This is the Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall, the largest known structure in the universe, a massive galaxy filament stretching about 10 billion light-years across. This breaks the laws of physics as we know it. The Cosmological Principle says no matter where you are in the universe if you look in any direction you should see an even distribution of matter this in turn creates a limit for the sizes of objects. It's about 1.2 billion light yearsmeaning that this structure is 8 times the supposedly limit of the largestobject possible.
>know it. The Cosmological Principle says no matter where you are in the universe if you look in any direction you should see an even distribution of matter this in turn creates a limit for the sizes of objects. It's about 1.2 billion light yearsThat is not true. It depends entirely on how you define an object. You could draw a sphere that went around the whole observable universe, and call that a strucutre. Or you could just join up multiple filamnets and call it one big structure. The problem is that when you go above the scale of galaxy clusters, none of these structures are gravitationally bound. So there is no objective definition of what is one object. So the size of objects you find depends entirely on the method and definition you use. The data people use to claim these gigaparsec structures is very sparse (less than 25 galaxies, GRBs). And with any dataset there is noise in the distribution of galaxies just based on the low numbers. Also with so few galaxies you can smear many structures into one. People have shown that the same methods used to find this "wall" also find structures of the same size and significance in totally random simulations. So these "objects" are not statistically significant evidence of a violation of the cosmological principle.https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013MNRAS.434..398N/abstracthttps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022SerAJ.204...29F/abstract
perhaps big bang model is flawed, it is possible
>>16869804I think the easiest answer to a lot of cosmological discrepancies is that the Big Bang was not constant. Starting the universe might of been more like starting the engine of an old car, it took a couple of tries and the oscillations from the last few attempts are still around.The one that does actually bug me is the Hubble Tension, that aspect of the universe should have already sorted itself out by now even if the Big Bang was messy.
>draws conclusions on visable mass>85% of reality is unvisable mass
