APOD and General Astronomy Discussion Forum
https://asterisk.apod.com/
But we're not. We're in agreement.dlmartin7@cogeco.ca wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:48 pm With Ann and Peterson sparing, one can only conclude that this discussion is one for the ages.
Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:00 pmBut we're not. We're in agreement.dlmartin7@cogeco.ca wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:48 pm
With Ann and Peterson sparing, one can only conclude that this discussion is one for the ages.
So... it was clear to you both from the Hubble image alone that this was never a Bok globule (and, presumably, that Herschel PACS far-IR 70 & 160mum maps, APEX LABOCA & SABOCA submillimeter continuum maps, and Magellan PANIC near-IR images were a waste of time)Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:48 pm
I'm mainly responding to her claim "It is so clear from the Hubble image that NGC 1999 is a cavity." I guess that is subject to interpretation. If she means it as "the dark region in NGC 1999 is a cavity, not a dust cloud", then there is no disagreement.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1005.2202 wrote:
Hier ist wahrhaftig ein Loch im Himmel - The NGC 1999 dark globule is not a globule
T. Stanke, A. M. Stutz, J. J. Tobin, B. Ali, S. T. Megeath, O. Krause, H. Linz, L. Allen, E. Bergin, N. Calvet, J. Di Francesco, W. J. Fischer, E. Furlan, L. Hartmann, T. Henning, P. Manoj, S. Maret, J. Muzerolle, P. C. Myers, D. Neufeld, M. Osorio, K. Pontoppidan, C. A. Poteet, D. M. Watson, T. Wilson
[Submitted on 12 May 2010]
The NGC 1999 reflection nebula features a dark patch with a size of ~10,000 AU, which has been interpreted as a small, dense foreground globule and possible site of imminent star formation. We present Herschel PACS far-infrared 70 and 160mum maps, which reveal a flux deficit at the location of the globule. We estimate the globule mass needed to produce such an absorption feature to be a few tenths to a few Msun. Inspired by this Herschel observation, we obtained APEX LABOCA and SABOCA submillimeter continuum maps, and Magellan PANIC near-infrared images of the region. We do not detect a submillimer source at the location of the Herschel flux decrement; furthermore our observations place an upper limit on the mass of the globule of ~2.4x10-2 Msun. Indeed, the submillimeter maps appear to show a flux depression as well. Furthermore, the near-infrared images detect faint background stars that are less affected by extinction inside the dark patch than in its surroundings. We suggest that the dark patch is in fact a hole or cavity in the material producing the NGC 1999 reflection nebula, excavated by protostellar jets from the V 380 Ori multiple system.
It was clear to me. And it certainly sounds like it was clear to her. It was only the choice of wording that made it sound like she was saying the NGC object and the cavity were one and the same. Which she has said she wasn't. So... no issue.neufer wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 10:42 pmChris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 8:00 pmBut we're not. We're in agreement.dlmartin7@cogeco.ca wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:48 pm
With Ann and Peterson sparing, one can only conclude that this discussion is one for the ages.
- Indeed.... for you wrote:
So... it was clear to you both from the Hubble image alone that this was never a Bok globule (and, presumably, that Herschel PACS far-IR 70 & 160mum maps, APEX LABOCA & SABOCA submillimeter continuum maps, and Magellan PANIC near-IR images were a waste of time) :?:Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:48 pm
I'm mainly responding to her claim "It is so clear from the Hubble image that NGC 1999 is a cavity." I guess that is subject to interpretation. If she means it as "the dark region in NGC 1999 is a cavity, not a dust cloud", then there is no disagreement.
Tom Glenn wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:49 pm FYI the discussion link for today's APOD (January 28) still directs to this page, and the date on the APOD landing page above the image is incorrect (still says January 27). This glitch also causes the APOD for the 27th to be skipped if you click "<" to see the previous APOD.
Tekija wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:59 pm This is the link to discuss today’s image:
http://asterisk.apod.com/viewtopic.php?t=42178
Chris Peterson wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 11:40 pmIt was clear to me. And it certainly sounds like it was clear to her.neufer wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 10:42 pm
So... it was clear to you both from the Hubble image alone that this was never a Bok globule (and, presumably, that Herschel PACS far-IR 70 & 160mum maps, APEX LABOCA & SABOCA submillimeter continuum maps, and Magellan PANIC near-IR images were a waste of time)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutzpah wrote:
<<Chutzpah is the quality of audacity, for good or for bad. Originated 1890–95 from Yiddish חוצפּה (ḥuṣpâ), from Mishnaic Hebrew חוֹצְפָּה (ḥôṣǝpâ), from חָצַף (ḥāṣap, “to be insolent”). Ultimately from Aramaic חֲצִיפָא (ḥăṣîpāʾ), חֲצַף (ḥaṣap, “to be barefaced, insolent”). In Hebrew, chutzpah is used indignantly, to describe someone who has overstepped the boundaries of accepted behavior. In traditional usage, the word expresses a strong sense of disapproval, condemnation and outrage.
Leo Rosten in The Joys of Yiddish defines chutzpah as "gall, brazen nerve, effrontery, incredible 'guts', presumption plus arrogance such as no other word and no other language can do justice to". In this sense, chutzpah expresses both strong disapproval and condemnation. In the same work, Rosten also defines the term as "that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan."
Chutzpah amounts to a total denial of personal responsibility, which renders others speechless and incredulous ... one cannot quite believe that another person totally lacks common human traits like remorse, regret, guilt, sympathy and insight. The implication is at least some degree of psychopathy in the subject, as well as the awestruck amazement of the observer at the display.>>