PDA

View Full Version : The Largest Objects Named After Somone?



Beleth
2004-Jul-02, 10:40 PM
I thought of this question while listening to reports about the Cassini probe.

Cassini's got the Cassini Division named after him, which is a pretty big thing to be named after one person.

What are the ten largest physical objects named after real people?

I'm looking for specific physical objects, not units of measurement (the Hubble Distance) or a description of a type of object. More like, well, the Cassini Division, or Mount Everest.

I can think of five things that are bigger than the Cassini Division, but I'm sure there are more.


Along similar lines, but probably not as astronomy-related, is the question
What are the ten smallest physical objects named after real people?

Diamond
2004-Jul-03, 12:28 AM
I thought of this question while listening to reports about the Cassini probe.

Cassini's got the Cassini Division named after him, which is a pretty big thing to be named after one person.

What are the ten largest physical objects named after real people?

I'm looking for specific physical objects, not units of measurement (the Hubble Distance) or a description of a type of object. More like, well, the Cassini Division, or Mount Everest.

I can think of five things that are bigger than the Cassini Division, but I'm sure there are more.


Along similar lines, but probably not as astronomy-related, is the question
What are the ten smallest physical objects named after real people?

The eponymous record is Abell7m named after astronomer George O. Abell, which is a supercluster of galaxies.

Dunno about the smallest one.

Maksutov
2004-Jul-03, 12:35 AM
A tie for the biggest between Jennifer Hawkins and Rene Zimmermann, Miss and Mr. Universe respectively.

Can't get any bigger than that... :wink:

Brady Yoon
2004-Jul-03, 12:46 AM
The Messier Objects (named after comet-hunter Charles Messier) would count. I think M87, a giant elliptical galaxy in the Virgo cluster, is the largest of those. Also, I think Ceres was named after a person. I'm definitely missing something obvious here. :D And of course, the Large and Small Magellanic clouds.

Smallest? All I can think of is Golgi bodies, those things in cells.

Diamond
2004-Jul-03, 12:53 AM
The Messier Objects (named after comet-hunter Charles Messier) would count. I think M87, a giant elliptical galaxy in the Virgo cluster, is the largest of those. Also, I think Ceres was named after a person. I'm definitely missing something obvious here. :D And of course, the Large and Small Magellanic clouds.

Smallest? All I can think of is Golgi bodies, those things in cells.

Ceres was a Roman goddess, not a real person.

Brady Yoon
2004-Jul-03, 01:09 AM
Oops. Another mistake on my part. It's obvious I don't know any Greek Mythology.:)

Tensor
2004-Jul-03, 02:35 AM
Depends on which measure you are talking about for the smallest. Length? Time? Actually, I guess you could say they both belong to Max Plank. The Plank length (10^-33 cm) and the Plank time (10^-43 sec).

Ilya
2004-Jul-03, 02:57 AM
The Messier Objects (named after comet-hunter Charles Messier) would count. I think M87, a giant elliptical galaxy in the Virgo cluster, is the largest of those. Also, I think Ceres was named after a person. I'm definitely missing something obvious here. :D And of course, the Large and Small Magellanic clouds.

Smallest? All I can think of is Golgi bodies, those things in cells.

Beleth asked for inividual objects, not classes of objects. Messier Objects is a class, just like Kuiper Belt Objects.

I agree, Abell supercluster of galaxies wins hands down. Can't think right away of any galaxies besides Magellanic Clouds named after individuals, but I am sure there are some.

JohnW
2004-Jul-03, 03:42 AM
The Messier Objects (named after comet-hunter Charles Messier) would count. I think M87, a giant elliptical galaxy in the Virgo cluster, is the largest of those. Also, I think Ceres was named after a person. I'm definitely missing something obvious here. :D And of course, the Large and Small Magellanic clouds.

Smallest? All I can think of is Golgi bodies, those things in cells.

Beleth asked for inividual objects, not classes of objects. Messier Objects is a class, just like Kuiper Belt Objects.

I agree, Abell supercluster of galaxies wins hands down. Can't think right away of any galaxies besides Magellanic Clouds named after individuals, but I am sure there are some.

I was looking at Bode's Galaxy (M81) just two weeks ago. AAlso, There's Markarian's Chain in the Virgo Cluster.

At the other end of the scale, are bosons and fermions small enough for you?

kucharek
2004-Jul-03, 05:54 AM
Depends on which measure you are talking about for the smallest. Length? Time? Actually, I guess you could say they both belong to Max Plank. The Plank length (10^-33 cm) and the Plank time (10^-43 sec).

Planck 8)

Tensor
2004-Jul-03, 02:02 PM
Depends on which measure you are talking about for the smallest. Length? Time? Actually, I guess you could say they both belong to Max Plank. The Plank length (10^-33 cm) and the Plank time (10^-43 sec).

Planck 8)

You know, I thought something looked weird. Oh, well, it was late for me. :oops:

TriangleMan
2004-Jul-03, 02:56 PM
Barnard's Star?

Eroica
2004-Jul-03, 04:23 PM
The eponymous record is Abell7m named after astronomer George O. Abell, which is a supercluster of galaxies.

This is really a catalogue designation rather than a proper name. It would be different if it was called the Abell Supercluster, which it isn't.

Kullat Nunu
2004-Jul-03, 04:51 PM
The eponymous record is Abell7m named after astronomer George O. Abell, which is a supercluster of galaxies.

This is really a catalogue designation rather than a proper name. It would be different if it was called the Abell Supercluster, which it isn't.

Well, what about the Shapley Supercluster (http://anzwers.org/free/universe/superc/shapley.html)?

ngc3314
2004-Jul-03, 07:54 PM
The eponymous record is Abell7m named after astronomer George O. Abell, which is a supercluster of galaxies.

This is really a catalogue designation rather than a proper name. It would be different if it was called the Abell Supercluster, which it isn't.

Well, what about the Shapley Supercluster (http://anzwers.org/free/universe/superc/shapley.html)?

Ah, you beat me to that one. The Shapley structure seems to be bigger every time new surrounding clusters are examined in detail.

(My excuse for not checking BABB for a couple of hours was giving a driving lesson to Teenaged Son. My nerves will be OK any time now).

I suppose one could in principle give an even larger answer - would the Friedmann or Einstein-de Sitter universes count? Maybe only of one were adequately close to observation.