A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 11th 16, 08:40 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue VII/250 parent , with datas of 420.000 galaxies .
The galaxies number should be the same for different degreesof eccentricity ( ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degrees ) ; with ecc. =1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) .... easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) = nu. galaxies 6.330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) = nu. galaxies 107.000 ; ecc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) = nu. galaxies 298.000 ...
  #2  
Old October 11th 16, 08:43 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

Il giorno martedì 11 ottobre 2016 09:40:22 UTC+2, ha scritto:
In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue VII/250 parent , with datas of 420.000 galaxies .
The galaxies number should be the same for different degreesof eccentricity ( ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degrees ) ; with ecc. =1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) ..... easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) = nu. galaxies 6.330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) = nu. galaxies 107.000 ; ecc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) = nu. galaxies 298.000 ...


...untill here , we extablished that almost all galaxies in cutting sight are vanishing ( i can teach better the way to verify before explained , if somebody has difficulties ..)
that fact (the vanishing) must be rewieved with higth surprise expecially because the galaxy' outern parts don't stop the light (so it's admitted normally!) and the cutting sight (eccentricity 0.7-1) is a condition to extend the capacity of observation (the area emitting light is reduced and proportionally the observation'distance should increase ).. are all-you agreing ?
The anomaly overreported causes the lost of the 50% of galaxies ...: i wrote many mail to the right and left side ; one year ago a big professor from California answered me and said '' In our strict circle of specialists we know well that problem : nothing of new !''
( we found 50 anomalies (= singularities , misteries , phenomenas ) not well known , that can be explained with only one reason (= cause , way , actor ) ; and that way can explicate other 20 anomalies including the galaxies escape , Cosmic Background Radiation , dark matter , space-time in supernovae , gravitational lens ...and .. but ,step by step ..)

  #3  
Old October 14th 16, 10:53 PM posted to sci.astro
Steve Willner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,172
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

In article ,
writes:
In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue
VII/250 pare= nt , with datas of 420.000 galaxies . The galaxies
number should be the same for different degreesof eccentric= ity (
ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degree=
s )


The above has some non-standard terminology, so I'm not sure what you
are doing. If the galaxy has a ratio of minor to major axis of b/a,
eccentricity _probably_ means 1 - (b/a), though I haven't gone back
to the original source to check that. Maximum eccentricity is
probably about 0.8 or so because galaxies have finite vertical height
even if they are seen edge-on. But as I say, you need to verify how
the original authors defined eccentricity.

From axis ratio, you can use the Hubble formula (not the Hubble Law
dealing with redshifts -- Mr. Hubble did lots of other things!) to
estimate inclination, which is the angle of the galaxy pole to the
line of sight. In other words, an edge-on galaxy will have an
inclination of 90 degrees. The Hubble formula, assuming an intrinsic
axis ratio of 0.2, is cos i = sqrt(1.042*(b/a)^2 - 0.042), where b/a
is the axis ratio. You can see that if b/a = 1, i.e., the galaxy is
round, cos i will be 1 implying i = 0 deg. If the quantity inside
the square root comes out negative, it says the galaxy's true b/a is
less than the smallest assumed value, so just set i = 90.

Once you have inclinations, there should be an equal number of them
in equal intervals of cos i _provided the source catalog is
unbiased_. In practice, there is often bias against edge-on galaxies
because they are generally more highly reddened by dust than pole-on
galaxies.

; with ecc. =3D1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) .... =
easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 6.=
330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 107.000 ; e=
cc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) =3D nu. galaxies 298.000 ...


--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123

Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
  #4  
Old October 21st 16, 10:55 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

Il giorno martedì 11 ottobre 2016 09:43:20 UTC+2, ha scritto:
Il giorno martedì 11 ottobre 2016 09:40:22 UTC+2, ha scritto:
In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue VII/250 parent , with datas of 420.000 galaxies .
The galaxies number should be the same for different degreesof eccentricity ( ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degrees ) ; with ecc. =1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) ..... easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) = nu. galaxies 6.330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) = nu. galaxies 107.000 ; ecc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) = nu. galaxies 298.000 ...


..untill here , we extablished that almost all galaxies in cutting sight are vanishing ( i can teach better the way to verify before explained , if somebody has difficulties ..)
that fact (the vanishing) must be rewieved with higth surprise expecially because the galaxy' outern parts don't stop the light (so it's admitted normally!) and the cutting sight (eccentricity 0.7-1) is a condition to extend the capacity of observation (the area emitting light is reduced and proportionally the observation'distance should increase ).. are all-you agreing ?
The anomaly overreported causes the lost of the 50% of galaxies ...: i wrote many mail to the right and left side ; one year ago a big professor from California answered me and said '' In our strict circle of specialists we know well that problem : nothing of new !''
( we found 50 anomalies (= singularities , misteries , phenomenas ) not well known , that can be explained with only one reason (= cause , way , actor ) ; and that way can explicate other 20 anomalies including the galaxies escape , Cosmic Background Radiation , dark matter , space-time in supernovae , gravitational lens ...and .. but ,step by step ..)


..next step .. so we have extablished that all galaxies to have to seen , should be 298.000 for 3=894.000 , because we see only 298000(in 1/3 sky)+107000(in 1/3 sky)+6(in 1/3 sky)=411.000 (411:894=we see only the 46% of all galaxies; that's strange A)!)
Now we ask to the same cat. VII/250 parent , how many galaxies with ecc. 0.5 ( with ecc.= 1 , we see a line !) have a redshift (z) or 0.08 .... : the aswer is 52 331 and 140 240 .... so , for a normal sight the nearer galaxies are 27% (52/(52+140)) ...
then we ask how many galaxies with ecc. 0.865 have a z and 0.08 ... : the answer is 1272 and 2364 ... so , for a cutting sight the nearer galaxies are 35% (1272/(1272+2364)....:the conclusion seems to be that the far galaxies are losting easierly B) !
Again we ask to the same catalogue : how many galaxies with ecc. 0.5 have an eta ( index of stellar formation ; if negative the temperature is higther ) or 0 ...: the answer is 88 926 and 63751 ...so for a normal sight the 58% have an hight temperature ( 88926/(88926+63751))..
then we ask how many galaxies with ecc. 0.865 have an eta or 0.... : the answer is 1587 and 1630 ... so , for a cutting sight the 49% have an hight temperature (1587/(1587+1630))....: the conclusion seems to be that the higther temperature ' galaxies are losting easierly C)!
...now we can prove to resolve the situations (anomalies!) A) , B) , C) : probabely the crown of a galaxy is a strong lens ( gravitational , or better rephractional lens because the deviations are highter for hight frequencies = C) )
  #5  
Old October 21st 16, 05:18 PM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

Il giorno venerdì 14 ottobre 2016 23:54:00 UTC+2, Steve Willner ha scritto:
In article ,
writes:
In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue
VII/250 pare= nt , with datas of 420.000 galaxies . The galaxies
number should be the same for different degreesof eccentric= ity (
ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degree=
s )


The above has some non-standard terminology, so I'm not sure what you
are doing. If the galaxy has a ratio of minor to major axis of b/a,
eccentricity _probably_ means 1 - (b/a), though I haven't gone back
to the original source to check that. Maximum eccentricity is
probably about 0.8 or so because galaxies have finite vertical height
even if they are seen edge-on. But as I say, you need to verify how
the original authors defined eccentricity.

From axis ratio, you can use the Hubble formula (not the Hubble Law
dealing with redshifts -- Mr. Hubble did lots of other things!) to
estimate inclination, which is the angle of the galaxy pole to the
line of sight. In other words, an edge-on galaxy will have an
inclination of 90 degrees. The Hubble formula, assuming an intrinsic
axis ratio of 0.2, is cos i = sqrt(1.042*(b/a)^2 - 0.042), where b/a
is the axis ratio. You can see that if b/a = 1, i.e., the galaxy is
round, cos i will be 1 implying i = 0 deg. If the quantity inside
the square root comes out negative, it says the galaxy's true b/a is
less than the smallest assumed value, so just set i = 90.

Once you have inclinations, there should be an equal number of them
in equal intervals of cos i _provided the source catalog is
unbiased_. In practice, there is often bias against edge-on galaxies
because they are generally more highly reddened by dust than pole-on
galaxies.

; with ecc. =3D1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) ..... =
easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 6.=
330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 107.000 ; e=
cc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) =3D nu. galaxies 298.000 ...


--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123

Cambridge, MA 02138 USA


.... i think in that way : we can semplify and consider only the ellipse with horizontal major ax ; the eccentricity is the distance between centrum and the focus ; if the major ax is 1 , c is just the ecc. ( a = ax major ; b = ax minor and c is 1/2 focuses distance ); when the ecc. is 0 , you have a circle ; when the ecc. moves untill 0.7 , you have made the 50% of possible positions and you have 266 000 galaxies ..in the remaining part you have only 41 000 galaxies ..
the reddening is the difficulty of the blue to go throught , but often the datas are cleaned from that problematics ...
  #6  
Old October 21st 16, 05:26 PM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default The misterious case of the desappeared galaxies ..

Il giorno venerdì 14 ottobre 2016 23:54:00 UTC+2, Steve Willner ha scritto:
In article ,
writes:
In CDS Strasbourg data center , we can access to the catalogue
VII/250 pare= nt , with datas of 420.000 galaxies . The galaxies
number should be the same for different degreesof eccentric= ity (
ecc.= c/a , in ellipse ; with ecc. =0 we see a circle ( 90 degree=
s )


The above has some non-standard terminology, so I'm not sure what you
are doing. If the galaxy has a ratio of minor to major axis of b/a,
eccentricity _probably_ means 1 - (b/a), though I haven't gone back
to the original source to check that. Maximum eccentricity is
probably about 0.8 or so because galaxies have finite vertical height
even if they are seen edge-on. But as I say, you need to verify how
the original authors defined eccentricity.

From axis ratio, you can use the Hubble formula (not the Hubble Law
dealing with redshifts -- Mr. Hubble did lots of other things!) to
estimate inclination, which is the angle of the galaxy pole to the
line of sight. In other words, an edge-on galaxy will have an
inclination of 90 degrees. The Hubble formula, assuming an intrinsic
axis ratio of 0.2, is cos i = sqrt(1.042*(b/a)^2 - 0.042), where b/a
is the axis ratio. You can see that if b/a = 1, i.e., the galaxy is
round, cos i will be 1 implying i = 0 deg. If the quantity inside
the square root comes out negative, it says the galaxy's true b/a is
less than the smallest assumed value, so just set i = 90.

Once you have inclinations, there should be an equal number of them
in equal intervals of cos i _provided the source catalog is
unbiased_. In practice, there is often bias against edge-on galaxies
because they are generally more highly reddened by dust than pole-on
galaxies.

; with ecc. =3D1 we see a line ( for cutting sight , 0 degrees ) ..... =
easily it comes out : ecc. 1-0.865 ( 0-30degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 6.=
330 ; ecc. 0.865- 0.5 (30-60 degrees) =3D nu. galaxies 107.000 ; e=
cc. 0.5 - 0 (60-90 degrees ) =3D nu. galaxies 298.000 ...


--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123

Cambridge, MA 02138 USA


.....( the calcules that i report , are referred to the galaxies with complete parameters like z, area , ecc ,,,,.. a inferior number than total catalogue )
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
.. misterious acceleration of Pioneer 10-11 ? Oh yes ! [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 April 15th 16 09:50 AM
Group of galaxies found to bend the light of remote galaxies(Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 January 6th 07 06:53 AM
Case Western Reserve U. astronomers find vast stellar web spun bycolliding galaxies (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 September 20th 05 04:57 PM
Case Western Reserve U. astronomers find vast stellar web spun bycolliding galaxies (Forwarded) Andrew Yee News 0 September 20th 05 04:31 PM
Old Galaxies in the Young Universe: VLT Unravels New Population of Very Old Massive Galaxies (Forwarded) greywolf42 Astronomy Misc 6 August 11th 04 05:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.