Why aren't the Canes I Group and M81 Group considered part of the same cluster or stream? They look like a continuous stream of densely packed galaxies (See: the second map in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgo_Supercluster ). Satellite galaxies shifting position shouldn't be taken as evidence that galaxies in the cluster are moving away from each other. Wikipedia says galaxies in Canes I group are moving away from each other. Whether they are or aren't is moot. What matters is they're upstream of the Maffei I Groups and M81 Groups, and all three groups are flowing the Virgocluster in the same vector. Maps with a lot data points are statistically significant. Unfortunately, the most important piece of data can only be inferred, since the Maffei Group/Cluster is in the zone of avoidance. More to the point, densely packed structures don't happen by chance. The hundreds of galaxies between Maffei I and M94 speaks volumes. Some galaxies in Canes I may be moving towards M81 and vice versa. M94 may be moving towards the Virgo cluster at a faster rate than the smaller galaxies in the Canes I Group. The black hole at the center of M81 is more massive than all of the black holes in the Canes I Group, Local Group, and Sculptor Group combined. Hence why satellites are so tightly packed to M81. Maffei I is the closest elliptical galaxy to both the Andromeda and M81. Elliptical galaxies form in the midst of galaxy clusters, not in less dense regions of space. Though dust in the galactic plane makes it impossible to measure the mass of Maffei I, it stands to reason that Maffei I and M81 are gravitationally bound to each other, given their close proximity. The majority of galaxies in the Maffei cluster probably aren't even visible because they're in the zone of avoidance. Since the M81 Group and the Maffei Group are so close to each other and they're so massive, they're probably gravitationally bound to each other. Therefore, M81 and Maffei should be considered sub-groups of the Maffei cluster. The M94 (Canes I) Group is much less massive than the Maffei cluster. The gravitational pull of the Virgo supercluster on the Maffei cluster is much greater than the gravitational pull of the Virgo supercluster on the M94 Group. Therefore, it stands to reason that the satellite galaxies of M94 will eventually merge with the Maffei cluster. As M81 devours its own satellites, it will replenish them with the Canes I Group. When it comes to the gravitational attraction of the Maffei cluster, the Virgo supercluster, and everything inbetween, dark energy is irrelevant. A Straight line can be drawn between the Maffei cluster and the Virgo cluster. That straight line would go right through the Canes I Group. Hence why the less massive objects in the M94 Group can be considered part the Mafei stream. M94 will be further upstream, flowing upstream at a faster rate than the parts of the Canes I Group that aren't its satellites. Dark energy is moot in that vector. The position of galaxies shift in the Maffei stream. Their radial velocity shifts according to their mass and relative distance to the most massive galaxies in the stream, and to a lesser extent, their relative distance to the Virgo cluster. There's a very strong bias to interpret data in support of the dark energy hypothesis. Objects are not given the correct precedence. The radial velocity of the core galaxies should have precedence. If small galaxies appear in the stream appear to be moving away from the largest galaxies in the stream, then it should be considered whether it's moving towards (eventually merging) with a closer galaxy. Radial velocity data doesn't speak for itself. The only reason it's currently misinterpreted, is because the most important data points are missing. By virtue of being an elliptical galaxy, it stands to reason that it's the most massive galaxy cluster within 14 million light years of the Milky Way. Considering the suppermassive black hole at the center of M81 is eighteen times the mass of Sagittarius A*, it stands to reason the Maffei vector negates the dark energy hypothesis within that vector. The maffei vector is lateral to us. Therefore, we cannot appreciate the most significant movement of all. Movement that is much faster than the intra-Canes I Group so called dark energy. M94 just isn't that massive. However, it is much more massive than the rest of the Canes I Group, which is why it moves towards the Virgo supercluster. Since Andromeda and the Milky Way are moving towards the Virgo supercluster at an even faster rate, and the vector it's almost lateral to us, the cause of "dark energy" is misinterpreted, at least in our local supercluster. Furthermore, it's because of the Maffei vector, that there are so many little galaxies in the Canes I Group. Though M94 is by far the most massive galaxy in the Canes I Group, it's not at the center. Indeed, there is some gravitational pull between galaxies within the Canes I Group, hence why there is so many of them and they form such tightly packed chains. Therefore, the concept of "dark energy" is negligible. The main story is the Maffei flow. Looking at a map with a lot data points is a sanity check. If the radial velocity numbers are not put into context, then the concept of dark energy is erroneously applied. At best, radial velocity data of Canes I can be used to redefine it multiple small groups. However, M94 is by far the most important member. There might be one other group within Canes I worthy of having its own name. The rest of the galaxies are too small to be called their own group. There could perhaps be two categories. 1. The M94 Group has a vector more similar to Maffei and M81. 2. The Canes I Group has a slightly slower vector. However, from our perspective, it will be hard to tell difference between the two vectors, since the local Group is also moving towards the Virgo supercluster at a similar vector. Also, the mass of the M81 sub-group, and the more massive Cannis I members may be slowing down M94. In which case, we would be moving laterally to the Milky Way.
However, the most significant vector in regards to the Milky Way is Andromeda. This will cause all of the galaxies in the Maffei cluster to appear to be moving away from each other. They're really just moving towards the Virgo Supercluster at a much faster rate than the Milky Way is. Andromeda's vector is more similar to Mafei vector though. The map linked earlier also doesn't show what's further upstream of M94. It could potentially cause M94 to move even faster upstream. Andromeda certainly has so such upstream pull, other than Virgo supercluster. Another thing to consider is the that stream itself acts as a gravity well. Since Andromeda isn't in the gravity well, it will move towards the Virgo cluster at a much slower rate. It should be noted that the Andromeda is towing the Triangulum galaxy. The gravitational attraction of Virgo supercluster on Andromeda is much stronger than gravitatinal attraction of the Virgo supercluster on Triangulum. That differential is almost equal to the gravitational attraction Andromeda has Triangulum. Hence why half of simulations say Triangulum will be devoured by Andromeda, and half say it won't. Nevertheless, the Milky is slowly approaching Andromeda. This increase in mass will cause Triangulum to collide with Andromeda. Even still, the attraction of Andromeda to the Milky Way is much greater than the attraction of Triangulum to the Milky Way. The closer Triangulum gets to the Milky Way, the more this differential will increase. Yet, despite the uncertainty of computer simulations, I suspect that Triangulum will collide with Andromeda. Triangulum is 70k light years across and only 200-300k light years from Andromeda. There's probably already a lot of hot and heavy gas between them. On some level, they're already colliding. The Milky Way is only 100k light years across, yet it's 10x farther away. Meaning, it would need to have100x times as much mass as Trinagulum to collide with Andromeda first. It's only because of the pull of the Virgo supercluster that there's any uncertainty at all. The Virgo cluster has 100 trillion solar masses. The gravitationally pull the Traingulum galaxy has on Andromeda should be stronger, given it's 50x closer. Galaxy groups/clusters in the same trajectory are a consideration though. As for the Maffei stream, the core of M81 is much more densely packed than the chain of satellite galaxies. Particularly close to M81 is M82. M82 is five times more luminous than the Milky Way. The center of M82 is 100x more luminous than the center of the Milky Way. The unusually high luminosity is caused by gravitational interactions with M81. N3077 also exhibits signs of gravitational interactions with M81. The black hole at the center of M81 is 70 million solar masses. Sagittarius A* is only 4 million solar masses. It's not a coincidence that such a massive black hole would have such a dense cluster of galaxies around it. Something peculiar about M81 is that its supernova is the second brightest supernova of the 20th century and it first "looked like a type II supernova, with strong hydrogen spectral line emission, but later the hydrogen lines faded and strong helium spectral lines appeared, making the supernova look more like a type Ib." Therefore, M81 may much be closer than measurements suggest. The measurement of supernova''s is one of the most fundamental measures of galactic distances. When they're wonky, all empirical data becomes unreliable. If we are much closer to M81 than is generally assumed, then Andromeda may be gravitationally attracted to it. Since we're moving towards Andromeda, the Milky Way would be moving away from M81 even if Andromeda is moving towards M81. More likely, Andromeda is moving towards the Maffei cluster. Recent members put some members of the Mafei cluster at only 7 light years from us. Which means they're only 5 light years away from Andromeda. There may be other members the Maffei that are cluster, but can't be seen because they're in the zone of avoidance. More distant members of the Maffei cluster may soon turn out to me much closer as well. Since we can barely see them, measurements that say they're farther away aren't very reliable. Assuming we can't even see half of the galaxies in Maffei cluster, and some of the larger ones are even closer than any known galaxy in the cluster, then Andromeda would certainly be moving towards it. Moreover, the star formation rate of the outer disk of M94 is approximately two times greater than the inner disk. The M94 Group is unusual much like its primary galaxy. Both are decentralized. M94 has twice as much star formation in the outer ring as in the inner ring, meaning the galaxy is about as decentralized as the group it is a part of. Given M94 isn't even at the center of the M94 Group, there's a basis to split it up into two groups. Perhaps the term "Group" is used too liberally. If the main group is called M94, and another smalled group is called Cannes I (instead of using the two names interchangably), then both groups would be quite small. More important though is that part of the Maffei stream, though they flow towards the Virgo supercluster at different rates, causing the illusion of dark energy. Some members of the Canes I Group are gravitational bound to each other. The act of moving towards each other, which causes others to move away from each other, further exacerbates the erroenous dark energy hypothesis. Since a galaxy merger increases the density of both galaxies, this causes a net increase in radial velocity. It's also possible the intergalactic-medium causes light to redshift. Maybe the phenomenon is even greater where galaxies are flowing towards a supercluster and even greater in filaments. In regards to the term "Group" being overused, the Milky Way could just be called a satellite system or the term "galaxy system" can be used, in which case Andromeda, Triangulum, and the Milky Way would considered a trinary system. The Sculptor Group, doesn't even have any galaxies in the Messier catalog. The Sculptor Group is the least massive group in the map. Galaxies such as N300 and the whale galaxy are halfway between the the Sculptor galaxy and the Local Group. Since the Local Group is more massive than the Sculptor galaxy, it stands to reason that N300 and the whale galaxy are either part of neither, or are part of the Local Group. However, if Andromeda is moving towards (or is already part of) the Maffei cluster, then N300 and the whale galaxy won't go along for the ride. It wouldn't be dark energy that causes N300 and the whale galaxy to move away from Andromeda though. Also, since the Andromeda trinary system is much more massive than N300 and the whale galaxy trailing behind them, the Andromeda system will get further and further them as all five galaxies move towards the Virgo supercluster.
Please watch the updated version here: ruclips.net/p/PLyu4Fovbph6d8lUKC4FGFv2iEobxKS42R
Why aren't the Canes I Group and M81 Group considered part of the same cluster or stream? They look like a continuous stream of densely packed galaxies (See: the second map in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgo_Supercluster ). Satellite galaxies shifting position shouldn't be taken as evidence that galaxies in the cluster are moving away from each other. Wikipedia says galaxies in Canes I group are moving away from each other. Whether they are or aren't is moot. What matters is they're upstream of the Maffei I Groups and M81 Groups, and all three groups are flowing the Virgocluster in the same vector. Maps with a lot data points are statistically significant. Unfortunately, the most important piece of data can only be inferred, since the Maffei Group/Cluster is in the zone of avoidance. More to the point, densely packed structures don't happen by chance. The hundreds of galaxies between Maffei I and M94 speaks volumes.
Some galaxies in Canes I may be moving towards M81 and vice versa. M94 may be moving towards the Virgo cluster at a faster rate than the smaller galaxies in the Canes I Group. The black hole at the center of M81 is more massive than all of the black holes in the Canes I Group, Local Group, and Sculptor Group combined. Hence why satellites are so tightly packed to M81. Maffei I is the closest elliptical galaxy to both the Andromeda and M81. Elliptical galaxies form in the midst of galaxy clusters, not in less dense regions of space. Though dust in the galactic plane makes it impossible to measure the mass of Maffei I, it stands to reason that Maffei I and M81 are gravitationally bound to each other, given their close proximity. The majority of galaxies in the Maffei cluster probably aren't even visible because they're in the zone of avoidance. Since the M81 Group and the Maffei Group are so close to each other and they're so massive, they're probably gravitationally bound to each other. Therefore, M81 and Maffei should be considered sub-groups of the Maffei cluster.
The M94 (Canes I) Group is much less massive than the Maffei cluster. The gravitational pull of the Virgo supercluster on the Maffei cluster is much greater than the gravitational pull of the Virgo supercluster on the M94 Group. Therefore, it stands to reason that the satellite galaxies of M94 will eventually merge with the Maffei cluster. As M81 devours its own satellites, it will replenish them with the Canes I Group. When it comes to the gravitational attraction of the Maffei cluster, the Virgo supercluster, and everything inbetween, dark energy is irrelevant. A Straight line can be drawn between the Maffei cluster and the Virgo cluster. That straight line would go right through the Canes I Group. Hence why the less massive objects in the M94 Group can be considered part the Mafei stream. M94 will be further upstream, flowing upstream at a faster rate than the parts of the Canes I Group that aren't its satellites. Dark energy is moot in that vector.
The position of galaxies shift in the Maffei stream. Their radial velocity shifts according to their mass and relative distance to the most massive galaxies in the stream, and to a lesser extent, their relative distance to the Virgo cluster. There's a very strong bias to interpret data in support of the dark energy hypothesis. Objects are not given the correct precedence. The radial velocity of the core galaxies should have precedence. If small galaxies appear in the stream appear to be moving away from the largest galaxies in the stream, then it should be considered whether it's moving towards (eventually merging) with a closer galaxy. Radial velocity data doesn't speak for itself. The only reason it's currently misinterpreted, is because the most important data points are missing. By virtue of being an elliptical galaxy, it stands to reason that it's the most massive galaxy cluster within 14 million light years of the Milky Way. Considering the suppermassive black hole at the center of M81 is eighteen times the mass of Sagittarius A*, it stands to reason the Maffei vector negates the dark energy hypothesis within that vector.
The maffei vector is lateral to us. Therefore, we cannot appreciate the most significant movement of all. Movement that is much faster than the intra-Canes I Group so called dark energy. M94 just isn't that massive. However, it is much more massive than the rest of the Canes I Group, which is why it moves towards the Virgo supercluster. Since Andromeda and the Milky Way are moving towards the Virgo supercluster at an even faster rate, and the vector it's almost lateral to us, the cause of "dark energy" is misinterpreted, at least in our local supercluster. Furthermore, it's because of the Maffei vector, that there are so many little galaxies in the Canes I Group. Though M94 is by far the most massive galaxy in the Canes I Group, it's not at the center. Indeed, there is some gravitational pull between galaxies within the Canes I Group, hence why there is so many of them and they form such tightly packed chains. Therefore, the concept of "dark energy" is negligible. The main story is the Maffei flow.
Looking at a map with a lot data points is a sanity check. If the radial velocity numbers are not put into context, then the concept of dark energy is erroneously applied. At best, radial velocity data of Canes I can be used to redefine it multiple small groups. However, M94 is by far the most important member. There might be one other group within Canes I worthy of having its own name. The rest of the galaxies are too small to be called their own group. There could perhaps be two categories. 1. The M94 Group has a vector more similar to Maffei and M81. 2. The Canes I Group has a slightly slower vector. However, from our perspective, it will be hard to tell difference between the two vectors, since the local Group is also moving towards the Virgo supercluster at a similar vector. Also, the mass of the M81 sub-group, and the more massive Cannis I members may be slowing down M94. In which case, we would be moving laterally to the Milky Way.
However, the most significant vector in regards to the Milky Way is Andromeda. This will cause all of the galaxies in the Maffei cluster to appear to be moving away from each other. They're really just moving towards the Virgo Supercluster at a much faster rate than the Milky Way is. Andromeda's vector is more similar to Mafei vector though. The map linked earlier also doesn't show what's further upstream of M94. It could potentially cause M94 to move even faster upstream. Andromeda certainly has so such upstream pull, other than Virgo supercluster. Another thing to consider is the that stream itself acts as a gravity well. Since Andromeda isn't in the gravity well, it will move towards the Virgo cluster at a much slower rate. It should be noted that the Andromeda is towing the Triangulum galaxy. The gravitational attraction of Virgo supercluster on Andromeda is much stronger than gravitatinal attraction of the Virgo supercluster on Triangulum. That differential is almost equal to the gravitational attraction Andromeda has Triangulum. Hence why half of simulations say Triangulum will be devoured by Andromeda, and half say it won't.
Nevertheless, the Milky is slowly approaching Andromeda. This increase in mass will cause Triangulum to collide with Andromeda. Even still, the attraction of Andromeda to the Milky Way is much greater than the attraction of Triangulum to the Milky Way. The closer Triangulum gets to the Milky Way, the more this differential will increase. Yet, despite the uncertainty of computer simulations, I suspect that Triangulum will collide with Andromeda. Triangulum is 70k light years across and only 200-300k light years from Andromeda. There's probably already a lot of hot and heavy gas between them. On some level, they're already colliding. The Milky Way is only 100k light years across, yet it's 10x farther away. Meaning, it would need to have100x times as much mass as Trinagulum to collide with Andromeda first. It's only because of the pull of the Virgo supercluster that there's any uncertainty at all. The Virgo cluster has 100 trillion solar masses. The gravitationally pull the Traingulum galaxy has on Andromeda should be stronger, given it's 50x closer. Galaxy groups/clusters in the same trajectory are a consideration though.
As for the Maffei stream, the core of M81 is much more densely packed than the chain of satellite galaxies. Particularly close to M81 is M82. M82 is five times more luminous than the Milky Way. The center of M82 is 100x more luminous than the center of the Milky Way. The unusually high luminosity is caused by gravitational interactions with M81. N3077 also exhibits signs of gravitational interactions with M81. The black hole at the center of M81 is 70 million solar masses. Sagittarius A* is only 4 million solar masses. It's not a coincidence that such a massive black hole would have such a dense cluster of galaxies around it. Something peculiar about M81 is that its supernova is the second brightest supernova of the 20th century and it first "looked like a type II supernova, with strong hydrogen spectral line emission, but later the hydrogen lines faded and strong helium spectral lines appeared, making the supernova look more like a type Ib." Therefore, M81 may much be closer than measurements suggest.
The measurement of supernova''s is one of the most fundamental measures of galactic distances. When they're wonky, all empirical data becomes unreliable. If we are much closer to M81 than is generally assumed, then Andromeda may be gravitationally attracted to it. Since we're moving towards Andromeda, the Milky Way would be moving away from M81 even if Andromeda is moving towards M81. More likely, Andromeda is moving towards the Maffei cluster. Recent members put some members of the Mafei cluster at only 7 light years from us. Which means they're only 5 light years away from Andromeda. There may be other members the Maffei that are cluster, but can't be seen because they're in the zone of avoidance. More distant members of the Maffei cluster may soon turn out to me much closer as well. Since we can barely see them, measurements that say they're farther away aren't very reliable. Assuming we can't even see half of the galaxies in Maffei cluster, and some of the larger ones are even closer than any known galaxy in the cluster, then Andromeda would certainly be moving towards it.
Moreover, the star formation rate of the outer disk of M94 is approximately two times greater than the inner disk. The M94 Group is unusual much like its primary galaxy. Both are decentralized. M94 has twice as much star formation in the outer ring as in the inner ring, meaning the galaxy is about as decentralized as the group it is a part of. Given M94 isn't even at the center of the M94 Group, there's a basis to split it up into two groups. Perhaps the term "Group" is used too liberally. If the main group is called M94, and another smalled group is called Cannes I (instead of using the two names interchangably), then both groups would be quite small. More important though is that part of the Maffei stream, though they flow towards the Virgo supercluster at different rates, causing the illusion of dark energy. Some members of the Canes I Group are gravitational bound to each other. The act of moving towards each other, which causes others to move away from each other, further exacerbates the erroenous dark energy hypothesis. Since a galaxy merger increases the density of both galaxies, this causes a net increase in radial velocity. It's also possible the intergalactic-medium causes light to redshift. Maybe the phenomenon is even greater where galaxies are flowing towards a supercluster and even greater in filaments.
In regards to the term "Group" being overused, the Milky Way could just be called a satellite system or the term "galaxy system" can be used, in which case Andromeda, Triangulum, and the Milky Way would considered a trinary system. The Sculptor Group, doesn't even have any galaxies in the Messier catalog. The Sculptor Group is the least massive group in the map. Galaxies such as N300 and the whale galaxy are halfway between the the Sculptor galaxy and the Local Group. Since the Local Group is more massive than the Sculptor galaxy, it stands to reason that N300 and the whale galaxy are either part of neither, or are part of the Local Group. However, if Andromeda is moving towards (or is already part of) the Maffei cluster, then N300 and the whale galaxy won't go along for the ride. It wouldn't be dark energy that causes N300 and the whale galaxy to move away from Andromeda though. Also, since the Andromeda trinary system is much more massive than N300 and the whale galaxy trailing behind them, the Andromeda system will get further and further them as all five galaxies move towards the Virgo supercluster.