ASTRO: FGC 1471 Better known under another name

FGC 1471 is an edge on spiral in Coma Berenices. NED says it SA(s)b?
with two cores separated by 0.8" one Sy3 the other Sy1.9. I rather like
flat galaxies like those that are flat enough to make the Flat Galaxy
Catalog. You probably know it by its more common names, NGC 4565 or the
Needle Galaxy. NGC Project says Sb I. While red shift puts it at 70
million light-years a closer distance seems more likely as that would
move it out of the Virgo Cluster. NED has measurements ranging from 30
to 72, averaging about 42. APOD says 30 million light-years in several
references to it. It's angular size argues for the smaller figure. I
measure it at 16.5 minutes of arc from end to end. That would be
144,000 light-years, assuming the 30 million light-year distance making
it considerably larger than our galaxy or the Andromeda Galaxy.

I'd not noticed before that its disk is warped at the ends. This though
might be related to the second active region 0.8" from the galaxy core.
At some wavelengths it is brighter than the core itself.

While exceedingly flat with little visible halo its rotation curve is
nearly flat indicating a lot of unseen mass, dark matter probably.

Two other galaxies share about the same redshift as NGC 4565. They are
likely gravitationally bound to it as satellites or at least members of
its group. I'll assume they too are much closer than their redshift
would indicate and thus at about the same distance as NGC 4565, whatever
that is.

I took a lot more data on this one but when I went to process it it had
horrid reflections I couldn't remove. This left me with only one sixth
the color data and one third the luminance. All taken when lower in the
sky with poorer seeing. I'll have to try yet again on this one. So
far, since going digital, something has thwarted all attempts. This was
the only one with usable color data and that is so thin it is very noisy.

The WHL J123614.7+255457 galaxy cluster at 5.8 billion light-years by
photographic redshift measurements is southwest of the galaxy. It has
11 members. The BCG for the cluster has no redshift data but is only
one second of arc from the cluster's position so I used one label with a
question mark for the galaxies distance. It appears many of the 11
members are also faintly visible in the area. Two other catalogs list
this same cluster but without any galaxy count and with distances of
about the same as those already mentioned. I didn't label them as
things could get crowded with no real useful added data. To the
southeast of this group is another, GMBCG J189.25931+25.84396 with 13
members at a distance of 3.5 billion light-years. In this case the
redshift distance of the cluster and galaxy agree. But while the
positions given for each are within a second of arc of each other the
cluster has an error circle of 30 seconds of arc while the galaxy has
one of 0.5" which matches my position for the BCG I've labeled.

Near the east edge of the image is another obvious galaxy cluster. No
individual member has a redshift listed in NED. The cluster itself is
NSCS J123523+255636 and has a redshift putting it about 3.4 billion
light-years distant. I've drawn a line to the approximate center of the
cluster. The error circle is 15" of arc so the position is the best I
can do.

For such a studied region I found many of the position measurements
surprisingly vague. Usually NED has an error circle of 0.5" of arc but
here the error circle was much larger. For the quasar at 10.5 million
light-years it was 37.5 seconds though with the help of the Sloan survey
I was able to find it within about 13 seconds of the given location.
Then there's the little cluster of galaxies off the southeast end of the
galaxy. It has two designations with the same location but and error
circle of 15" of arc. The position of the BCG was better at 1.5 seconds
of arc. Still three times greater than what I'm used to. All had the
same given position and were within 1" of my position so why the large
uncertainty I don't know. But the differences continue. WHL
J123647.1+255131 is listed as having 14 members at a redshift distance
of 2.25 billion light-years while MaxBCG J189.19641+25.85862 at the same
position is said to have 24 members at a distance of 2.35 billion
light-years. The BCG however is listed at 2.20 billion light-years. As
all are photographically determined the difference doesn't surprise me
but the galaxy count difference does. Could be due to the larger count
going out further from the center but why don't they specify that
distance? Very frustrating to me. I could see it in a rather obscure
part of the sky but this is a very highly studied region. NGC 4565 is
listed by NED in 35 catalogs. 3 radio, 5 IR, 21 visual and 6 X-ray.

For the large number of faint fuzzies in the image very few have any
redshift data making for a surprisingly sparse annotated image.
Apparently all study the big ape in the room and ignore nearly
everything else.

There is one lone asteroid in the image; (123365) 2000 WU31 at an
estimated magnitude of 18.7.

147" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=1x10'x3, STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
. com...

FGC 1471 is an edge on spiral in Coma Berenices. NED says it SA(s)b?
with two cores separated by 0.8" one Sy3 the other Sy1.9. I rather like
flat galaxies like those that are flat enough to make the Flat Galaxy
Catalog. You probably know it by its more common names, NGC 4565 or the
Needle Galaxy. NGC Project says Sb I. While red shift puts it at 70
million light-years a closer distance seems more likely as that would
move it out of the Virgo Cluster. NED has measurements ranging from 30
to 72, averaging about 42. APOD says 30 million light-years in several
references to it. It's angular size argues for the smaller figure. I
measure it at 16.5 minutes of arc from end to end. That would be
144,000 light-years, assuming the 30 million light-year distance making
it considerably larger than our galaxy or the Andromeda Galaxy.

I'd not noticed before that its disk is warped at the ends. This though
might be related to the second active region 0.8" from the galaxy core.
At some wavelengths it is brighter than the core itself.

While exceedingly flat with little visible halo its rotation curve is
nearly flat indicating a lot of unseen mass, dark matter probably.

Two other galaxies share about the same redshift as NGC 4565. They are
likely gravitationally bound to it as satellites or at least members of
its group. I'll assume they too are much closer than their redshift
would indicate and thus at about the same distance as NGC 4565, whatever
that is.

I took a lot more data on this one but when I went to process it it had
horrid reflections I couldn't remove. This left me with only one sixth
the color data and one third the luminance. All taken when lower in the
sky with poorer seeing. I'll have to try yet again on this one. So
far, since going digital, something has thwarted all attempts. This was
the only one with usable color data and that is so thin it is very noisy.

The WHL J123614.7+255457 galaxy cluster at 5.8 billion light-years by
photographic redshift measurements is southwest of the galaxy. It has
11 members. The BCG for the cluster has no redshift data but is only
one second of arc from the cluster's position so I used one label with a
question mark for the galaxies distance. It appears many of the 11
members are also faintly visible in the area. Two other catalogs list
this same cluster but without any galaxy count and with distances of
about the same as those already mentioned. I didn't label them as
things could get crowded with no real useful added data. To the
southeast of this group is another, GMBCG J189.25931+25.84396 with 13
members at a distance of 3.5 billion light-years. In this case the
redshift distance of the cluster and galaxy agree. But while the
positions given for each are within a second of arc of each other the
cluster has an error circle of 30 seconds of arc while the galaxy has
one of 0.5" which matches my position for the BCG I've labeled.

Near the east edge of the image is another obvious galaxy cluster. No
individual member has a redshift listed in NED. The cluster itself is
NSCS J123523+255636 and has a redshift putting it about 3.4 billion
light-years distant. I've drawn a line to the approximate center of the
cluster. The error circle is 15" of arc so the position is the best I
can do.

For such a studied region I found many of the position measurements
surprisingly vague. Usually NED has an error circle of 0.5" of arc but
here the error circle was much larger. For the quasar at 10.5 million
light-years it was 37.5 seconds though with the help of the Sloan survey
I was able to find it within about 13 seconds of the given location.
Then there's the little cluster of galaxies off the southeast end of the
galaxy. It has two designations with the same location but and error
circle of 15" of arc. The position of the BCG was better at 1.5 seconds
of arc. Still three times greater than what I'm used to. All had the
same given position and were within 1" of my position so why the large
uncertainty I don't know. But the differences continue. WHL
J123647.1+255131 is listed as having 14 members at a redshift distance
of 2.25 billion light-years while MaxBCG J189.19641+25.85862 at the same
position is said to have 24 members at a distance of 2.35 billion
light-years. The BCG however is listed at 2.20 billion light-years. As
all are photographically determined the difference doesn't surprise me
but the galaxy count difference does. Could be due to the larger count
going out further from the center but why don't they specify that
distance? Very frustrating to me. I could see it in a rather obscure
part of the sky but this is a very highly studied region. NGC 4565 is
listed by NED in 35 catalogs. 3 radio, 5 IR, 21 visual and 6 X-ray.

For the large number of faint fuzzies in the image very few have any
redshift data making for a surprisingly sparse annotated image.
Apparently all study the big ape in the room and ignore nearly
everything else.

There is one lone asteroid in the image; (123365) 2000 WU31 at an
estimated magnitude of 18.7.

147" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=1x10'x3, STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

.....

Rick, I am so jealous. I tried to image this a couple of weeks ago from a
remote, dark site, but unfortunately there was so much moisture in the air
that it came out really poorly, plus the battery pack on my laptop computer
ran out before I got enough exposures to do anything useful with it. That
won't happen next time because I ordered a spare battery today. You did a
wonderful job with this. I hope I can do half this well if I ever get to do
it again.

George

"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
. com...

FGC 1471 is an edge on spiral in Coma Berenices. NED says it SA(s)b?
with two cores separated by 0.8" one Sy3 the other Sy1.9. I rather like
flat galaxies like those that are flat enough to make the Flat Galaxy
Catalog. You probably know it by its more common names, NGC 4565 or the
Needle Galaxy. NGC Project says Sb I. While red shift puts it at 70
million light-years a closer distance seems more likely as that would
move it out of the Virgo Cluster. NED has measurements ranging from 30
to 72, averaging about 42. APOD says 30 million light-years in several
references to it. It's angular size argues for the smaller figure. I
measure it at 16.5 minutes of arc from end to end. That would be
144,000 light-years, assuming the 30 million light-year distance making
it considerably larger than our galaxy or the Andromeda Galaxy.

I'd not noticed before that its disk is warped at the ends. This though
might be related to the second active region 0.8" from the galaxy core.
At some wavelengths it is brighter than the core itself.

While exceedingly flat with little visible halo its rotation curve is
nearly flat indicating a lot of unseen mass, dark matter probably.

Two other galaxies share about the same redshift as NGC 4565. They are
likely gravitationally bound to it as satellites or at least members of
its group. I'll assume they too are much closer than their redshift
would indicate and thus at about the same distance as NGC 4565, whatever
that is.

I took a lot more data on this one but when I went to process it it had
horrid reflections I couldn't remove. This left me with only one sixth
the color data and one third the luminance. All taken when lower in the
sky with poorer seeing. I'll have to try yet again on this one. So
far, since going digital, something has thwarted all attempts. This was
the only one with usable color data and that is so thin it is very noisy.

The WHL J123614.7+255457 galaxy cluster at 5.8 billion light-years by
photographic redshift measurements is southwest of the galaxy. It has
11 members. The BCG for the cluster has no redshift data but is only
one second of arc from the cluster's position so I used one label with a
question mark for the galaxies distance. It appears many of the 11
members are also faintly visible in the area. Two other catalogs list
this same cluster but without any galaxy count and with distances of
about the same as those already mentioned. I didn't label them as
things could get crowded with no real useful added data. To the
southeast of this group is another, GMBCG J189.25931+25.84396 with 13
members at a distance of 3.5 billion light-years. In this case the
redshift distance of the cluster and galaxy agree. But while the
positions given for each are within a second of arc of each other the
cluster has an error circle of 30 seconds of arc while the galaxy has
one of 0.5" which matches my position for the BCG I've labeled.

Near the east edge of the image is another obvious galaxy cluster. No
individual member has a redshift listed in NED. The cluster itself is
NSCS J123523+255636 and has a redshift putting it about 3.4 billion
light-years distant. I've drawn a line to the approximate center of the
cluster. The error circle is 15" of arc so the position is the best I
can do.

For such a studied region I found many of the position measurements
surprisingly vague. Usually NED has an error circle of 0.5" of arc but
here the error circle was much larger. For the quasar at 10.5 million
light-years it was 37.5 seconds though with the help of the Sloan survey
I was able to find it within about 13 seconds of the given location.
Then there's the little cluster of galaxies off the southeast end of the
galaxy. It has two designations with the same location but and error
circle of 15" of arc. The position of the BCG was better at 1.5 seconds
of arc. Still three times greater than what I'm used to. All had the
same given position and were within 1" of my position so why the large
uncertainty I don't know. But the differences continue. WHL
J123647.1+255131 is listed as having 14 members at a redshift distance
of 2.25 billion light-years while MaxBCG J189.19641+25.85862 at the same
position is said to have 24 members at a distance of 2.35 billion
light-years. The BCG however is listed at 2.20 billion light-years. As
all are photographically determined the difference doesn't surprise me
but the galaxy count difference does. Could be due to the larger count
going out further from the center but why don't they specify that
distance? Very frustrating to me. I could see it in a rather obscure
part of the sky but this is a very highly studied region. NGC 4565 is
listed by NED in 35 catalogs. 3 radio, 5 IR, 21 visual and 6 X-ray.

For the large number of faint fuzzies in the image very few have any
redshift data making for a surprisingly sparse annotated image.
Apparently all study the big ape in the room and ignore nearly
everything else.

There is one lone asteroid in the image; (123365) 2000 WU31 at an
estimated magnitude of 18.7.

147" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=1x10'x3, STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

....

By the way, I noticed that your LX200R grew by 133". Wish mine could do
that. lol

George

On 6/1/2012 9:56 AM, George wrote:


"Rick Johnson" wrote in message
. com...

FGC 1471 is an edge on spiral in Coma Berenices. NED says it SA(s)b?
with two cores separated by 0.8" one Sy3 the other Sy1.9. I rather like
flat galaxies like those that are flat enough to make the Flat Galaxy
Catalog. You probably know it by its more common names, NGC 4565 or the
Needle Galaxy. NGC Project says Sb I. While red shift puts it at 70
million light-years a closer distance seems more likely as that would
move it out of the Virgo Cluster. NED has measurements ranging from 30
to 72, averaging about 42. APOD says 30 million light-years in several
references to it. It's angular size argues for the smaller figure. I
measure it at 16.5 minutes of arc from end to end. That would be
144,000 light-years, assuming the 30 million light-year distance making
it considerably larger than our galaxy or the Andromeda Galaxy.

I'd not noticed before that its disk is warped at the ends. This though
might be related to the second active region 0.8" from the galaxy core.
At some wavelengths it is brighter than the core itself.

While exceedingly flat with little visible halo its rotation curve is
nearly flat indicating a lot of unseen mass, dark matter probably.

Two other galaxies share about the same redshift as NGC 4565. They are
likely gravitationally bound to it as satellites or at least members of
its group. I'll assume they too are much closer than their redshift
would indicate and thus at about the same distance as NGC 4565, whatever
that is.

I took a lot more data on this one but when I went to process it it had
horrid reflections I couldn't remove. This left me with only one sixth
the color data and one third the luminance. All taken when lower in the
sky with poorer seeing. I'll have to try yet again on this one. So
far, since going digital, something has thwarted all attempts. This was
the only one with usable color data and that is so thin it is very noisy.

The WHL J123614.7+255457 galaxy cluster at 5.8 billion light-years by
photographic redshift measurements is southwest of the galaxy. It has
11 members. The BCG for the cluster has no redshift data but is only
one second of arc from the cluster's position so I used one label with a
question mark for the galaxies distance. It appears many of the 11
members are also faintly visible in the area. Two other catalogs list
this same cluster but without any galaxy count and with distances of
about the same as those already mentioned. I didn't label them as
things could get crowded with no real useful added data. To the
southeast of this group is another, GMBCG J189.25931+25.84396 with 13
members at a distance of 3.5 billion light-years. In this case the
redshift distance of the cluster and galaxy agree. But while the
positions given for each are within a second of arc of each other the
cluster has an error circle of 30 seconds of arc while the galaxy has
one of 0.5" which matches my position for the BCG I've labeled.

Near the east edge of the image is another obvious galaxy cluster. No
individual member has a redshift listed in NED. The cluster itself is
NSCS J123523+255636 and has a redshift putting it about 3.4 billion
light-years distant. I've drawn a line to the approximate center of the
cluster. The error circle is 15" of arc so the position is the best I
can do.

For such a studied region I found many of the position measurements
surprisingly vague. Usually NED has an error circle of 0.5" of arc but
here the error circle was much larger. For the quasar at 10.5 million
light-years it was 37.5 seconds though with the help of the Sloan survey
I was able to find it within about 13 seconds of the given location.
Then there's the little cluster of galaxies off the southeast end of the
galaxy. It has two designations with the same location but and error
circle of 15" of arc. The position of the BCG was better at 1.5 seconds
of arc. Still three times greater than what I'm used to. All had the
same given position and were within 1" of my position so why the large
uncertainty I don't know. But the differences continue. WHL
J123647.1+255131 is listed as having 14 members at a redshift distance
of 2.25 billion light-years while MaxBCG J189.19641+25.85862 at the same
position is said to have 24 members at a distance of 2.35 billion
light-years. The BCG however is listed at 2.20 billion light-years. As
all are photographically determined the difference doesn't surprise me
but the galaxy count difference does. Could be due to the larger count
going out further from the center but why don't they specify that
distance? Very frustrating to me. I could see it in a rather obscure
part of the sky but this is a very highly studied region. NGC 4565 is
listed by NED in 35 catalogs. 3 radio, 5 IR, 21 visual and 6 X-ray.

For the large number of faint fuzzies in the image very few have any
redshift data making for a surprisingly sparse annotated image.
Apparently all study the big ape in the room and ignore nearly
everything else.

There is one lone asteroid in the image; (123365) 2000 WU31 at an
estimated magnitude of 18.7.

147" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=1x10'x3, STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

...

By the way, I noticed that your LX200R grew by 133". Wish mine could do
that. lol

Oops. All thumbs on the keypad it appears. Due to my decades as a CPA
I use the keypad for numbers but I'm getting sloppy in my old age it
appears.

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

Mighty image Rick, lots of detail in the dust lane.

Stefan

"Rick Johnson" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
FGC 1471 is an edge on spiral in Coma Berenices. NED says it SA(s)b?
with two cores separated by 0.8" one Sy3 the other Sy1.9. I rather like
flat galaxies like those that are flat enough to make the Flat Galaxy
Catalog. You probably know it by its more common names, NGC 4565 or the
Needle Galaxy. NGC Project says Sb I. While red shift puts it at 70
million light-years a closer distance seems more likely as that would
move it out of the Virgo Cluster. NED has measurements ranging from 30
to 72, averaging about 42. APOD says 30 million light-years in several
references to it. It's angular size argues for the smaller figure. I
measure it at 16.5 minutes of arc from end to end. That would be
144,000 light-years, assuming the 30 million light-year distance making
it considerably larger than our galaxy or the Andromeda Galaxy.

I'd not noticed before that its disk is warped at the ends. This though
might be related to the second active region 0.8" from the galaxy core.
At some wavelengths it is brighter than the core itself.

While exceedingly flat with little visible halo its rotation curve is
nearly flat indicating a lot of unseen mass, dark matter probably.

Two other galaxies share about the same redshift as NGC 4565. They are
likely gravitationally bound to it as satellites or at least members of
its group. I'll assume they too are much closer than their redshift
would indicate and thus at about the same distance as NGC 4565, whatever
that is.

I took a lot more data on this one but when I went to process it it had
horrid reflections I couldn't remove. This left me with only one sixth
the color data and one third the luminance. All taken when lower in the
sky with poorer seeing. I'll have to try yet again on this one. So
far, since going digital, something has thwarted all attempts. This was
the only one with usable color data and that is so thin it is very noisy.

The WHL J123614.7+255457 galaxy cluster at 5.8 billion light-years by
photographic redshift measurements is southwest of the galaxy. It has
11 members. The BCG for the cluster has no redshift data but is only
one second of arc from the cluster's position so I used one label with a
question mark for the galaxies distance. It appears many of the 11
members are also faintly visible in the area. Two other catalogs list
this same cluster but without any galaxy count and with distances of
about the same as those already mentioned. I didn't label them as
things could get crowded with no real useful added data. To the
southeast of this group is another, GMBCG J189.25931+25.84396 with 13
members at a distance of 3.5 billion light-years. In this case the
redshift distance of the cluster and galaxy agree. But while the
positions given for each are within a second of arc of each other the
cluster has an error circle of 30 seconds of arc while the galaxy has
one of 0.5" which matches my position for the BCG I've labeled.

Near the east edge of the image is another obvious galaxy cluster. No
individual member has a redshift listed in NED. The cluster itself is
NSCS J123523+255636 and has a redshift putting it about 3.4 billion
light-years distant. I've drawn a line to the approximate center of the
cluster. The error circle is 15" of arc so the position is the best I
can do.

For such a studied region I found many of the position measurements
surprisingly vague. Usually NED has an error circle of 0.5" of arc but
here the error circle was much larger. For the quasar at 10.5 million
light-years it was 37.5 seconds though with the help of the Sloan survey
I was able to find it within about 13 seconds of the given location.
Then there's the little cluster of galaxies off the southeast end of the
galaxy. It has two designations with the same location but and error
circle of 15" of arc. The position of the BCG was better at 1.5 seconds
of arc. Still three times greater than what I'm used to. All had the
same given position and were within 1" of my position so why the large
uncertainty I don't know. But the differences continue. WHL
J123647.1+255131 is listed as having 14 members at a redshift distance
of 2.25 billion light-years while MaxBCG J189.19641+25.85862 at the same
position is said to have 24 members at a distance of 2.35 billion
light-years. The BCG however is listed at 2.20 billion light-years. As
all are photographically determined the difference doesn't surprise me
but the galaxy count difference does. Could be due to the larger count
going out further from the center but why don't they specify that
distance? Very frustrating to me. I could see it in a rather obscure
part of the sky but this is a very highly studied region. NGC 4565 is
listed by NED in 35 catalogs. 3 radio, 5 IR, 21 visual and 6 X-ray.

For the large number of faint fuzzies in the image very few have any
redshift data making for a surprisingly sparse annotated image.
Apparently all study the big ape in the room and ignore nearly
everything else.

There is one lone asteroid in the image; (123365) 2000 WU31 at an
estimated magnitude of 18.7.

147" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=1x10'x3, STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net

I recently reprocessed the cropped image for better color.

Rick

--
Prefix is correct. Domain is arvig dot net[/quote]