Starship Asterisk*

Central Cygnus Skyscape

Explanation: In cosmic brush strokes of glowing hydrogen gas, this beautiful skyscape unfolds across the plane of our Milky Way Galaxy and the center of the northern constellation Cygnus the Swan. The featured image spans about six degrees. Bright supergiant star Gamma Cygni (Sadr) to the upper left of the image center lies in the foreground of the complex gas and dust clouds and crowded star fields. Left of Gamma Cygni, shaped like two luminous wings divided by a long dark dust lane is IC 1318, whose popular name is understandably the Butterfly Nebula. The more compact, bright nebula at the lower right is NGC 6888, the Crescent Nebula. Some distance estimates for Gamma Cygni place it at around 1,800 light-years while estimates for IC 1318 and NGC 6888 range from 2,000 to 5,000 light-years.

<< Previous APOD

This Day in APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

APOD Robot wrote:
Some distance estimates for Gamma Cygni place it at around 750 light-years while estimates for IC 1318 and NGC 6888 range from 2,000 to 5,000 light-years.

We wait for Gaia.

Ann

So much better than waiting for Godot!

Dr Kaler's "stars" website gives a Sadr distance of 1830 (+ or - 280) ly - is he wrong??

What is the perfectly circular bubble to the lower left of NGC 6888, the Crescent Nebula

whatsupdoc wrote:What is the perfectly circular bubble to the lower left of NGC 6888, the Crescent Nebula

This is a planetary nebula with the lovely name of the Soap Bubble Nebula. Interestingly it was discovered in 2008 by the amateur astronomer Dave Jurasevich.

whatsupdoc wrote:What is the perfectly circular bubble to the lower left of NGC 6888, the Crescent Nebula

Maybe a small faint planetary nebula?

Ann

APOD Robot wrote:In cosmic brush strokes of glowing hydrogen gas

There is also a bit of oxygen in this region, most notably associated with the Crescent Nebula.

johnemac wrote:Dr Kaler's "stars" website gives a Sadr distance of 1830 (+ or - 280) ly - is he wrong??

That's the Hipparcos parallax distance, which is probably a lot more accurate than the value given in today's caption (which is closer to the distance in parsecs, not light years, though a bit on the high side). Most Hipparcos distances are pretty accurate, although there are significant errors with some measurements. As Ann suggests, the Gaia data will confirm or correct many current distance values.

starsurfer wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:What is the perfectly circular bubble to the lower left of NGC 6888, the Crescent Nebula

This is a planetary nebula with the lovely name of the Soap Bubble Nebula. Interestingly it was discovered in 2008 by the amateur astronomer Dave Jurasevich.

Thanks, starsurfer.

I was observing this very region Monday night. Unfortunately, most of the gas and dust is too faint to see, but the Crescent Nebula is readily visible through a narrow-band filter and is quite interesting.

Chris Peterson wrote:

johnemac wrote:Dr Kaler's "stars" website gives a Sadr distance of 1830 (+ or - 280) ly - is he wrong??

That's the Hipparcos parallax distance, which is probably a lot more accurate than the value given in today's caption.

Thanks! Fixed it. - RJN

What a great image made even more spectacular when you double-click on it. Sometimes I forget to look at it this way which would have resulted in missing a lot of detail including the Soap Bubble Nebula. The links are a key part too in viewing the Astronomy Picture of the Day.

Being a photography neophyte – why are some APOD's "clickable" to reveal higher detail while others aren't? The file sizes submitted by the photographer or are there other factors involved?

This is a gorgeous image!

I'm wondering about the appearance of halos around Gamma Cygni in this image. There is an inner one that appears perfectly spherical, a little larger in visual size than the soap bubble nebula. Outside of that is an incomplete arc, looking somewhat like a capital letter "G". Even beyond that are other wisps that may be more of the same, whatever it is.

Ron-Astro Pharmacist wrote: why are some APOD's "clickable" to reveal higher detail while others aren't? The file sizes submitted by the photographer or are there other factors involved?

Yes, it is mostly submitted file sizes. - RJN

A giant Gila-Scorpion thingy, and a Giant Moustachioed Genie.... a nasty fish face, and I am sure others, if your pareidolia is up for it...

Really awesome image...

:---[===] *

I was pleased to see that the explaining text indicated the span of degrees of the image. It would be nice if this could happen more often.