Starship Asterisk*

APOD Robot wrote on January 4, 2007:

Left of Gamma Cyg and shaped like two glowing cosmic wings divided by a long dark dust lane, IC 1318's popular name is understandably the Butterfly Nebula.

RocketRon wrote:And, independently of that, clicking "reprocessed colors" above brings up an image of a blue cat.

What is that all about ?

APOD Robot wrote:
Explanation: The bright clusters and nebulae of planet Earth's night sky are often named for flowers or insects. Though its wingspan covers over 3 light-years, NGC 6302 is no exception. With an estimated surface temperature of about 250,000 degrees C, the dying central star of this particular planetary nebula has become exceptionally hot, shining brightly in ultraviolet light but hidden from direct view by a dense torus of dust.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGC_6302 wrote:
<<The spectrum of NGC 6302 shows that its central star is one of the hottest stars in the galaxy, with a surface temperature in excess of 200,000 K, implying that the star from which it formed must have been very large (cf. PG 1159 star). [Parents are strongly cautioned that some of the ultra-violent stellar material may be inappropriate for children under 1159.]>>

smitty wrote:
Could anyone please offer a science-based explanation for the apparently more-or-less bi-polar nature of the star's ejected material (as opposed to it being more spherical in nature)? Thanks!

smitty wrote:Could anyone please offer a science-based explanation for the apparently more-or-less bi-polar nature of the star's ejected material (as opposed to it being more spherical in nature)? Thanks!

smitty wrote:Chris Peterson and Art Neuendorffer,
Thanks for your helpful explanations of what's going on here. It leads me to wonder now, however, why we do sometimes see spherical planetary nebulae? Apparently different initial conditions? Can we learn anything worthwhile from comparing these two different varieties of stellar evolution?

smitty wrote:Chris Peterson and Art Neuendorffer,
Thanks for your helpful explanations of what's going on here. It leads me to wonder now, however, why we do sometimes see spherical planetary nebulae? Apparently different initial conditions? Can we learn anything worthwhile from comparing these two different varieties of stellar evolution? Don't know, but might be worth looking into? Just asking is all.

Wikipedia wrote:
Starting from the 1990s, Hubble Space Telescope images have revealed many planetary nebulae to have extremely complex and varied morphologies. About one-fifth are roughly spherical, but the majority are not spherically symmetric. The mechanisms that produce such a wide variety of shapes and features are not yet well understood, but binary central stars, stellar winds and magnetic fields may play a role.

Wikipedia wrote:
(...) the majority of (planetary nebulae) belong to just three types: spherical, elliptical and bipolar. Bipolar nebulae are concentrated in the galactic plane, likely produced by relatively young massive progenitor stars; and bipolars in the galactic bulge appear to prefer orienting their orbital axes parallel to the galactic plane.[40] On the other hand, spherical nebulae are likely produced by the old stars similar to the Sun.
...
It has been determined that the more massive stars produce more irregularly shaped nebulae.

Ann wrote:
So because the Butterfly Nebula is very irregularly shaped, it was likely produced by a relatively massive star. It is possible that Bellatrix in Orion will become such a massive and irregular white dwarf, if it doesn't explode as a supernova.

neufer wrote:

---

Ann wrote:
So because the Butterfly Nebula is very irregularly shaped, it was likely produced by a relatively massive star. It is possible that Bellatrix in Orion will become such a massive and irregular white dwarf, if it doesn't explode as a supernova.

"Potter, you cannot win against me! I was and am the Dark Lord's most loyal servant. I learned the Dark Arts from him, and I know spells of such power that you, pathetic little boy, can never hope to compete!" —Bellatrix Lestrange

starsurfer wrote:She seems fun to hang out with.

Chris Peterson wrote:

starsurfer wrote:
She seems fun to hang out with.

Except for that whole Avada Kedavra thing. That will end a date real quick!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spells_in_Harry_Potter#Avada_Kedavra_.28Killing_Curse.29 wrote:

• Avada Kedavra (Killing Curse):
  Causes instant, painless death to whomever the curse hits.

<<During an audience interview at the Edinburgh Book Festival (15 April 2004) Rowling said: "Does anyone know where Avada Kedavra came from? It is an ancient spell in Aramaic, and it is the original of Abracadabra, which means 'let the thing be destroyed'. Originally, it was used to cure illness and the 'thing' was the illness, but I decided to make it the 'thing' as in the person standing in front of me. I take a lot of liberties with things like that. I twist them round and make them mine." Rowling's use of this name may have been influenced by Latin cadaver = "corpse".>>