When the dynamical mass of a proto-cluster of galaxies is ~(1-2)x1014 Msolar, the proto-cluster is expected to evolve into a coma-type cluster.

In almost every paper I read about the confirmation of proto-clusters, the authors of the paper are (almost) always interested in proto-clusters (of galaxies) that will eventually evolve into a Coma-type cluster.

Why are astronomers and astrophysicists so interested in studying those type of structures (Coma-type galaxy clusters)? I mean is it interesting that a proto-cluster will eventually evolve into a Coma-type galaxy cluster? Are these structures rare in the universe?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Out of curiosity, would you mind linking to one of these papers? $\endgroup$
    – HDE 226868
    Mar 30 '20 at 22:59

I think the answer to this isn't that Coma-type galaxy clusters are interesting, it's that galaxy clusters are interesting. Chiang et al. (2014) talks about the importance of studying protoclusters as a means of understanding how galaxies evolve over time.

Galaxy clusters are extreme products of structure formation. They are ideal laboratories to study galaxy assembly, quenching, and sub/super-halo galaxy environments. It has become clear that to obtain a complete picture of cluster formation, we also need to find and study their progenitors at high redshifts that were still forming.

In their paper, they discuss the discovery of a large number of new protoclusters. They bin their protoclusters by mass and designate them as "Fornax-type" ($M_{z=0} = 1-3\times 10^{14}\ M_{\odot}$), "Virgo-type" ($M_{z=0} = 3-10\times 10^{14}\ M_{\odot}$), or "Coma-type" ($M_{z=0} > 10^{15}\ M_{\odot}$). Clearly, they're using present-day clusters as analogs to describe what these protoclusters may turn into as they continue to evolve. The fact that a protocluster is considered a Coma-type cluster, is only based on the mass. Astronomer's aren't so much interested in studying Coma-type protoclusters specifically, they're just studying protoclusters and the high mass protoclusters are considered Coma-type protoclusters.

It's very possible that you were preferentially seeing references to Coma-type clusters because Virgo- or Fornax-type clusters are harder to find (being of smaller mass) and so there is an observational bias that preferentially makes Coma-type protoclusters easier to find and subsequently publish about.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.