Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:50:36.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Superclustering: Theory Versus Observations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2017

Jaan Einasto ,
Maret Einasto ,
Enn Saar ,
Bernard J. T. Jones  and
Vicent J. Martinez
Jaan Einasto
Affiliation:
Tartu Astrophysical Observatory, Toravere, Estonia, USSR
Maret Einasto
Affiliation:
Tartu Astrophysical Observatory, Toravere, Estonia, USSR
Enn Saar
Affiliation:
Tartu Astrophysical Observatory, Toravere, Estonia, USSR
Bernard J. T. Jones
Affiliation:
NORDITA, Copenhagen, Denmark
Vicent J. Martinez
Affiliation:
NORDITA, Copenhagen, Denmark

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The spatial distribution of galaxies is compared with model distributions. It is demonstrated that giant and dwarf galaxies in the Local Supercluster occupy statistically identical regions. Various tests suggest that galaxy formation is biased since all unbiased model distributions are in conflict with observed distribution of galaxies. Multifractal analysis shows that a cold dark matter dominated universe with biased galaxy formation has a fairly constant fractal dimension over a broad range of scales. This contrasts with the observed distribution which does not show simple fractal features.

Type
Research Article
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 130: Large Scale Structures of the Universe , 1988 , pp. 245 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1988 

References

Dekel, A. and Silk, J., 1986. Astrophys. J. 303, 39.Google Scholar
Doroshkevich, A.G., Shandarin, S.F. and Saar, E., 1978. Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 184, 643.Google Scholar
Einasto, J., Einasto, M., Gramann, M., Melott, A. and Saar, E. 1986a. Tartu Astr. Obs. Preprint A–7.Google Scholar
Einasto, J., Gramann, M., Einasto, M., Melott, A., Saar, E. and Saar, V. 1986b. Tartu Astr. Obs. Preprint A–9.Google Scholar
Einasto, J., Joeveer, M. and Saar, E., 1979. Tartu Astr. Obs. Preprint (Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 193, 353, 1980).Google Scholar
Einasto, J., Klypin, A. A. and Saar, E., 1986. Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 219, 457.Google Scholar
Einasto, J., Klypin, A. A., Saar, E. and Shandarin, S.F., 1984. Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc. 206, 529.Google Scholar
Einasto, M., 1987. Preprint.Google Scholar
Fisher, J.R. and Tully, R.B., 1981. Astrophys. J. Suppl. 47, 139.Google Scholar
Gott, J.R., Melott, A.L. and Dickinson, M., 1986. Astrophys. J. 306, 341.Google Scholar
Gramann, M., 1987. Preprint.Google Scholar
Halsey, T.C., Jensen, M.H., Kadanoff, L.P., Procaccia, I. and Shraiman, B.I., 1986. Phys. Rev. A 33, 1141.Google Scholar
Hockney, R. W. and Eastwood, J. W., 1981. Computer Simulation Using Particles, McGraw Hill, N. Y. Google Scholar
Huchra, J. P., 1983. Redshift compilation.Google Scholar
Jones, B.J.T., Martinez, V., Saar, E. and Einasto, J., 1987. Preprint.Google Scholar
Kaiser, N., 1984. Astroph. J. 284, L9.Google Scholar
Lachieze-Rey, M., 1986. Preprint.Google Scholar
Mandelbrot, B.B., 1982. The Fractal Geometry of Nature. Freeman and Co., San Francisco.Google Scholar
Saar, E., Einasto, J., Einasto, M. and Gramann, M., 1987. Preprint.Google Scholar
White, S.D.M., Frenk, C.S., Davis, M. and Efstathiou, G., 1986. Preprint Steward Obs. No. 620.Google Scholar
Zeldovich, Ya.B., Einasto, J. and Shandarin, S.F., 1982. Nature, 300, 407.Google Scholar