Starship Asterisk*

In the Heart of the Rosette Nebula

Explanation: In the heart of the Rosette Nebula lies a bright open cluster of stars that lights up the nebula. The stars of NGC 2244 formed from the surrounding gas only a few million years ago. The above image taken in January using multiple exposures and very specific colors of Sulfur (shaded red), Hydrogen (green), and Oxygen (blue), captures the central region in tremendous detail. A hot wind of particles streams away from the cluster stars and contributes to an already complex menagerie of gas and dust filaments while slowly evacuating the cluster center. The Rosette Nebula's center measures about 50 light-years across, lies about 4,500 light-years away, and is visible with binoculars towards the constellation of the Unicorn (Monoceros).

<< Previous APOD

This Day in APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

Always wondrous to look into the heart of a nebula. Lots of detail. Filaments, bow shock, looking things (though I don't think that is what they actually are), globs...like looking into a deep pool of water in a cavern, with waves moving across it....

:---[===] *

Compares favorably to the 60's vintage photo of the Rosette nebula taken with Palomar's 48-inch Schmidt telescope: http://palomarskies.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... ebula.html

This is from the 16 incher? Wow!
http://www.astrodonimaging.com/observatories/

Really amazing and very inspiring.

Joules wrote:Compares favorably to the 60's vintage photo of the Rosette nebula taken with Palomar's 48-inch Schmidt telescope: http://palomarskies.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... ebula.html

This is from the 16 incher? Wow!
http://www.astrodonimaging.com/observatories/

He used to have a 16 inch in a northern observatory. Since last year, he has been imaging with a 20 inch in his southern remote observatory.

Joules wrote:Compares favorably to the 60's vintage photo of the Rosette nebula taken with Palomar's 48-inch Schmidt telescope: http://palomarskies.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... ebula.html

This is from the 16 incher? Wow!
http://www.astrodonimaging.com/observatories/

Keep in mind that beyond an aperture of about 12", there is little or no improvement in resolution for ground based telescopes, particularly with wide angle images where adaptive optics can't be used. The only thing aperture gains is reduced exposure time.

Modern images are so much better than the older ones because of electronic imaging. A CCD is vastly superior to film in every respect, and of course, today we have the ability to digitally process the images we collect.

Chris Peterson wrote:A CCD is vastly superior to film in every respect . . .

Except for the hipster respect.

Anyone else see the mermaid? Blue figure just left of the cluster.

geckzilla wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote:A CCD is vastly superior to film in every respect . . .

Except for the hipster respect.

Fine with me if people want to admire film while listening to vinyl records. Helps keep the crazies off the streets.

A beautiful "image" and much care and time involved.

Chris Peterson wrote:A CCD is vastly superior to film in every respect

I remember learning to push Tri-X pan to ISO 2000, so I could take non-flash images at swim-meets and concerts. The results were always grainy. Nowdays getting such flashless shots in low light is trivial with camera ISO numbers easily going past 8000.

I love the way these static images reveal the dynamic nature of the universe.

Is there a theory why the elements congregate together?

Ron-Astro Pharmacist wrote:Is there a theory why the elements congregate together?

In some cases, the elements actually are together as a consequence of when they were ejected (in all types of star death, elements tend to be ordered by depth in the progenitor star). But in many cases, the elements aren't as segregated as images like this make them appear. Elements ionize under different conditions, and that varies with the distance from energetic stars. You can have different elements mixed together, but only one showing significant ionization, meaning only one is apparent in visible light. That is often the case in nebulas like this.

Chris Peterson wrote:

Ron-Astro Pharmacist wrote:Is there a theory why the elements congregate together?

In some cases, the elements actually are together as a consequence of when they were ejected (in all types of star death, elements tend to be ordered by depth in the progenitor star). But in many cases, the elements aren't as segregated as images like this make them appear. Elements ionize under different conditions, and that varies with the distance from energetic stars. You can have different elements mixed together, but only one showing significant ionization, meaning only one is apparent in visible light. That is often the case in nebulas like this.

The thought that they form at a specific time and place prior to a super nova hadn't crossed my mind. Pretty amazing that the sulfur shell would "vaporize" then remain somewhat localized (in some cases.) Thanks Chris.

theMightyZoltran wrote:Anyone else see the mermaid? Blue figure just left of the cluster.

And Flounder is right above her head

I thught I saw a Whale Tail but upon closer instection I realize it was just a Fluke

theMightyZoltran wrote:Anyone else see the mermaid? Blue figure just left of the cluster.

The one standing up in Green or the Bluer one sitting down behind that one???

I have a 9 carat Pale Blue Sapphire, that has an Inclusion that looks a bit like the area in the top left. The Main Bright "Crack" looking part.

:---[===] *

Boomer12k wrote:

theMightyZoltran wrote:Anyone else see the mermaid? Blue figure just left of the cluster.

The one standing up in Green or the Bluer one sitting down behind that one???

I have a 9 carat Pale Blue Sapphire, that has an Inclusion that looks a bit like the area in the top left. The Main Bright "Crack" looking part.

:---[===] *

Gee not the Pink Panther Diamond but the Blue Mermaid Sapphire... Sounds breath taking