Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LibKill; RossA
They don't detect the gravity per se.

There's a certain amount of deduction going on here. Theory (meaning computer simulations) tells them that there should be self-gravitating streams of hot gas between the galaxies.

You can get a taste of what these streams look like and how they form in a couple of simulations I ran using the National Scalable Cluster Project supercomputers here at Penn, using parallel code written by Prof. Paul Bode.

Since they expect the streams to be there, they set about to detect them by looking at the spectra of distant quasars. Since there are so many streams, they reasoned that some quasars must end up behind streams, from our point of view. In that case, the streams will block out part of the light from the obstructed quasars in a characteristic way in the x-ray band. This obstruction is what they have detected.

Note that this doesn't allow them to image the streams themselves; they just see the effect of the streams at a small number of points on the sky. They call them streams because that's what they expected to see. The same data might support the hypothesis that there are big gasseous blobs out there. But either way, the total mass of the gas can be estimated, and it is non-negligible.

15 posted on 08/02/2002 5:52:42 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Physicist
Thank you, Physicist.

I count on you for no-BS facts.

If I fail to understand those facts, well that is my failing.

20 posted on 08/02/2002 6:12:02 PM PDT by LibKill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Physicist; ThinkPlease; RadioAstronomer
Any thoughts on how this "hot gas" got to be so hot, and why it hasn't radiated most of it's heat out into the surrounding Universe?

Also, is it thought that the "hot gas" is still being heated? If so, what's the mechanism and source of energy to heat it?

Thanx...

21 posted on 08/02/2002 6:12:36 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Physicist
The latest Scientific American has a cover story along the lines of "Do We Really Need Dark Matter?" If it lies in rivers and pulls ordinary matter with it, does that mean we do? (The proposed alternate theory revises Newtonian dynamics so that less force is needed to produce very small accelerations.)
24 posted on 08/02/2002 6:39:02 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson