APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

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: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by emc » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:37 pm

I enjoy the visible wavelength comparison in this APOD… technology drills beyond the visible revealing the "monsters" and chemistry to those with a trained eye.

I am grateful that astronomers are generous with their discoveries. I see the APODs as art in science and science in art. It’s no wonder there are so many references to art here.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Ann » Fri Oct 29, 2010 5:00 am

Well, good thing we have brave Perseus to defend our Andromeda!

Image

He may wear red and yellow here (an unfortunate choice of colors, Perseus dear), but he sure has a lot of ultravioletties wrapped up in that red skirt of his! (And he's got a truly petrifying accessory, too, but that's another matter.)

Ann

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Ann » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:37 am

neufer wrote:
Ann wrote:
Art! We've got an ultraviolet image for once. Even better and even more unusual,
it's an ultraviolet image of a spiral galaxy and not, say, of the Sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A_Swi ... of_M31.OGG
Ann wrote:
And hey, you start talking infrared???
Ah, I don't know, Art. She has her ultraviolet sides after all.
Let's just help stamp out all those little infrareddies out there, okay?

Image

An infrareddie about to turn Andromeda all red! Let's stamp him out!

Ann

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by neufer » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:05 am

Ann wrote:
Art! We've got an ultraviolet image for once. Even better and even more unusual,
it's an ultraviolet image of a spiral galaxy and not, say, of the Sun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A_Swi ... of_M31.OGG
Ann wrote:
And hey, you start talking infrared???

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by cliff » Fri Oct 29, 2010 3:09 am

What is that at the bottom right (sandwiched between the stars) -- looks like two hollow balls of light -- which are readily seen in UV, but completely disappear in optical light. Nothing else in the photo gives the appearance of a hollow ball of light. except these two.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Meneldur » Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:26 pm

Thank you! Very interesting stuff.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by neufer » Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:20 pm

Meneldur wrote:
I too am curious about what appears to be three small rings joined together at about 4 o'clock on the UV image.
It looks like a very curious formation, or could be nothing at all and just a trick of optics.
http://asterisk.apod.com/vie ... =0#p110352
http://asterisk.apod.com/vie ... =0#p110346

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Meneldur » Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:00 pm

I too am curious about what appears to be three small rings joined together at about 4 o'clock on the UV image. It looks like a very curious formation, or could be nothing at all and just a trick of optics.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Ann » Wed Oct 27, 2010 11:53 pm

Its core is blazingly hot? You can see the core??
Eh... no, I can't.... :oops: :oops: :oops:

But the core of a red giant is hot! That sets it apart from the core of a red dwarf, which is, as stellar cores go, measly and cool.

When I look at some info on red supergiants, such as Betelgeuse, I'm often told that this star displays ultraviolet FeII emission. Personally I've taken this to mean that red giant stars, and certainly red supergiants, are ultraviolet emitters that would show up better than most stars in ultraviolet images. (I also thought that this FeII ultraviolet emission wouldn't be there if these cool stars didn't have such hot cores... Any comments on that?)

As for EG And being a symbiotic star, my software has no information on that. Nowhere does it say that EG And is multiple at all. But it makes excellent sense that it is, so thank you very much for providing that information, Art! :D

Ann

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by RandyT5194 » Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:21 pm

What great fun, mousing over the photo, and comparing the visible vs. UV
images.

One feature was particularly striking to me: at about 4 o'clock from the
galactic center are two bright stars. The brighter of the two, the one
that's the "left-most" of them, has 3 or 4 very bright (in UV) objects in a
straight line, or perhaps in an L shape. Only one of the objects is
apparent on the visible light image.

They seem outside the large arm where all the fun hot stuff is, and are one
of the few objects outside the large arms that pop in UV but not in visible
light.

Any idea what they are?

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by crisdavid2 » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:32 pm

This picture have two green paralel lines at left side. What is it?.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by mexhunter » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:19 pm

Spitzer's and now NASA's Swift satellite has given us the chance to see otherwise deep space, not as artistic as other telescopes, although I suppose most disturbing to professional astronomers.
Greetings
César

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by neufer » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:39 pm

Ann wrote: I believe that the red star in this picture is the same as the blue star in the GALEX image. But how can a star that is very red visually be very blue in ultraviolet light? Is that even possible?

Apparently so. The star in question would be EG Andromedae, a cool red M giant. EG Andromedae is very far away, possibly as much as 2,000 light-years, and it may be around 500 times as bright as the Sun in visual light. That, of course, means that it would be even brighter in infrared light, given the fact that this star is so cool. Its color index is 1.613 ± 0.014, which is a lot.

So EG Andromeda is a visually very red and cool star. But it is also a massive star, and its core is blazingly hot. Even though EG Andromedae is visually a red star, its core emits a lot of far ultraviolet light, and the star will show up as strikingly blue in a GALEX image.
Its core is blazingly hot? You can see the core??
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Dk83DYRgp0

    There once was an M giant in Andromeda
    Who watched little boys as they played with their
    Marbles and toys as in days of old yore
    And for a companion he had a white dwarf.
EG Andromeda is a cool red M giant with a very hot companion:
http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-3881/128/4/1790/204122.text.html wrote:
SYNTHETIC SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF THE HOT COMPONENT IN THE S-TYPE SYMBIOTIC VARIABLE EG ANDROMEDAE
KELLY KOLB, JOLEEN MILLER, AND EDWARD M. SION
Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Villanova University.

AND JOANNA MIKOłAJEWSKA
Centrum Astronomiczne im. Mikołaja Kopernika, Polska Akademia Nauk, ulica Bartycka 18, PL-00-716 Warszawa, Poland.

Received 2004 March 29; accepted 2004 June 25

ABSTRACT

We have applied grids of non-LTE (NLTE) high-gravity model atmospheres and optically thick accretion disk models for the first time to archival IUE and FUSE spectra of the S-type symbiotic variable EG Andromedae taken at superior spectroscopic conjunction, when Rayleigh scattering should be minimal and the hot component is viewed in front of the red giant. For EG And's widely accepted, published hot-component mass, orbital inclination, and distance from the Hipparcos parallax, we find that hot, high-gravity, NLTE photosphere model fits to the IUE spectra yield distances from the best-fitting models that agree with the Hipparcos parallax distance, but at temperatures substantially lower than the modified Zanstra temperatures. NLTE fits to an archival FUSE spectrum taken at the same orbital phase as the IUE spectra yield the same temperature as the IUE temperature (50,000 K). However, for the same hot-component mass, inclination, and parallax-derived distance, accretion disk models at moderately high inclinations, ∼60°–75°, with accretion rates from 1 × 10-8 to 1 × 10-9 M⊙ yr-1 for white dwarf masses Mwd = 0.4 M⊙ yield distances grossly smaller than the distance from the Hipparcos parallax. Therefore, we rule out an accretion disk as the dominant source of the far-UV flux. Our findings support a hot bare white dwarf as the dominant source of far-UV flux.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by CBridge » Wed Oct 27, 2010 8:16 pm

What an absolutely stunning photo! It reminds me of the photos of the earth taken at night showing all the lights of the various cities.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by geoffrey.landis » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:58 pm

On the question of identification, what it is in the lower right? Of the two stars in the lower right, one has a diffuse hollow ring near, but not quite centered on, it in the ultraviolet image. It looks like an artifact, but if so, it seems to be the only star with such an artifact. Is this real?

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by bystander » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:05 pm

orin stepanek wrote:http://astrophysics.gsfc.nasa.gov/outre ... new-light/
I get a not available on this server from this url! :?
There's a space in the URL that is not supposed to be there. Try:
http://astrophysics.gsfc.nasa.gov/outre ... new-light/

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by TheSpam » Wed Oct 27, 2010 5:24 pm

Thanks to both neufer and Ann for replying to my question. I found a 1983 article http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1983PASP...95..759K that confirms Ann is correct and the star is EG And. Very Cool!

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Ann » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:49 pm

TheSpam wrote:Question: There is a rather large round source of light on the Ultraviolet image seen clearly just slightly below middle on the far left. It appears much smaller in the optical light image (1/4 size roughly).

Any explanation for this? Larger/Brighter in Ultraviolet than in optical, what would that suggest?

If your having trouble finding it quickly mouse over the two images repeatedly, it should become apparent fairly quickly.
I know what star you mean. I've been looking for it with my astronomy software, but I can't find anything obvious.

But take a look at this GALEX image:
Can you see a very blue-looking star below and to the left of Andromeda at about a 7.30 position? Okay, now take a look at this visual-light image of Andromeda:

Image

Can you see a very red star above and to the left of Andromeda? I believe that the red star in this picture is the same as the blue star in the GALEX image. But how can a star that is very red visually be very blue in ultraviolet light? Is that even possible?

Apparently so. The star in question would be EG Andromedae, a cool red M giant. EG Andromedae is very far away, possibly as much as 2,000 light-years, and it may be around 500 times as bright as the Sun in visual light. That, of course, means that it would be even brighter in infrared light, given the fact that this star is so cool. Its color index is 1.613 ± 0.014, which is a lot.

So EG Andromeda is a visually very red and cool star. But it is also a massive star, and its core is blazingly hot. Even though EG Andromedae is visually a red star, its core emits a lot of far ultraviolet light, and the star will show up as strikingly blue in a GALEX image.

Ann

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by owlice » Wed Oct 27, 2010 4:00 pm

biddie67 wrote:I'd love to have a series of posters to hang on the wall that showed Andromeda as seen in all the different wavelengths - they would make a fine display.
What a great idea for a thread: a series of Andromeda images! Thanks!!

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by biddie67 » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:56 pm

I'd love to have a series of posters to hang on the wall that showed Andromeda as seen in all the different wavelengths - they would make a fine display.

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by biddie67 » Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:54 pm

neufer wrote: I'm ordering pepperoni, mushrooms, and dwarf galaxies on my next pizza. (MMMMMMM....)
I understand that dwarf galaxies are really crunchy and hotter than jalapenos!!! Proceed with care!

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by Guest » Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:25 pm

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by neufer » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:36 pm

owlice wrote:Art, the video was great; thanks for posting it!
I'm ordering pepperoni, mushrooms, and dwarf galaxies on my next pizza. (MMMMMMM....)

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by orin stepanek » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:17 pm

http://astrophysics.gsfc.nasa.gov/outre ... new-light/
I get a not available on this server from this url! :?

Re: APOD: Ultraviolet Andromeda (2010 Oct 27)

by neufer » Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:00 pm

[img3="A Galaxy Evolution Explorer observation of M31 with near ultraviolet shown by red and far ultraviolet shown by blue. M32, a dwarf elliptical galaxy directly below the central bulge and just outside the spiral arms, and M110, above and to the right of the center. M110 has an unusual far ultraviolet bright core in an otherwise "red", old star halo."]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... galaxy.jpg[/img3]
TheSpam wrote:
Question: There is a rather large round source of light on the Ultraviolet image seen clearly just slightly below middle on the far left.
It appears much smaller in the optical light image (1/4 size roughly).
A Milky Way blue giant star?

Note that it is rather reddish in this Galex ultraviolet image=>
TheSpam wrote:
Any explanation for this? Larger/Brighter in Ultraviolet than in optical, what would that suggest?
OB stars would be brighter in the near ultraviolet.

Top