169@attbi_s71...

Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the
orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680


I beat ya to it!

Bless your heart.

Ya right, as if anyone is interested in this.

Sam Wormley wrote:
Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Sam

Albert thought that light leaving stars would go to waste so he bent
the universe to stop it from happening,it is truly hilarious with
nobody laughing.

" This conception is in itself not very satisfactory. It is still less
satisfactory because it leads to the result that the light emitted by
the stars and also individual stars of the stellar system are
perpetually passing out into infinite space, never to return, and
without ever again coming into interaction with other objects of
nature. Such a finite material universe would be destined to become
gradually but systematically impoverished. "

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

This is what happens when a bunch of astrophotographers take charge of
an astronomical heritage.Personally I find Albert's reasons for 'warped
space' to be the funniest piece of literature ever written and light
relief from the intricacies of the real problem back at Newton and
Flamsteed.

I suppose you think these astrophotographers care what you post,they
care about clouds,wind,rain and anything that might spoil their
celestial sphere peep show.

Do you not like Albert's reasons for 'curving the universe' in
1920,before galactic structures were discovered.

I really enjoy Albert's rejection of galactic structures and
especially as he uses Newton as a basis for that rejection. -

"This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite
island in the infinite ocean of space."

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html


I told you that the early 20th century relativistic ideas are
genuinely funny for a real astronomer as a really exotic expansion of
the original Newtonian errors and especially when you understand what
Isaac was really doing.

Btw,Newton never pondered a center,universal or otherwise so whatever
Albert imagined in that passage above,it has nothing whatsoever to do
with Newton -

"Cor. 2. And since these stars are liable to no sensible parallax from
the annual motion of the earth, they can have no force, because of
their immense distance, to produce any sensible effect in our system.
Not to mention that the fixed stars, every where promiscuously
dispersed in the heavens, by their contrary actions destroy their
mutual actions, by Prop. LXX, Book I." Newton

My views are from the era of Copernicus and Kepler,their working
astronomical principles are a joy to behold for those who get beyond
the initial unfamiliarity and it does not take long before the cracks
in the empirical system start to emerge.While relativistic conceptions
are just plain funny,the Newtonian/Flamsteed working principles are far
harder to root out for they have a useful side.

I do not pity you,if you wish to pay homage to the 17th century guys
who were really only interested in finding terrestial longitudes by
whatever means then good for you,but astronomy it ain't.

oriel36 wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:

Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680


Sam

Albert thought that light leaving stars would go to waste so he bent
the universe to stop it from happening,it is truly hilarious with
nobody laughing.

" This conception is in itself not very satisfactory. It is still less
satisfactory because it leads to the result that the light emitted by
the stars and also individual stars of the stellar system are
perpetually passing out into infinite space, never to return, and
without ever again coming into interaction with other objects of
nature. Such a finite material universe would be destined to become
gradually but systematically impoverished. "

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

This is what happens when a bunch of astrophotographers take charge of
an astronomical heritage.Personally I find Albert's reasons for 'warped
space' to be the funniest piece of literature ever written and light
relief from the intricacies of the real problem back at Newton and
Flamsteed.

I suppose you think these astrophotographers care what you post,they
care about clouds,wind,rain and anything that might spoil their
celestial sphere peep show.



I like to find objects (or their companions) that I've read about. It
enhances my sense of connectedness. I've often pointed out to others...
That's the companion of Cygnus X-1.. or that star went nova some years
ago... or this star has at least one detected extra solar planet.

And now I know that some spiral galaxy orientations are part of a
bigger pattern!

They may not be visually significant or even interesting... but finding
and identifying those, involved in a discovery of some kind, is very
satisfying.

Sam Wormley wrote:
oriel36 wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:

Detection of the effect of cosmological large-scale structure on the orientation of galaxies
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680

Galaxies are not distributed randomly throughout space but are
instead arranged in an intricate "cosmic web" of filaments and walls
surrounding bubble-like voids. There is still no compelling
observational evidence of a link between the structure of the cosmic
web and how galaxies form within it. However, such a connection is
expected on the basis of our understanding of the origin of galaxy
angular momentum: disk galaxies should be highly inclined relative to
the plane defined by the large-scale structure surrounding them.
Using the two largest galaxy redshift surveys currently in existence
(2dFGRS and SDSS) we show at the 99.7% confident level that these
alignments do indeed exist: spiral galaxies located on the shells of
the largest cosmic voids have rotation axes that lie preferentially
on the void surface.

See: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0511680


Sam

Albert thought that light leaving stars would go to waste so he bent
the universe to stop it from happening,it is truly hilarious with
nobody laughing.

" This conception is in itself not very satisfactory. It is still less
satisfactory because it leads to the result that the light emitted by
the stars and also individual stars of the stellar system are
perpetually passing out into infinite space, never to return, and
without ever again coming into interaction with other objects of
nature. Such a finite material universe would be destined to become
gradually but systematically impoverished. "

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html

This is what happens when a bunch of astrophotographers take charge of
an astronomical heritage.Personally I find Albert's reasons for 'warped
space' to be the funniest piece of literature ever written and light
relief from the intricacies of the real problem back at Newton and
Flamsteed.

I suppose you think these astrophotographers care what you post,they
care about clouds,wind,rain and anything that might spoil their
celestial sphere peep show.



I like to find objects (or their companions) that I've read about. It
enhances my sense of connectedness. I've often pointed out to others...
That's the companion of Cygnus X-1.. or that star went nova some years
ago... or this star has at least one detected extra solar planet.

And now I know that some spiral galaxy orientations are part of a
bigger pattern!

They may not be visually significant or even interesting... but finding
and identifying those, involved in a discovery of some kind, is very
satisfying.

The descriptions of external galaxies to the stellar foreground are
made using the celestial sphere/constellations with no attempt
whatsoever to bother to consider the changing foreground stellar
rotation to the external galaxies.

The opposite in fact,theorists and astrophotographers ignore foreground
stellar rotation,including our own solar system , off the Mily Way
axis and consider only the myopic celestial sphere now know as the
expanding balloon universe where every point is the valid center of the
universe.

Considering the enormous difficulties people here have with Copernican
heliocentricity and recognising the Earth's orbital motion I would say
that the situation is now extremely dire at this level never mind at
the galactic or inter-galactic level.

I like to find objects (or their companions) that I've read about. It
enhances my sense of connectedness. I've often pointed out to
others...
That's the companion of Cygnus X-1.. or that star went nova some
years
ago... or this star has at least one detected extra solar planet.

And now I know that some spiral galaxy orientations are part of a
bigger pattern!

They may not be visually significant or even interesting... but
finding
and identifying those, involved in a discovery of some kind, is very
satisfying.

Here here!!!...Amen!


The descriptions of external galaxies to the stellar foreground are
made using the celestial sphere/constellations with no attempt
whatsoever to bother to consider the changing foreground stellar
rotation to the external galaxies.

The opposite in fact,theorists and astrophotographers ignore foreground
stellar rotation,including our own solar system , off the Mily Way
axis and consider only the myopic celestial sphere now know as the
expanding balloon universe where every point is the valid center of the
universe.


Listen you goof ball, one rotation of the MW galaxy happens in about 60
million years. If you can detect
year to year changes in the foreground stars against the galaxies, BE OUR
GUEST!!

"oriel36" wrote in message
ups.com...
Do you not like Albert's reasons for 'curving the universe' in
1920,before galactic structures were discovered.


His curvature was confirmed by experiment and eclipse in 1918. and has been
confirmed ever since.


I really enjoy Albert's rejection of galactic structures and
especially as he uses Newton as a basis for that rejection. -

"This view is not in harmony with the theory of Newton. The latter
theory rather requires that the universe should have a kind of centre
in which the density of the stars is a maximum, and that as we proceed
outwards from this centre the group-density of the stars should
diminish, until finally, at great distances, it is succeeded by an
infinite region of emptiness. The stellar universe ought to be a finite
island in the infinite ocean of space."

http://www.bartleby.com/173/30.html


This is all speculation on the part of Einstein. Nothing more...ong before
dark matter and dark energy were determined to be present.


I told you that the early 20th century relativistic ideas are
genuinely funny for a real astronomer as a really exotic expansion of
the original Newtonian errors and especially when you understand what
Isaac was really doing.

Explain what "he was really doing" since you are so knowledgeable of this.


Btw,Newton never pondered a center,universal or otherwise so whatever
Albert imagined in that passage above,it has nothing whatsoever to do
with Newton -

Look, Einstein had a total understanding that Newton's Theory of Gravity
required instantaneous effect at large distances.
Which is obviously impossible. His theory of warped space-time preserves
Newtons Law and makes way for large distances.
If the sun were to disappear, we wouldn't know it for about 8 minutes. The
earth would stay exactly in it's orbit for 8 minutes
even though the sun was no more. Also, it Enstein who exactly described the
orbit of Mercury and it's problem of precession.
Newton's theory never did account for mercury completely. I knpw that you
don't know these things.

You speak more some kid than any adult I have known!! BTW. If you are a kid
then at least you have an excuse
as to why you come off as so OUT TO LUNCH and uninformed.

oriel36 wrote:


The descriptions of external galaxies to the stellar foreground are
made using the celestial sphere/constellations with no attempt
whatsoever to bother to consider the changing foreground stellar
rotation to the external galaxies.


This sentence make no sense to me--can you clarify for me Jerald?