Year of the Comet
Comet C/2011 L4 (PANSTARRS)

PANSTARRS information

Comet C/2012 S1 (ISON)

ISON information

Astronomy News
E-mail Article to a FriendPrint ArticleBookmark and Share

Large galaxies stopped growing 7 billion years ago

Conventional simulations of the evolution of the universe predict that the most massive galaxies should have at least tripled in size over the past 9 billion years.
By Royal Astronomical Society, United Kingdom Published: April 18, 2011
Abell 2218
The picture shows Abell 2218, a rich galaxy cluster composed of thousands of individual galaxies. It sits about 2.1 billion light-years from the Earth in the northern constellation of Draco. When used by astronomers as a powerful gravitational lens to magnify distant galaxies, the cluster allows them to peer far into the universe. However, it not only magnifies the images of hidden galaxies, but also distorts them into long, thin arcs. Several arcs in the image can be studied in detail thanks to Hubble's sharp vision. Multiple distorted images of the same galaxies can be identified by comparing the shape of the galaxies and their color. In addition to the giant arcs, many smaller arclets have been identified. NASA/ESA/Johan Richard (Caltech, USA) Acknowledgement: Davide de Martin & James Long (ESA/Hubble)
Galaxies are thought to develop by the gravitational attraction between and merger of smaller “sub-galaxies,” a process that standard cosmological ideas suggest should be ongoing. But new data from a team of scientists from Liverpool John Moores University, United Kingdom, directly challenges this idea, suggesting that the growth of some of the most massive objects stopped 7 billion years ago when the universe was half of its present age.

How galaxies form and then evolve is still a major unanswered question in astronomy. The sub-galaxy units thought to have merged to make galaxies are themselves associated with fluctuations in the density of material in the cosmos left over from the Big Bang and seen today as temperature “ripples” in the cosmic background radiation.

To study galaxy evolution, a team of scientists looked at the most massive galaxies in the universe known as Brightest Cluster Galaxies (BCGs) because of their location at the center of galaxy clusters — structures that typically contain hundreds of galaxies.

In the nearby universe, BCGs are elliptical in shape and are the largest, most uniform, and most massive class of galaxies observed, with each galaxy having a mass equivalent up to 100 trillion Suns. Like smaller elliptical galaxies, BCGs are composed of old red stars and are thought to have formed through mergers of the dense population of sub-galaxies that were found in the center of galaxy clusters. By studying how BCGs grow in size, scientists gain insight into the formation and evolution of galaxies in general.

Measuring the sizes of BCGs has always been difficult as their outer regions are faint. Claire Burke from Liverpool John Moores University and her team have overcome this by using long-exposure images from the Hubble Space Telescope data archive that pick up the dimmer parts of these galaxies. The BCGs they studied are so distant that the light detected from them left 7 billion years ago, so they appear as they were when the universe was less than half its present age.

When they examined the Hubble images, the team found that these distant BCGs are almost the same size as their nearby counterparts, and that these galaxies have grown at most by 30 percent in the past 9 billion years. This is in line with other work by the same research group, but it is quite unlike the observed development of regular elliptical galaxies. More significantly, conventional simulations of the evolution of the universe predict that BCGs should have at least tripled in size over that time.

“The lack of growth of the most massive galaxies is a major challenge to current models of the formation and evolution of large scale structure in the universe,” said Burke. “Our work suggests that cosmologists appear to lack some of the crucial ingredients they need to understand how galaxies evolved from the distant past to the present day.”

Find us on FacebookFind us on Twitter
User Comments
Be the first to leave your comment below!

Only registered members of Astronomy.com are allowed to comment on this article. Registration is FREE and only takes a couple minutes.

Register Today!
 
JOHN C KREMER from COLORADO said:
Somewhere along the path of the Universe's development, we seemed to have overlooked why there are so many globular clusters associated with nearly every galaxy, whether they be big or small, spiral or eliptical, or fractured and results of collision. I have not found even a little discussion of where or when globular clusters developed. Yet they must be a part of the overall development of a galaxy when we even find globular clusters within the galaxy itself.
4 stars
MARK ROSSI said:
Perhaps when the universe was 7 billion years old, there was a tipping point in the scales. With the expansion of the universe (dark energy) vs gravitational attraction. The universe may have got to the point in which the gravitational force became less than the dark energy force. And maybe most of the galaxies within the observable universe were formed before this point, and have not grown much since due to the expansion of space (dark energy)?
JOHN MOES from MICHIGAN said:
"Measuring the sizes of BCGs has always been difficult as their outer regions are faint. . . .
When they examined the Hubble images, the team found that these distant BCGs are almost the same size as their nearby counterparts, and that these galaxies have grown at most by 30 percent in the past 9 billion years."

At that rate did they grow by 45 percent in 13.5 billion years? At that point in their history wouldn't the space containing the visible part of the universe have been 1/13th the size it is now? Squeeze all the baryons and all the dark matter in the visible universe into a sphere that small and you couldn't tell where one galaxy ended and the next started. Maybe it has been only the space between that has been increasing since the uniformly distributed stuff broke up into blobs. As each blob had more and more space, it stretch out a bit - a little less dense but not much change is total matter.
4 stars
PHILIP DE LOURAILLE from CALIFORNIA said:
To Chris Baker: They compared them to closer galactic clusters (my guess would be the Virgo giant cluster - which, incidentally, is today APOD shot.) Cosmologists assume that the Universe is isotropic at large scales. If the clusters they are looking at grew the same way as the clusters close to us, we can make an evolution comparison. So they are saying the far away clusters look about the same as Virgo does now. So a comparison is possible but the growth is wrong if one follows what the theoreticians are saying should have happened. Observation does not match theoretical calculation.
5 stars
GEORGE W BOEHNE SR from ILLINOIS said:
Man will never know ALL the secrets of the universe.
4 stars
CHRIS R BAKER from CALIFORNIA said:
Ok, if the light left them 7 billion years ago, and according to the article that's over half the universe's age ago, how do they know how much they've grown in the last 9 billion years since we can't seen them as they are now and the universe was only 7 billion years old when the light supposedly left them? Just for grins, if we could travel infinitely fast and could get there NOW how far would we have to travel? Oh wait, are they saying that the close by counterparts are the ones that have only grown 30% in the last 9 billion years or the far away ones? That paragraph is confusing to me.
4 stars
FORREST NOBLE from CALIFORNIA said:
The interpretation of these astronomers that large galaxies grow at a very slowly rate comes as no surprise to me based upon the quote below.

“The lack of growth of the most massive galaxies is a major challenge to current models of the formation and evolution of large scale structure in the universe,”

I believe this is in contradiction to the standard model. This is one of a number of more recent "discoveries" that seem to contradict the standard model. The most prominent of these "discoveries" I think is that at the greatest distances both very large galaxies and very old appearing galaxies can be found. In time I believe these observations will lead to the realization that the standard BB model concerning a universe with an age of 13.7 billion years may be wrong and that a much older universe is better supported by observations.

SEARCH SITE
Subscriber Only Access
Subscriber Only Content
Look for this icon. This denotes premium subscriber content. Learn more »
Become a Member of Astronomy.com
Register today for access to more valuable resource information.
Interact in our forums, comment on articles, receive our newsletter and much more!
Not a member?
Subscriber and Member Login
Password
Remember me