Starship Asterisk*

The Sombrero Galaxy from Hubble

Explanation: Why does the Sombrero Galaxy look like a hat? Reasons include the Sombrero's unusually large and extended central bulge of stars, and dark prominent dust lanes that appear in a disk that we see nearly edge-on. Billions of old stars cause the diffuse glow of the extended central bulge. Close inspection of the bulge in the above photograph shows many points of light that are actually globular clusters. M104's spectacular dust rings harbor many younger and brighter stars, and show intricate details astronomers don't yet fully understand. The very center of the Sombrero glows across the electromagnetic spectrum, and is thought to house a large black hole. Fifty million-year-old light from the Sombrero Galaxy can be seen with a small telescope towards the constellation of Virgo.

<< Previous APOD

This Day in APOD

Next APOD >>

[/b]

The Sombrero Galaxy is a bit like the Saturn of galaxies.

I don't know if the rings of Saturn know how to make new rings, or ringlets. Maybe they do.

But the disk of the Sombrero has mislaid the recipe for making new stars.

Ann

When one gets old, one tends to forget things.

Why is it tipped a bit like that?

WOULD OUR GALAXY FIT IN THE SOMBRERO GALAXY?

Guest wrote:WOULD OUR GALAXY FIT IN THE SOMBRERO GALAXY?

No need to YELL! Yes No, it wouldn't fit. According to Wikipedia the radius of the Sombrero galaxy is only 30% of our Milky Way.

This image offers the opportunity for hundreds of questions related to background objects. The linked "owl eyes" galaxies near the left hand bottom is a fascinating feature. The variety of galactic shapes scattered in the distance gives a great cross section of galactic forms. Fantastic image for both the Sombrero and for background exploration!

I tried to access the hi-res image but it seems to have errors in it and I can't display it. I was looking at the lower-res image and the central bulge seems to me to be a little bit flattened as the bulge gets to a perpendicular direction from the plane of the galaxy. Kins of like a fat donut without the hole. I'm not sure whether this is an artifact of the low res image or if it is really so. I understand how the central bulge could be formed along the lines of a (kind of) Kai Squared distribution from the galactic plane to a limit of 90 degrees, but I'm not sure it is real. Any ideas, or any way to find a good copy of the hi res image.

Also, the reference to the 'small telescope' is of interest. My Dad may buy me an 8" reflector this year. Is that big enough to see this in some detail? Thanks...

Dad is watching wrote:Also, the reference to the 'small telescope' is of interest. My Dad may buy me an 8" reflector this year. Is that big enough to see this in some detail? Thanks...

This is a bright galaxy, visible even in binoculars. An 8" scope will allow you to see it at reasonable magnification, and will show its sombrero shape and dust lane. Don't expect to see much more than that- this object doesn't have much in the way of visual features.

Markus Schwarz wrote:

Guest wrote:
WOULD OUR GALAXY FIT IN THE SOMBRERO GALAXY?

No need to YELL! Yes, it would fit.
According to Wikipedia the radius of the Sombrero galaxy is only 30% of our Milky Way

• So it would NOT fit.

Well, perhaps the Sombrero would fit us, like a hat.

Ann

Dad is watching wrote: I tried to access the hi-res image but it seems to have errors in it and I can't display it.

It is quite large (9 Mb). Here is a link to a download page at HubbleSite.

So, just how far away is this galaxy?

Is it 28 Mly, as HubbleSite.org (STScI) claims? Is it 1/2 the distance to the Virgo Cluster (about 25 – 28 Mly), as NightSkyInfo.com claims? Is it 11.118 Mpc (36 Mly), as NED claims? Or is it 50 Mly, as claimed by SEDS.org, SpaceTelescope.org (ESA), and today’s professional astronomer?

A range of 25 to 36 Mly seems normal for this type of distance estimate, but 50 Mly seems a bit too far from the other estimates. We seem to have two different clusters of estimates.

Chris Peterson wrote:

Dad is watching wrote:Also, the reference to the 'small telescope' is of interest. My Dad may buy me an 8" reflector this year. Is that big enough to see this in some detail? Thanks...

This is a bright galaxy, visible even in binoculars. An 8" scope will allow you to see it at reasonable magnification, and will show its sombrero shape and dust lane. Don't expect to see much more than that- this object doesn't have much in the way of visual features.

Should I ask for 10" ???

Dad's not waching wrote:

Chris Peterson wrote:

Dad is watching wrote:Also, the reference to the 'small telescope' is of interest. My Dad may buy me an 8" reflector this year. Is that big enough to see this in some detail? Thanks...

This is a bright galaxy, visible even in binoculars. An 8" scope will allow you to see it at reasonable magnification, and will show its sombrero shape and dust lane. Don't expect to see much more than that- this object doesn't have much in the way of visual features.

Should I ask for 10" ??? :)

More aperture allows for more magnification, which is important for showing detail. But more aperture is more length and more weight, and at some point inconvenience might get in the way of actually using the thing- especially if (like most people) you're only able to take serious advantage of it by driving someplace darker than your backyard.

neufer wrote:

Markus Schwarz wrote:Yes, it would fit.

• So it would NOT fit.

Fixed it. Thanks!

If you click on the picture to go to the BIG picture, then click to magnify on the central part of the dust lane....I see several "pipe nebula"s....

:---[===] *

bystander wrote:

Dad is watching wrote: I tried to access the hi-res image but it seems to have errors in it and I can't display it.

It is quite large (9 Mb). Here is a link to a download page at HubbleSite.

The large file behind the presentation picture on APOD is a 9.060meg file.

Pianosorplanets wrote:

bystander wrote:

Dad is watching wrote: I tried to access the hi-res image but it seems to have errors in it and I can't display it.

It is quite large (9 Mb). Here is a link to a download page at HubbleSite.

The large file behind the presentation picture on APOD is a 9.060meg file.

That's what bystander was saying. If you've got an older computer without a lot of memory, there can be trouble trying to display a 9 meg image file within a browser. Might be dad's problem. So a download link where the image can be saved to the hard disk and opened locally in a photo viewer might work.

Chris Peterson wrote: More aperture allows for more magnification, which is important for showing detail. But more aperture is more length and more weight, and at some point inconvenience might get in the way of actually using the thing- especially if (like most people) you're only able to take serious advantage of it by driving someplace darker than your backyard.

Chris is correct, as usual. An 8" scope is the perfect size to start with - large enough to explore all the Messier objects (including M104), but small enough to be easy to use. Messier made quite a catalogue with a 4".

This is kind of thang I love on APOD. Take a break from all thing terrestrial unless you are looking down from orbit.