Largest object in the universe?

Is that actually an object though? Isn't there space between the quasars? What does it look like?
 
Is that actually an object though? Isn't there space between the quasars? What does it look like?

You are correct, it really is a structure of objects rather than one individual 'thing' A quasar is the active heart of a galaxy, so if you substitute the word galaxy for quasar you get an idea of what this structure looks like albeit a massive galactic cluster
 
Is that actually an object though? Isn't there space between the quasars? What does it look like?

I thought the same thing at first too. Then it got me thinking of how I would define an 'object'. Clearly it has to be held together by its own gravitational force. The largest stars come to mind, like Betelgeuse. That sucker, if it were in the place of our Sun, would stretch out to around the orbit of Jupiter I believe. Pretty big....

But then, isn't our solar system (both with and without the Oort cloud) held together by gravity? And our galaxy itself? So, where would you draw the line and define an 'object' at?
 
I thought the same thing at first too. Then it got me thinking of how I would define an 'object'. Clearly it has to be held together by its own gravitational force. The largest stars come to mind, like Betelgeuse. That sucker, if it were in the place of our Sun, would stretch out to around the orbit of Jupiter I believe. Pretty big....

But then, isn't our solar system (both with and without the Oort cloud) held together by gravity? And our galaxy itself? So, where would you draw the line and define an 'object' at?

Big stars can be problematic. They get so large you could actually be flying inside the outer edge of the star and not even know it. Traditionally a star's size is defined by its mass rather than diameter.

Even here Betelguese is big, potentially 30 solar masses. Which itself is dwarfed by stars such as Eta Carine who could be pulling as much as 110 to 120 solar masses
 

Back
Top Bottom