ASTRO: NGC 428

NGC 428 is one odd looking galaxy in Cetus. Redshift puts it 38 million
light-years away. Unfortunately the error bar of redshift is at least
this great meaning it could be twice as distant. In fact Tully-Fisher
measurements put it between 45 and and 54 million light-years distant.
The longer estimate may be the more accurate. It is classed as SAB(s)m
with HII emission. Galaxies of the Magellan class tend to look rather
messed up. Are they naturally this way is the question. I see one note
at NED that says; "Two bar-like bright regions suggest that an
interaction may be occurring, and one of the bars has more bright knots
than the other. The galaxy is not detected at radio wavelengths by NH."
Usually if there's interaction involved you'd expect rather high radio
activity. If it is 50 million light-years distant it would be about
60,000 light-years across. If the redshift distance of is right then it
is about 45,000 light-years across.

North of NGC 428 is the dwarf irregular galaxy LEDA 135629. It appears
as a blue smudge. Was it torn apart by NGC 428? They have similar
redshift. But the galaxy looks rather typical of its type so I doubt
any interaction. Still they make an interesting pair.

Galaxy cluster WHL J011247.4+005254 is south of NGC 428. It's position
is within a second of arc of a galaxy that is not listed at NED. Still
I think it likely the anchor of the cluster. The cluster is listed as
having 12 members in a 1.38 minute diameter circle. Several other faint
galaxies are within this area. Another galaxy cluster is at the bottom
of the image a bit left of NGC 428. It, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 and
the galaxy, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 BCG do have the same position.
The cluster is listed as having 9 members with no size given. The
galaxy cluster NSCS J011344+010621 is in the upper left corner at 2.3
billion light-years. NED shows it has having 19 members in a 2.65
minute circle.

SDSS J011310.00+005012.3, bottom center, has two very different
redshifts given at NED. One puts it at about the same distance as NGC
428 while the other puts it nearly 400,000 light-years further away.
While it does seem to have a low surface brightness like others in the
NGC 428 group I doubt the redshift measurement that puts it at the
distance of NGC 428 can be right.

Three asteroids are in the image:
(251334) 2007 EZ3 at magnitude 19.5
(244947) 2003 YP81 at magnitude 18.6
(127014) 2002 GY11 at magnitude 20

As usual, the annotated image shows the light travel time distance to
all objects in the field that NED had the needed data. Labels are
immediately right of the object unless a line is drawn to the object.
Also I included catalog names for objects likely part of the same group
as NGC 428 as well as galaxy clusters. Interestingly, all galaxies in
the vicinity of NGC 428 are dwarf irregular galaxies of very low surface
brightness. While far larger NGC 428 is considered a low surface
brightness galaxy that has little regular structure same as its
traveling companions. There were quite a few noted quasars and UvES
objects (likely quasars) in the field which are noted by a Q or the UvES
label and their light travel time distance.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10'x3, STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick
--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

Great image Rick. This one is on my list too. Unfortunately weather didn't
allow for any imaging for two month this winter...
Now we had some clear nights, but I wasted a lot of time with guidescope
shift...

Stefan

"Rick Johnson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
NGC 428 is one odd looking galaxy in Cetus. Redshift puts it 38 million
light-years away. Unfortunately the error bar of redshift is at least
this great meaning it could be twice as distant. In fact Tully-Fisher
measurements put it between 45 and and 54 million light-years distant.
The longer estimate may be the more accurate. It is classed as SAB(s)m
with HII emission. Galaxies of the Magellan class tend to look rather
messed up. Are they naturally this way is the question. I see one note
at NED that says; "Two bar-like bright regions suggest that an
interaction may be occurring, and one of the bars has more bright knots
than the other. The galaxy is not detected at radio wavelengths by NH."
Usually if there's interaction involved you'd expect rather high radio
activity. If it is 50 million light-years distant it would be about
60,000 light-years across. If the redshift distance of is right then it
is about 45,000 light-years across.

North of NGC 428 is the dwarf irregular galaxy LEDA 135629. It appears
as a blue smudge. Was it torn apart by NGC 428? They have similar
redshift. But the galaxy looks rather typical of its type so I doubt
any interaction. Still they make an interesting pair.

Galaxy cluster WHL J011247.4+005254 is south of NGC 428. It's position
is within a second of arc of a galaxy that is not listed at NED. Still
I think it likely the anchor of the cluster. The cluster is listed as
having 12 members in a 1.38 minute diameter circle. Several other faint
galaxies are within this area. Another galaxy cluster is at the bottom
of the image a bit left of NGC 428. It, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 and
the galaxy, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 BCG do have the same position.
The cluster is listed as having 9 members with no size given. The
galaxy cluster NSCS J011344+010621 is in the upper left corner at 2.3
billion light-years. NED shows it has having 19 members in a 2.65
minute circle.

SDSS J011310.00+005012.3, bottom center, has two very different
redshifts given at NED. One puts it at about the same distance as NGC
428 while the other puts it nearly 400,000 light-years further away.
While it does seem to have a low surface brightness like others in the
NGC 428 group I doubt the redshift measurement that puts it at the
distance of NGC 428 can be right.

Three asteroids are in the image:
(251334) 2007 EZ3 at magnitude 19.5
(244947) 2003 YP81 at magnitude 18.6
(127014) 2002 GY11 at magnitude 20

As usual, the annotated image shows the light travel time distance to
all objects in the field that NED had the needed data. Labels are
immediately right of the object unless a line is drawn to the object.
Also I included catalog names for objects likely part of the same group
as NGC 428 as well as galaxy clusters. Interestingly, all galaxies in
the vicinity of NGC 428 are dwarf irregular galaxies of very low surface
brightness. While far larger NGC 428 is considered a low surface
brightness galaxy that has little regular structure same as its
traveling companions. There were quite a few noted quasars and UvES
objects (likely quasars) in the field which are noted by a Q or the UvES
label and their light travel time distance.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10'x3, STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick
--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

Same weather here but you have cold and snow, we have warm and clouds
without much snow. Been down now for 2 months as well. Then my imaging
computer died. I got a new one but had nothing but trouble getting it
to communicate with the mount. Random errors would stop everything.
Sometimes after two hours other times after 2 minutes. I'd get errors
that stopped guiding, prevented the mount from moving a specific
distance and turning off tracking. Only way to restart tracking was to
reboot the mount which meant it going to home position then having to
recenter on the object. I use plate solve moves so this is pretty
painless but takes 10 minutes only to die again.

Finally clouds parted a bit tonight so could run some tests. Think I
found the problem. New machine is totally USB3. While it is claimed to
be backward compatible with any USB 2 or 1.1 unit apparently that's not
the case. I borrowed a card for USB 2 and put it in. That meant a lot
of drivers had to be reinstalled to find the new USB port. After that
was done all the little odds and ends vanished and after 5 hours of
tracking not one random error. Never got beyond 1.5 hours before. So
it appears USB 3 isn't as backward compatible as claimed!! Now to order
my own card. I can borrow this one until it gets here. On order and
should be here Friday. Moon will still be a pain so not a big deal.

Sure has been a frustrating month. If I used virtual XP all was fine
but then I noticed it loaded only USB 2 drivers for those ports! That
gave me the hint and tonight that appears to be the problem.

So if the skies ever clear I'm back in business. That might happen as
the temperatures have turned to typical for this time of the year.
First all winter. We put up our usual winter wood supply (we heat
mostly with wood as we have plenty due to the forest land we own) but so
far haven't even used 5% of it. Been so warm the heat pump has been
carrying nearly all the load. Off peak electricity makes it very cheap
but only good to about -3C.

Typical winter low is -40C with at least a week with the high never
above -18C. Usually about 20 days never get warmer than -18C. This
year not one got that cold. Result is it looks like we'll have far more
firewood than storage space as the warm winter has stressed the firs and
pines so much they are turning brown! How many will survive I don't yet
know.

Tonight it is past the coldest part of winter but looks like we are well
below -18C now. First time this winter.

We are thinning the herd of idiots as well. With the warm weather ice
is very unsafe with daily warnings. Normally a fully loaded semi would
be safe, this year even a small ATV will go for a swim. Even walking
can be dangerous. Killing them off at a high rate. Most are over 50
and should know better too but its a "right" to drive on the ice and no
one will take that away from them it seems. On this lake we normally
see dozens of snowmobiles daily, no idiots here as not one has been seen
all year! That may change if this cold hangs in for a bit and we get
some snow. Haven't used the blower all winter! Hear you are getting
clobbered however.

Rick



On 2/7/2012 2:01 PM, Stefan Lilge wrote:
Great image Rick. This one is on my list too. Unfortunately weather didn't
allow for any imaging for two month this winter...
Now we had some clear nights, but I wasted a lot of time with guidescope
shift...

Stefan

"Rick schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
NGC 428 is one odd looking galaxy in Cetus. Redshift puts it 38 million
light-years away. Unfortunately the error bar of redshift is at least
this great meaning it could be twice as distant. In fact Tully-Fisher
measurements put it between 45 and and 54 million light-years distant.
The longer estimate may be the more accurate. It is classed as SAB(s)m
with HII emission. Galaxies of the Magellan class tend to look rather
messed up. Are they naturally this way is the question. I see one note
at NED that says; "Two bar-like bright regions suggest that an
interaction may be occurring, and one of the bars has more bright knots
than the other. The galaxy is not detected at radio wavelengths by NH."
Usually if there's interaction involved you'd expect rather high radio
activity. If it is 50 million light-years distant it would be about
60,000 light-years across. If the redshift distance of is right then it
is about 45,000 light-years across.

North of NGC 428 is the dwarf irregular galaxy LEDA 135629. It appears
as a blue smudge. Was it torn apart by NGC 428? They have similar
redshift. But the galaxy looks rather typical of its type so I doubt
any interaction. Still they make an interesting pair.

Galaxy cluster WHL J011247.4+005254 is south of NGC 428. It's position
is within a second of arc of a galaxy that is not listed at NED. Still
I think it likely the anchor of the cluster. The cluster is listed as
having 12 members in a 1.38 minute diameter circle. Several other faint
galaxies are within this area. Another galaxy cluster is at the bottom
of the image a bit left of NGC 428. It, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 and
the galaxy, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 BCG do have the same position.
The cluster is listed as having 9 members with no size given. The
galaxy cluster NSCS J011344+010621 is in the upper left corner at 2.3
billion light-years. NED shows it has having 19 members in a 2.65
minute circle.

SDSS J011310.00+005012.3, bottom center, has two very different
redshifts given at NED. One puts it at about the same distance as NGC
428 while the other puts it nearly 400,000 light-years further away.
While it does seem to have a low surface brightness like others in the
NGC 428 group I doubt the redshift measurement that puts it at the
distance of NGC 428 can be right.

Three asteroids are in the image:
(251334) 2007 EZ3 at magnitude 19.5
(244947) 2003 YP81 at magnitude 18.6
(127014) 2002 GY11 at magnitude 20

As usual, the annotated image shows the light travel time distance to
all objects in the field that NED had the needed data. Labels are
immediately right of the object unless a line is drawn to the object.
Also I included catalog names for objects likely part of the same group
as NGC 428 as well as galaxy clusters. Interestingly, all galaxies in
the vicinity of NGC 428 are dwarf irregular galaxies of very low surface
brightness. While far larger NGC 428 is considered a low surface
brightness galaxy that has little regular structure same as its
traveling companions. There were quite a few noted quasars and UvES
objects (likely quasars) in the field which are noted by a Q or the UvES
label and their light travel time distance.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10'x3, STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick
--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net





--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

Rick,

actually we had a very warm winter until about two weeks ago. We had +12C in
December on several days.
Now that it has turned cold we also had a lot of people breaking into ice
because they entered it after only 2-3 really cold days...

Stefan

"Rick Johnson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
.com...
Same weather here but you have cold and snow, we have warm and clouds
without much snow. Been down now for 2 months as well. Then my imaging
computer died. I got a new one but had nothing but trouble getting it to
communicate with the mount. Random errors would stop everything.
Sometimes after two hours other times after 2 minutes. I'd get errors
that stopped guiding, prevented the mount from moving a specific distance
and turning off tracking. Only way to restart tracking was to reboot the
mount which meant it going to home position then having to recenter on the
object. I use plate solve moves so this is pretty painless but takes 10
minutes only to die again.

Finally clouds parted a bit tonight so could run some tests. Think I
found the problem. New machine is totally USB3. While it is claimed to
be backward compatible with any USB 2 or 1.1 unit apparently that's not
the case. I borrowed a card for USB 2 and put it in. That meant a lot of
drivers had to be reinstalled to find the new USB port. After that was
done all the little odds and ends vanished and after 5 hours of tracking
not one random error. Never got beyond 1.5 hours before. So it appears
USB 3 isn't as backward compatible as claimed!! Now to order my own card.
I can borrow this one until it gets here. On order and should be here
Friday. Moon will still be a pain so not a big deal.

Sure has been a frustrating month. If I used virtual XP all was fine but
then I noticed it loaded only USB 2 drivers for those ports! That gave me
the hint and tonight that appears to be the problem.

So if the skies ever clear I'm back in business. That might happen as the
temperatures have turned to typical for this time of the year. First all
winter. We put up our usual winter wood supply (we heat mostly with wood
as we have plenty due to the forest land we own) but so far haven't even
used 5% of it. Been so warm the heat pump has been carrying nearly all
the load. Off peak electricity makes it very cheap but only good to
about -3C.

Typical winter low is -40C with at least a week with the high never
above -18C. Usually about 20 days never get warmer than -18C. This year
not one got that cold. Result is it looks like we'll have far more
firewood than storage space as the warm winter has stressed the firs and
pines so much they are turning brown! How many will survive I don't yet
know.

Tonight it is past the coldest part of winter but looks like we are well
below -18C now. First time this winter.

We are thinning the herd of idiots as well. With the warm weather ice is
very unsafe with daily warnings. Normally a fully loaded semi would be
safe, this year even a small ATV will go for a swim. Even walking can be
dangerous. Killing them off at a high rate. Most are over 50 and should
know better too but its a "right" to drive on the ice and no one will take
that away from them it seems. On this lake we normally see dozens of
snowmobiles daily, no idiots here as not one has been seen all year! That
may change if this cold hangs in for a bit and we get some snow. Haven't
used the blower all winter! Hear you are getting clobbered however.

Rick



On 2/7/2012 2:01 PM, Stefan Lilge wrote:
Great image Rick. This one is on my list too. Unfortunately weather
didn't
allow for any imaging for two month this winter...
Now we had some clear nights, but I wasted a lot of time with guidescope
shift...

Stefan

"Rick schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
NGC 428 is one odd looking galaxy in Cetus. Redshift puts it 38 million
light-years away. Unfortunately the error bar of redshift is at least
this great meaning it could be twice as distant. In fact Tully-Fisher
measurements put it between 45 and and 54 million light-years distant.
The longer estimate may be the more accurate. It is classed as SAB(s)m
with HII emission. Galaxies of the Magellan class tend to look rather
messed up. Are they naturally this way is the question. I see one note
at NED that says; "Two bar-like bright regions suggest that an
interaction may be occurring, and one of the bars has more bright knots
than the other. The galaxy is not detected at radio wavelengths by NH."
Usually if there's interaction involved you'd expect rather high radio
activity. If it is 50 million light-years distant it would be about
60,000 light-years across. If the redshift distance of is right then it
is about 45,000 light-years across.

North of NGC 428 is the dwarf irregular galaxy LEDA 135629. It appears
as a blue smudge. Was it torn apart by NGC 428? They have similar
redshift. But the galaxy looks rather typical of its type so I doubt
any interaction. Still they make an interesting pair.

Galaxy cluster WHL J011247.4+005254 is south of NGC 428. It's position
is within a second of arc of a galaxy that is not listed at NED. Still
I think it likely the anchor of the cluster. The cluster is listed as
having 12 members in a 1.38 minute diameter circle. Several other faint
galaxies are within this area. Another galaxy cluster is at the bottom
of the image a bit left of NGC 428. It, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 and
the galaxy, GMBCG J018.27683+00.82032 BCG do have the same position.
The cluster is listed as having 9 members with no size given. The
galaxy cluster NSCS J011344+010621 is in the upper left corner at 2.3
billion light-years. NED shows it has having 19 members in a 2.65
minute circle.

SDSS J011310.00+005012.3, bottom center, has two very different
redshifts given at NED. One puts it at about the same distance as NGC
428 while the other puts it nearly 400,000 light-years further away.
While it does seem to have a low surface brightness like others in the
NGC 428 group I doubt the redshift measurement that puts it at the
distance of NGC 428 can be right.

Three asteroids are in the image:
(251334) 2007 EZ3 at magnitude 19.5
(244947) 2003 YP81 at magnitude 18.6
(127014) 2002 GY11 at magnitude 20

As usual, the annotated image shows the light travel time distance to
all objects in the field that NED had the needed data. Labels are
immediately right of the object unless a line is drawn to the object.
Also I included catalog names for objects likely part of the same group
as NGC 428 as well as galaxy clusters. Interestingly, all galaxies in
the vicinity of NGC 428 are dwarf irregular galaxies of very low surface
brightness. While far larger NGC 428 is considered a low surface
brightness galaxy that has little regular structure same as its
traveling companions. There were quite a few noted quasars and UvES
objects (likely quasars) in the field which are noted by a Q or the UvES
label and their light travel time distance.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10'x3, STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick
--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net





--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net