Astronomer here.
Sorry for criticism, but I think it would be much better if galaxies were shown in 3d. There are a lot of surveys providing redshifts, hence 3d positions. Then one would see the cosmic web, otherwise it looks a bit weird just projected on the sphere.
I agree, if you keep the heavenly filament model you should probably restrict the view point origin to the center to have at least have one plausibly correct interpretation.
Well, to play student's advocate here for a second: wouldn't that make it harder to see the immediate difference, given the more complex presentation? IMO this visualization makes it pretty immediately obvious that galaxies aren't random in a way that a massive volumetric map might not.
Hi there,
Lead Dev for OpenSpace here. We do have the ability to render galaxy (or any point cloud dataset really) in 3D space as well as stereoscopically. For an example see a video we made for Matt from SpaceTime a while back: https://youtu.be/E8rel2-kLJA?si=yqQZr7Nk9dyMDqZa&t=373 Thst video uses the Tully, and Sloan Digital Sky Surveys and then a catalogue of Quasars.
It would be fairly straightforward to add your random galaxy dataset as an asset as it would only require some light Lua coding and a CSV file with positions + any additional variables
Given that oftentimes you get a range of estimated distances (in megaparsecs, MPc), maybe you can show the galaxy as a line instead of a point. The innermost end of the line would be the closest estimated distance. The furthest out end of the line would be the furthest estimated distance. You can put the median estimated distance as a dot on the line. Either that or you'd have to use the median estimated distance for a singular point.
Andromeda we have pretty-well established at 0.78 MPc, and M32 at 0.77 MPc.
NGC 7768 at 120 MPc.
Whereas the largest galaxy we currently know of, ESO 383-G 076, is at 200.59 ± 14.12 MPc. That gives a variability in distance far larger than the distance to most of our nearby closest galaxies!
