Surprising giant ring-like structure in the universe

September 7, 2015 by Tomasz Nowakowski report
An image of the distribution of GRBs on the sky at a distance of 7 billion light years, centred on the newly discovered ring. The positions of the GRBs are marked by blue dots and the Milky Way is indicated for reference, running from left to right across the image. Credit: L. Balazs.

(Phys.org)—Five billion light years is a distance almost inconceivable, even on a cosmic scale. To better illustrate the extent of this physical quantity, it's enough to say that 35,000 galaxies the size of our Milky Way are needed to cover that distance. Thanks to a surprising discovery made by a Hungarian-U.S. team of astronomers, now we know that a structure this big really exists in the observable universe.

The researchers found a ring of nine gamma ray bursts (GRBs)—the most luminous events in the universe—about 5 billion light years in diameter, and having a nearly regular circular shape, noting that there is a one in 20,000 probability of the GRBs being in this distribution by chance. They published their findings on July 27 in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Lajos Balazs of Konkoly Observatory in Budapest, Hungary who led the team of astronomers, cannot hide how surprised he was when a feature so large was discovered.

"Until now GRBs are the only objects for which we know the spatial distribution in the whole . All other objects are complete only in a restricted part of the sky. Our discovery has revealed a large-scale regular feature not known before. Large scale objects like GRB groups have been known already, but such a regular circular structure was a surprise," Balazs told Phys.org.

The newly-found ring-shaped feature is large enough to contradict the cosmological principle (CP), which sets a theoretical limit of 1.2 billion for the largest structures. The researchers assume that the ring could be a projection of a spheroidal structure and we see it nearly face-on because of the small variations of GRB distances around the object's center.

Although they claim to have found evidence for a regular structure, the apparent shape of this ring is based only on a visual impression.

The astronomers conclude that the ring is probably not a real physical structure. But further studies are needed to reveal whether or not the structure could have been produced by a low-frequency spatial harmonic of the large-scale matter density distribution or of universal star-forming activity.

"It would be important to increase the number of GRBs with known redshift, consequently with known distances, and to study the distribution of galaxies potentially hosting GRBs in more detail," Balazs said.

GRBs are the brightest electromagnetic events known to occur in the universe. They release as much energy in a few seconds as the Sun does over its 10-billion-year lifetime. GRBs are believed to be the result of massive stars collapsing into black holes. But the problem of forming GRBs is still not completely settled.

"According to the widely accepted view, the GRBs have two basic types. The short duration ones, less than a couple of seconds, are formed by two coalescing neutron stars, while the longer ones resulted in collapsing stars of 20 to 40 solar masses," Balazs revealed.

The majority of the observed GRBs are resulted in collapsing high-mass stars. GRBs are very rare transient phenomena. Consequently, the observed is a serious under-sampling of the space distribution of galaxies in general. Furthermore, the high-mass stars have short lifetimes; thus, GRBs prefer those galaxy hosts having considerable star-forming activity.

The known number of GRBs now exceeds a couple of thousand and is steadily increasing with ongoing observations.

Explore further: 5 billion light years across—the largest feature in the universe

More information: A giant ring-like structure at 0.78 < z < 0.86 displayed by GRBs, MNRAS (September 21, 2015) 452 (3): 2236-2246. DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stv1421

Abstract
According to the cosmological principle (CP), Universal large-scale structure is homogeneous and isotropic. The observable Universe, however, shows complex structures even on very large scales. The recent discoveries of structures significantly exceeding the transition scale of 370 Mpc pose a challenge to the CP. We report here the discovery of the largest regular formation in the observable Universe; a ring with a diameter of 1720 Mpc, displayed by 9 gamma-ray bursts (GRBs), exceeding by a factor of 5 the transition scale to the homogeneous and isotropic distribution. The ring has a major diameter of 43° and a minor diameter of 30° at a distance of 2770 Mpc in the 0.78 < z < 0.86 redshift range, with a probability of 2 × 10−6 of being the result of a random fluctuation in the GRB count rate. Evidence suggests that this feature is the projection of a shell on to the plane of the sky. Voids and string-like formations are common outcomes of large-scale structure. However, these structures have maximum sizes of 150 Mpc, which are an order of magnitude smaller than the observed GRB ring diameter. Evidence in support of the shell interpretation requires that temporal information of the transient GRBs be included in the analysis. This ring-shaped feature is large enough to contradict the CP. The physical mechanism responsible for causing it is unknown.

Related Stories

Possibly the most distant object known

July 18, 2011

The most distant objects in the universe are also the oldest -- or at least that is how they appear to us, because their light has had to travel for billions of years to get here. They are also extraordinarily faint since ...

Recommended for you

Tidal tails detected around a distant globular cluster

May 22, 2017

(Phys.org)—Astronomers have found tidal tails around a distant globular cluster known as NGC 7492. The newly discovered features could provide important information about the nature of globular clusters. The findings were ...

46 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.3 / 5 (16) Sep 07, 2015
Rehash of 27 July publication. The only new claim, or at least newly promoted, is "further studies are needed". You don't say!? =D
docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (20) Sep 07, 2015
This observation is not so surprising: the dense aether model leads
@docile/ZEPHIR
1- your model is falsified to the 10^-17 level
http://exphy.uni-...2009.pdf

2- if it is not surprising, then why couldn't you predict it?
3- where are your physics predictions from your "model" that demonstrate the accuracy of said model?
no, not AFTER the fact postdictions pushed by you as "proof"... but actual predictions made and that can be historically validated to be pre-discovery and accurate to the level of your "claims"

most important:
IF your religion is so accurate, why isn't it considered a viable scientific theory?
PROTIP - because pseudoscience is NOT SCIENCE

evidence is the key here.... validation is something you have never ONCE proven, BTW...
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (17) Sep 07, 2015
docile 3 / 5 (2)
and uprating with your SOCK PUPPET army is not validation

just because you have multiple accounts doesn't mean you are valid, nor does it mean you have accurate comments, just like downrating with your sock army doesn't make you right

docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (12) Sep 07, 2015
My theory is that just out of sight is an immense finger.

It makes as much sense to me as that convoluted stuff above, and is quicker to read.
docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (17) Sep 07, 2015
This is what I'm just doing here
@ZEPHIR
no, it isn't. you are predicting after the fact: you did NOT predict the large scale structure, nor have you been able to make "aether" predictions that can be validated
Just because you're saying it doesn't mean, it's true
except that i've had various moderators track all the accounts back to your source... even with an anonymizer, this is possible (perhaps you didn't know that? see also: ANON and how they took out pedo sites/pedo's)

Yes, i HAVE validated your sock army, and you also validated it in the PO posts... shall i dig that up and quote you?
after all, you have replied to me from various sock accounts in the past (that you denied were you, BTW) and then started using (like Docile)

so, if your religion is so accurate... why haven't you published refuting papers against this:
http://arxiv.org/...1284.pdf

if they were accurate, it would be VALIDATED
you know, like those links i just left!

oopsie?
Captain Stumpy
3.5 / 5 (13) Sep 07, 2015
The dodecahedron symbol is historically attributed just both to aether (prana) concept
@ZEPHIR
1- your link goes to a BLOG, not a reputable peer reviewed journal - so NO, it is NOT historically attributed, it is BLOGGED, SUGGESTED, IMAGINED, DREAMED ABOUT, HALLUCINATED or GUESSED, but it is NOT ATTRIBUTED!

2- there is a very big difference between a validated published peer reviewed journal study and an article or a blog

3- you can also see that a "GOOGLE" search for "fairy turds" gives you About 94,500 results (0.34 seconds)
https://www.googl...ry+turds

does that mean fairies or fairy turds are real?
or predicted?
shall we talk about what constituted evidence again?
because you seem to think that if you can find a link or web page, it must be real... you should read this:
https://en.wikipe...Evidence

your evidence is weak... like eyewitness testimony

scientific evidence is NOT a blog...
docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (15) Sep 07, 2015
I even couldn't - the dodecahedron structure was found in 2003, I started with AWT posts in August 2005
@ZEPHIR
and the aether hypothesis has been around for more than a century... also note, you have previously linked documents that you claim "prove" aether and your religious belief in it from mid-1900's, therefore you are either a serious CON man, in denial, or have Alzheimer's... take your pick
celebrate just ten years of dense aether model right now
PSEUDOSCIENCE is not science, so why celebrate it?
I didn't invent neither draw this picture - old Greeks or Arabs did....
and here are some ancient pictographs

http://www.panora...83846962

did they predict BATMAN?
Superman?
Vampires?

NO!

i say again:
IF it has been historically present for so long AND
IF it is a viable scientific study THEN
WHERE is the empirical evidence, the predictions or the validated studies?

antigoracle
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2015
The human penchant for perceiving shapes in the abstract must be in decline. The ancient Greeks would have seen the octopus in those flashes.
docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.1 / 5 (15) Sep 07, 2015
This is how ... draw the vacuum
And this is how i would have drawn the vacuum:
http://sweetclipa...aner.png

linking pics from daVinci doesn't justify aether
He was quite competent aetherist BTW
so was Einstein
https://en.wikipe...s_aether

that doesn't mean aether is true any more than me believing in Ferrari makes my SUV worth $100K and a part in a TV series
This is how he imagined
PSEUDOSCIENCE LINK
try again, troll boy
that is just your opinion... AKA "looks like a duck" delusion

couple that with your conspiracy ideation, and you get a religious like devotion to a known debunked pseudoscience, which pretty much defines your circular argument

my point still stands: you cannot VALIDATE your claims with empirical evidence that is reputable
your claim is like your own body odour... you are the only one sniffing it and enjoying the moment-we're gagging at your lack of evidence
docile
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (14) Sep 07, 2015
I'll stay with my aether
@ZEPHIR
spoken like a true fundamental religious zealot
screw the evidence, i will believe in my delusion!
Try to explain, why the dark matter has a dodecahedron structure -
you do realise that this argument is exactly the same as the "god of the gaps" argument, right?
basically, you are saying: because i don't understand it now, god did it [you use the term aether, not god]
this is the same reason Newton stopped where he did.. and why he failed to be even more successful than he was
just be aware that god [or YOUR chosen religion] will be an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance and will eventually disappear to knowledge

https://www.youtu...kg4hMRjs

the reason is simple: the scientific method
Empirical evidence
repeatable experiments
validation

all those things you have YET to be able to provide for your belief system (or hobby)

enjoy your "Darwin award", aether boy
Captain Stumpy
3.2 / 5 (13) Sep 07, 2015
Try to explain, why the dark matter has a dodecahedron structure - and you'll see...
@ZEPHIR
this is also called "looks like a duck" science... and is no different than the eu claims that, despite the observed meteorite collisions we actually SEE hitting the Moon, the craters formed are from plasma discharge because [insert random oxidation/plasma pic here]

i will say it again:
your links above prove nothing
just like Batman, Superman, Vampires and modern gansta' rappers are not validated and predicted by THIS pic in THIS link:
http://www.panora...83846962

just because you see similarity, doesn't mean there is quantifiable evidence that something is real
https://en.wikipe...cination

believing you have all the answers when there are hundreds of scientists more capable still researching?
https://en.wikipe...r_effect

believing your BS is real?
https://en.wikipe...Delusion
knowphiself
3.4 / 5 (18) Sep 07, 2015
To Captain Stumpy & docile

Get A Room
verkle
Sep 07, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
El_Nose
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 08, 2015
when i was a kick we just ignored the troll under the bridge... then I grew up and forgot how to even see them... and then the internet reminded me they exist.
wduckss
1 / 5 (1) Sep 08, 2015
What can be expected in the body that rotates, rather than spherical shape. I do not know what is the surprise?
Me anymore interested "dilemma" whether it is in terms of distance (5 billion light-years) or an event from the distant past when is the universe "was old 8-9" billion years.
Stavros
3 / 5 (1) Sep 08, 2015
This is clear evidence that it is time to Degauss the universe!
EnsignFlandry
4.6 / 5 (9) Sep 08, 2015
"The astronomers conclude that the ring is probably not a real physical structure."

Everyone chill out and quit attacking each other. And creationist trolls, go away.
EnsignFlandry
4 / 5 (4) Sep 08, 2015
Rehash of 27 July publication. The only new claim, or at least newly promoted, is "further studies are needed". You don't say!? =D


"Further studies are needed", or an equivalent statement, is almost required for a research paper today. Its just boilerplate.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
mytwocts
3.7 / 5 (9) Sep 08, 2015
The dodecahedron symbol is http://aetherwave...pt.html. It seems, our predecessors were somehow aware of this structure on the sky. They couldn't observe the dark matter structure, but they could remember the position of supernovas and visible flashes connected with gamma ray bursts....

I hope you are in a safe place where you can't hurt yourself.
gkam
1 / 5 (6) Sep 08, 2015
I think my post about the finger was just as accurate as anything I have read here.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
mytwocts
4 / 5 (8) Sep 08, 2015
I take that as a "yes".
Quite a relief.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Sep 08, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
2.8 / 5 (9) Sep 09, 2015
We therefore have situation, when the string theorists could finally find vindication for their effort, but they cannot see it, because they don't understand the physical meaning of their own theories, because they don't understand their emergent geometry.
perhaps you should read this
https://en.wikipe...r_effect
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein relatively unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate...Dunning and Kruger attributed the bias to the metacognitive inability of the unskilled to evaluate their own ability level accurately
...Dunning and Kruger have postulated that the effect is the result of internal illusion in the unskilled...

docile
Sep 09, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
docile
Sep 09, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
e_savelev
1 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2015
In fact, there are two rings visible: inner and outer, not single one. The outer rind has distortion as the map is a projection of sphere.
docile
Sep 09, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
e_savelev
1 / 5 (1) Sep 10, 2015
It is a set of dots near to the edge of the map. In fact there is a sphere and in reality these dots are much closely to each other than you can see in the picture.
Billy_Madison
not rated yet Sep 10, 2015
You guys are overthinking this way too much.

Couldn't this just be logically explained by the fact our visible universe started from a single point so therefor we would have a conical view going back as far as light allows us to? I mean it looks like we are just staring down the barrel back to the earliest times of the universe with each gamma ray burst lighting the path similar to that of an airstrip at an airport.
SoylentGrin
not rated yet Sep 10, 2015
It is the Alcubierre Bus making its regular rounds. Exact fare required.
SMILING HATRED
1 / 5 (1) Sep 10, 2015
Yet again we see a circular structure with what appears to be a high conentration of energy in the middle of it, is it possible that it is in rotation around the things that are producing these gamma ray bursts?
sobeit
3 / 5 (2) Sep 12, 2015
Actually, that is not a ring but very clearly -- and neatly -- a spiral. Fibonacci, anyone?
c0y0te
3 / 5 (2) Sep 13, 2015
Actually, that is not a ring but very clearly -- and neatly -- a spiral.

Exactly!
I've just wanted to post this fact, wondering how nobody else had noticed the same, but you were faster... ;)

balslev
not rated yet Sep 15, 2015
Since the Big Bang according to #General_Relativity started as a singularity, it has to comply with the cosmological principle (CP), that says, that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic. Accordingly, it will not have been possible to generate a structure with a diameter of 5 billion light years, within the first 6.8 billion years of the existence of the Universe according to the Big Bang theory.

However, if the Big Bang was an explosion in an existing closed Universe in a Euclidean space, the structure could have developed long before (or simultaneous with) the explosion.

Besides, if the Big Bang was an explosion in an existing Universe, it would explain what was before the Big Bang, and where the energy came from to create the Big Bang. Furthermore, the presence of "old" matter in the vicinity of the Big Bang could serve as accumulation points for the fast creation of stars, quasars, black holes, and gigantic structures just after the Big Bang.
varyar
3 / 5 (2) Sep 16, 2015
A genuine scientist should notice a spiral shape not the circle. See for yourself http://i.imgur.com/9cWE3eN.jpg?1

I made this in a 20 seconds and I'm not a scientist.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.