Talk:Sombrero Galaxy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Astronomy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy, and WikiProject Astronomical Objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Hubble aberrations

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2003/28/image/a makes the odd claim that "this magnificent galaxy has a diameter that is nearly one-fifth the diameter of the full moon". Apparently the galaxy is local to the solar system and composed of very tiny stars. Is there ongoing research about the implications of this? What is the Sombrero Galaxy's orbit? --[[User:Eequor|η♀υωρ]] 22:51, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think you misinterpreted that sentence; they probalby mean that the angular diameter of the galaxy is one fifth of the full moon's angular diameter. ✏ Sverdrup 00:41, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Visibility

I took out the part that said "just faint enough to be invisible to the naked eye but" as it was misleading. At mag 8 (8.3 according to some sources) M104 is 13 times fainter than the faintest stars visible with the naked eye from reasonably dark skies (limiting magnitude 5.5) --Kalsermar 19:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Professional changes: general info, distance, supermassive black hole

Since I spent a year of professional research on this galaxy, I want to make a few changes to this entry. My changes on 21 June 2006 include updating all of the information in the fact box (using information from NED), updating the distance measurement discussion, and adding a note on the supermassive black hole. (Someone should create a bot to download all the information from NED or the Third Reference Catalogue into Wikipedia.)

Partly because this galaxy has a large bulge, it's been a popular target for distance measurements in astronomy. The Ajhar et al. and Ford et al. references in the article represent the best measurements available. (One key criticism that I received from the referee for my Astrophysical Journal paper was that I didn't use these people's measurements.) Most of the other distance measurements in the literature appear to rely on redshift. Since M104 is close to the Virgo cluster, the cluster causes M104 to deviate from Hubble's law, so distance measurements based on redshift do not work well. Therefore, I decided to delete the old text with the broad distance range.

From a professional standpoint, the giant black hole in the center is really amazing. Even professional astronomers are awed by a 109 Mʘ black hole. Since this has been a popular target for X-ray and radio black hole observations over the years, I will be adding more discussion in the future.

I also plan on finding references for some of the other scientific statements about this galaxy. The comments on the globular clusters, the halo, and the early redshift measurement are all unreferenced. If I don't find anything, I may delete the comments in the future.

GeorgeJBendo 11:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Globular Clusters and Halo Sections Update (16 Aug 2006)

I found quite a few papers specifically on the globular clusters of the Sombrero Galaxy with which I was able to expand the Globular Clusters section. The revised version should be a vast improvement over the previous section. I did not include every reference on globular clusters in the Sombrero Galaxy that I could find, but other editors are welcome to insert appropriate references.

On the other hand, I had problems finding papers that discussed the size of the halo of the Sombrero Galaxy (other than a paper on distance measurements), so I deleted the Halo section.

[edit] New hubble image, way better one

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0803/M104b_peris2048.jpg Visually more stunning with lots of extra M104 galaxy details visible and lots of extra stars and so on... Way better overall quality. Part of the problem is that current image is a "featured picture". And I'm not sure about copyright status - new one got "Credit & Copyright: Vicent Peris (OAUV / PTeam), MAST, STScI, AURA, NASA". NASA is there but I'm not sure if we can still upload picture to wiki with all others credits? TestPilot 12:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC) PS. Here is full resolution version of new picture: http://pixinsight.com/gallery/frontcover/200803-1/M104_hst.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by TestPilot (talk • contribs) 12:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)