APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:D :) :ssmile: :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol2: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :roll: :wink: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Ann » Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:08 pm

KennyZ wrote:This is the first time I have ever seen an image of the Big Dipper which showed what appear to be gas clouds. The Dipper seems awfully far from the Galactic plane to have clouds like that. What am I really seeing here?
You may actually be seeing gas clouds. The existence of gas clouds is well-known around galaxy M81, and M81 is in Ursa Major, not far from the Big Dipper.
Image
This image by Jordi Gallego shows the so-called Integrated Flux Nebula around M81 and M82. It seems quite likely that many or most of the gas clouds seen here are in the Milky Way, or in the halo of the Milky Way.







Ann

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by KennyZ » Wed Sep 07, 2011 1:34 pm

This is the first time I have ever seen an image of the Big Dipper which showed what appear to be gas clouds. The Dipper seems awfully far from the Galactic plane to have clouds like that. What am I really seeing here?

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by ourkind » Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:59 am

Has anyone noticed what seems to be a satellite streak between M101 and Alkaid ... at least that is what I think it is. Great photo!

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by neufer » Sat Jun 25, 2011 2:14 pm

Ann wrote:
I don't think there is anything mysterious about the arrangement of stars in the vicinity of M108 and M97. Stars form patterns for no reason. The most famous "line-up" of stars in the sky is probably Kemble's Cascade
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap100128.html

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by graydawn » Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:46 pm

Thank you Ann.

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Ann » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:43 pm

matsutoya wrote:This higher resolution of todays picture of the Big Dipper has what appears to be an unusual string of 28 stars or so trailing away from the star Merak. I have never seen something like this before, nor have I seen any attempt at explaining this sort of phenonema. I was wondering if M 108 and/or M 97 may have played a part in causing of this, since we see on the Owl Nebula photo what appears to be a small remnant of the same color trailing that beatiful nebula.
We can be sure that M108 and M97 have nothing to do with the arrangements of stars seen around the Big Dipper. I used my software to check out a number of stars in the vicinity of M108 and M97, and several of them are A- and F-type main sequence stars about 300 light-years away. If you ask me, I'd say that these stars belong to some sort of common group or association. But not all the stars here are about 300 light-years away. The prominent orange star which can be seen at about 8 o'clock from Merak is a K2 giant about 1,000 light-years away.

The reason why M97 and M108 can have nothing to do with the arrangement of stars around the Big Dipper is that these two Messier objects are so much farther away than the stars here. M97 is about 2,600 light-years away, according to Wikipedia. And M108 is between 40 and 50 million light-years away.

I don't think there is anything mysterious about the arrangement of stars in the vicinity of M108 and M97. Stars form patterns for no reason. The most famous "line-up" of stars in the sky is probably Kemble's Cascade:
Photo: Walter MacDonald.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kemble's_Cascade writes:
Kemble's Cascade (Kemble 1), located in the constellation Camelopardalis, is an asterism — a pattern created by unrelated stars. It is an apparent straight line of more than 20 colorful 5th to 10th magnitude stars over a distance of approximately five moon diameters, and the open cluster NGC 1502 can be found at one end.
Another famous asterism of unrelated stars that form an intriguing pattern is the Coathanger:
Nice coathanger, isn't it? Even though it's upside down. But the stars have nothing to do with one another, and they are situated at very different distances from us. Photo: Greg Parker.

Ann

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by neufer » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:22 pm

Wolf Kotenberrg wrote:
Maybe someday they will put a telescope on the Moon, or even some asteroid.
http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2007/05/liquid_telescope wrote:
A Plan to Build a Giant Liquid Telescope on the Moon
Alexander Gelfand Email 05.21.07 Even by astronomical standards, Roger Angel thinks big. Angel, a leading astronomer at the University of Arizona, is proposing an enormous liquid-mirror telescope on the moon that could be hundreds of times more sensitive than the Hubble Space Telescope.

Using a rotating dish of reflective liquid as its primary mirror, Angel's telescope would the largest ever built, and would permit astronomers to study the oldest and most distant objects in the universe, including the very first stars.

"It's an idea that's been around, and we decided to flesh it out," Angel says.

Angel, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, a MacArthur Fellow and a Fellow of the Royal Society, is currently concluding a study to determine the feasibility of constructing a lunar liquid mirror telescope, or LMT, for NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts, an NASA-funded space think tank.

LMT's have been built on Earth -- the Large Zenith Telescope in British Columbia is the third largest telescope in North America -- but the moon's low gravity and lack of atmosphere would allow for a truly gigantic instrument.

Angel dreams of a 100-meter mirror, which would be larger than two side-by-side football fields and would collect 1,736 times more light than the Hubble.

Even a 20-meter instrument, which is more likely in the near term, would be 70 times more sensitive than the Hubble and could detect objects 100 times fainter than those that will be seen with the James Webb Space Telescope, a next-generation orbiting observatory scheduled for launch in 2013.

"At first, it sort of sounds like a crazy idea," says Paul Hickson of the University of British Columbia, one of two Canadian LMT experts who collaborated with Angel on the study. "But when you go through it in some detail, you realize it could actually work."

NIAC director Bob Cassanova agrees. "It's quite feasible," he says. "The debate about this is about some of the details." The biggest advantage is the relative low cost. Liquid telescopes cost 10 to 20 times less to build than polished aluminum mirrors of similar size, in part because they needn't be engineered to the same tolerances. And even the largest liquid mirrors don't require the sophisticated support structures that are needed to prevent solid ones from sagging under their own weight. "The forces of nature conspire to give them the right shape," Borra says.

Although the final cost of the project is yet to be determined, a 20-meter lunar LMT ought to be a bargain in comparison to the James Webb Space Telescope, which is expected to carry a $4.5 billion price tag. It would also make the JWST look like a child's spyglass. "There's very good science to be done, and you're not going to make a telescope of that size and sensitivity in space without spending an ungodly sum of money," Angel says.

There are many advantages to building a deep-space telescope on the moon. A lunar LMT would be free from the atmospheric distortion that afflicts terrestrial telescopes of all kinds, and from the self-generated winds that produce troublesome waves in the largest earth-based LMTs.

The light from the universe's most distant stars is intensely red-shifted, and the airless lunar deep-freeze would be ideal for infrared observation – as would a liquid mirror: While they perform as well as conventional mirrors at visible wavelengths, liquid mirrors do even better in the infrared.

Alas, the same low temperatures that would facilitate infrared observation would also turn mercury, the liquid used in terrestrial LMTs, into a solid. So the greatest technical challenge for Angel's team lies in finding reflective liquids with low freezing points and vapor pressures – liquids that would neither freeze nor evaporate into space.

That task fell to Ermanno Borra, a physicist and liquid-mirror pioneer at Laval University in Quebec who first made the case for a lunar LMT in 1991. Recently, Borra has been experimenting with metal liquid-like films, or MELFFs, that reflect light as effectively as aluminum. Borra declined to comment on his results until they've been published in the journal Nature later this summer. But his teammates were impressed. "It looks very promising," Hickson says.

Borra's MELFFs are new, but liquid mirrors have been around for a while. Sir Isaac Newton first recognized that gravity and centrifugal force would cause a rotating liquid to assume a parabolic shape. In 1850, Italian astronomer Ernesto Capocci suggested that a spinning dish of mercury could serve as the primary mirror in a telescope. And the American physicist Robert W. Wood built several working mercury-mirror telescopes in the early 1900s.

Still, the earliest LMTs were beset with problems. They couldn't maintain stable rotation speeds, and their crude bearings caused the mirrors to vibrate. And since liquid mirrors cannot be tilted in order to track objects as they move across the sky, early efforts at liquid-mirror astrophotography generated streaks of light that quickly exited the field of view. (While fixed pointing precludes some kinds of astronomical work, it doesn't interfere with studies of the most distant stars and galaxies. thanks to the homogeneous and isotropropic nature of the universe, these objects are found wherever one might look.)

In recent years, however, Borra and Hickson have overcome these obstacles.

Ultra-smooth air bearings and synchronous motors governed by crystal oscillators and optical sensors eliminated the vibration and unstable rotation that plagued early LMTs. (Air bearings wouldn't work on the moon, so Angel proposes using superconductor magnetic bearings instead.)

The tracking problem was solved with a technique called drift-scanning, in the rotation of the moon is taken into account by software. Digitization also allows images from many nights' observation to be combined, resulting in extremely long cumulative exposure times.

With Borra's help, Hickson built the Large Zenith Telescope , a 6-meter LMT that is now the third largest telescope in North America. Hickson is currently working on a plan to build an 8-meter instrument in Chile.

A relatively small lunar LMT could be deployed robotically, its rotating dish unfurling like an umbrella. But building a 20-meter or 100-meter instrument would require human hands.>>

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)-object near M101

by Ann » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:18 pm

graydawn wrote:Hello,
Near top left corner of Big Dipper mosaic is M101. Enlarge the picture. At about 8 o'clock from M101, 2 inches away from M101, is what appears to be a transparent sphere, looking carefully, another object can barely be seen at about 1 o'clock within the spere.
What is this object?

thank you,
That is NGC 5474, one of M101's satellite galaxies.
NGC 5474 by Adam Block. The object that seems to be inside this galaxy is actually the galaxy's bulge. The disk has been displaced to one side, probably due to interaction with M101.

Ann

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Wolf Kotenberrg » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:01 pm

I grew up where the Southern Cross pointed south. Maybe someday they will put a telescope on the Moon, or even some asteroid. With some really good batteries and a fantastic ZOOM lens.

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by neufer » Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:54 pm

islader2 wrote:Neufer: great post! But I wonder if nontypical Messier objects {such as M40} might not have something to do with Messier's obsession about having 100 items to list? Some of us psychometricians often dwell on stuff like that. Thanx.
I don't think that Messier every had exactly 100 items in his catalogue.

However, his first catalogue containing 45 objects came out in Messier's 45th year. (Candles on the cake?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Messier wrote:
<<Charles Messier (26 June 1730 – 12 April 1817) was a French astronomer most notable for publishing an astronomical catalogue consisting of deep sky objects such as nebulae and star clusters that came to be known as the 110 "Messier objects". The purpose of the catalogue was to help astronomical observers, in particular comet hunters such as himself, distinguish between permanent and transient objects in the sky.

The first version of Messier's catalogue contained 45 objects and was published in 1774 in the journal of the French Academy of Sciences in Paris. The final version of the catalogue was published in 1781, in Connoissance des Temps for 1784. The final list of Messier objects had grown to 103.

On several different occasions between 1921 and 1966, astronomers and historians discovered evidence of another seven deep-sky objects that were observed either by Messier or his friend and assistant, Pierre Méchain, shortly after the final version was published. These seven objects, M104 through M110, are accepted by astronomers as "official" Messier objects.

The catalogue is not organized scientifically by object type or by location, as the later New General Catalogue would be. Nonetheless, the Messier catalogue comprises nearly all the most spectacular examples of the five types of deep sky object -- diffuse nebulae, planetary nebulae, open clusters, globular clusters and galaxies -- visible from European latitudes. Because these objects could be observed with the relatively small-aperture refracting telescope (approximately four inches) used by Messier to study the sky, they are among the brightest and most attractive deep sky objects observable from earth. Furthermore, almost all of the Messier objects are among the closest to our planet in their respective classes, which makes them heavily studied with professional class instruments that today can resolve very small and visually spectacular details in them.>>

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by peter2 » Fri Jun 24, 2011 7:35 pm

In poland we call it "The big wheel-cart", as opposed to the small(er) one

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)-object near M101

by graydawn » Fri Jun 24, 2011 7:34 pm

Hello,
Near top left corner of Big Dipper mosaic is M101. Enlarge the picture. At about 8 o'clock from M101, 2 inches away from M101, is what appears to be a transparent sphere, looking carefully, another object can barely be seen at about 1 o'clock within the spere.
What is this object?

thank you,

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by islader2 » Fri Jun 24, 2011 7:10 pm

Neufer: great post! But I wonder if nontypical Messier objects {such as M40} might not have something to do with Messier's obsession about having 100 items to list? Some of us psychometricians often dwell on stuff like that. Thanx.

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by bystander » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:57 pm

kaigun wrote:They mentioned the pointers to the polestar, but what about "follow the arc to Arcturus?"
Big Dipper Navigation

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by luigi » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:41 pm

This is a beautiful constellation portraits. Maybe I'm crazy but I believe constellations are nicer than people for portraits :)
Thank you to APOD and Rogelio!

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by kshiarella » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:38 pm

What a great image! My favorite APOD addiction is scanning the backgrounds of high resolution mosaic shots for background galaxies. I find that fascinating. But happening upon the Owl was the true treat here.

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Chris Peterson » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:24 pm

kaigun wrote:They mentioned the pointers to the polestar, but what about "follow the arc to Arcturus?"
And from there, "on to Antares".

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by orin stepanek » Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:44 pm

Very nice APOD. 8-) :)

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by neufer » Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:39 pm

Jake81499 wrote:
On the far right hand side of this photo under the bottom star of the dipper there is a streak. Does anyone know what that might be?
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap101216.html

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Jake81499 » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:26 am

Im not much of a star gazer so please excuse me for not knowing the names of the stars. On the far right hand side of this photo under the bottom star of the dipper there is a streak. Does anyone know what that might be?

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by matsutoya » Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:08 am

This higher resolution of todays picture of the Big Dipper has what appears to be an unusual string of 28 stars or so trailing away from the star Merak. I have never seen something like this before, nor have I seen any attempt at explaining this sort of phenonema. I was wondering if M 108 and/or M 97 may have played a part in causing of this, since we see on the Owl Nebula photo what appears to be a small remnant of the same color trailing that beatiful nebula.

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by mexhunter » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:08 am

It is an extraordinary mosaic, anyone who sees the size of the "dipper" knows the immense work involved in this picture.
Congratulations Rogelio.
Greetings
César

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Alessandro » Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:21 am

Gulp. Squared sorry, it's M97, I suppose.. (thanks to Ann for her kindness: i promise to hold back further superficial posts C°°(

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Alessandro » Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:46 am

Ops, sorry.. It is a small bluish circle below and left of M108, near Merak
C°°)

Re: APOD: The Big Dipper (2011 Jun 24)

by Ann » Fri Jun 24, 2011 8:28 am

Alessandro wrote:What about the object at X=6274, Y=2254 (from top left)?
an easter egg or a photographic artifact?
C°°)
I'm afraid I don't understand your coordinates, Alessandro. Can you explain a bit better? Slide your cursor over the image and you'll get several names and designations. Is your "Easter egg" close to any of the labelled objects in the picture?

By the way, thanks for the explanation about M40, Neufer! I couldn't make head or tail of it, and I absolutely couldn't remember ever reading about it, either. What's worse, when I told my software to take me to M40, I got - zilch! No, I got two faint stars, HD 238107 and HD 238108, two circa G0-type stars. They are very probably an optical pair, like you said. Sheesh! Oh, but Charles Messier did well anyway... I mean, he didn't have access to splendid images like today's APOD when he was scanning the sky.

Ann

Top