Talk:Large-scale structure of the cosmos
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. |
|
Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify its strengths and weaknesses. |
|
Contents |
[edit] removed
Next paragraph in italics was removed from the main text because it seems confused. The fact that they are no nearby quasars is probably not a property of the structure of the cosmos, and as far as I know they aren't known to cluster more at large distances. Quasar statistics are *very* difficult to do.
- Another indicator is the quasars themselves. A quasar ('quasi-stellar object') looks like a star but if estimates of their distance are correct then they are each many billions of times brighter than any star, and up to 1000 times brighter than ane entire giant galaxy. There is no quasar within 2 billion light years of earth, but they apparently cluster more thickly at greater distances, leading to speculation that they are a phenomenon of the early universe and that most of them have recently 'gone out', though in that case there ought to be some remnants of them to be discovered.
[edit] last paragraph
The last paragraph is very confusing. I tried to clean it up a little but it's not enough. I don't know what the author is trying to say so I don't want to rewrite it; which is what it needs.
[edit] QSS
Adding an unreferenced sentence about the quasi-steady state model in the middle of the article doesn't really make much sense to me. If it is the consensus to add stuff about alternative cosmologies, it needs to be done in a more structured way. (i.e. not in the middle of a paragraph about the big bang, probably in its own subsection.) –Joke137 03:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
Marginalizing other cosmologies that are against the one you hold, Joker, is not a NPOV. JDR (Note that you took the statement out before, without checking the varacity of the claim ... no faith at all ...)
This is truly tiresome. Do you insist on reinserting your spelling errors into the article? The authors of the article themselves admit, in calling it a toy model, that it is not a complete model of structure formation in QSS. –Joke137 16:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Picture
This page could use a good picture like the red, filamental Item 8 found here or perhaps one of the large-scale dark matter growth images found here. Not sure of the copyright status of those images. --Flex (talk|contribs) 17:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] megefrom Galaxy filament
- Oppose leave it separate, since voids are also separate, and detail can go into that article moreso than this one, as more is discovered. 132.205.44.5 (talk) 05:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
