Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-fzmlz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-06T02:32:11.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimates of Ω Based on Motions within the Local Supercluster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2016

R. Brent Tully
R. Brent Tully*
Affiliation:
Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, 2680 Woodlawn Drive Honolulu, HI 96822 U.S.A.

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.

Three ways to estimate Ω from the motions of nearby galaxies are reviewed: (i) comparisons can be made between observed local streaming motions and observed density fluctuations, (ii) a timing argument can give a value of f(Ω) = to Ho, and (iii) the motions in groups provide solid evidence regarding the amount of matter that is distributed like galaxies on a scale of 0.5 Mpc. In each case, the evidence suggests the Universe is open, but only by a factor of 3–5 and, given the uncertainties, a closed Universe definitely is not precluded.

Type
Chapter III. The Classical Quantities of Cosmology
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 124: Observational Cosmology , 1987 , pp. 207 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1987 

References

Aaronson, M., Huchra, J. P., Mould, J. R., Schechter, P. L., and Tully, R. B. 1982, Ap. J., 258, 64.Google Scholar
Aaronson, M., Bothun, G., Mould, J. R., Huchra, J. P., Schommer, R. A., and Cornell, M. 1986, Ap. J., 302, 536.Google Scholar
Burstein, D., Davies, R. L., Dressler, A., Faber, S. M., Lynden-Bell, D., Terlevich, R., and Wegner, G. 1986, in: Galaxy Distances and Deviations from Universal Expansion, eds. Madore, B. F. and Tully, R. B. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, C. A., Joseph, R. D., and Robertson, N. A. 1986, in: Galaxy Distances and Deviations from Universal Expansion, eds. Madore, B. F. and Tully, R. B. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 131.Google Scholar
Davis, M., and Huchra, J. P. 1982, Ap. J., 254, 437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M., and Peebles, P. J. E. 1983, Ap. J., 267, 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, G. L., Olson, D. W., and Salpeter, E. E. 1980, Ap. J., 242, 861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, G. L., and Salpeter, E. E. 1982, Ap. J., 263, 485.Google Scholar
Huchra, J. P., and Geller, M. J. 1982, Ap. J., 257, 423.Google Scholar
Lahar, O. 1986, preprint.Google Scholar
Lilje, P. B., Yahil, A., and Jones, B. J. T. 1986, Ap. J., 307, 91.Google Scholar
Meiksin, A., and Davis, M. 1986, A.J., in press.Google Scholar
Melott, A. L. 1986, in: Galaxy Distances and Deviations from Universal Expansion, eds. Madore, B. F. and Tully, R. B. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 225.Google Scholar
Peebles, P. J. E. 1980, in: The Large-Scale Structure of the Universe (Princeton: Princeton University Press), Ch. 14.Google Scholar
Rivolo, A. R., and Yahil, A. 1981, Ap. J., 251, 477.Google Scholar
Silk, J. 1974, Ap. J., 193, 525.Google Scholar
Shaya, E. J. 1986a, in: Galaxy Distances and Deviations from Universal Expansion, eds. Madore, B. F. and Tully, R. B. (Dordrecht: Reidel), p. 229.Google Scholar
Shaya, E. J. 1986b, in preparation.Google Scholar
Schechter, P. L. 1980, A.J., 85, 801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tully, R. B. 1987, Ap. J., to be submitted.Google Scholar
Tully, R. B., and Shaya, E. J. 1984, Ap. J., 281, 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villumsen, J. V., and Davis, M. 1986, Ap. J., in press.Google Scholar
Yahil, A., Sandage, A., and Tammann, G. A. 1980, Ap. J., 242, 448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yahil, A., Walker, D., and Rowan-Robinson, M. 1986, Ap. J. (Letters), 301, L1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar