What is it?

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008..._Advisory.html

M Holmes wrote:

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008..._Advisory.html

A very young (140 years old, ish) supernova remnant.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/main/index.html

Jim
--
'Cloverfield' in nine words: "What is it?!" "We're gonna die!" BOOM!
Roll credits.

Find me at http://www.ursaminorbeta.co.uk

Jim wrote:

M Holmes wrote:

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008..._Advisory.html

A very young (140 years old, ish) supernova remnant.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/main/index.html

Sorry, that was slightly lacking - it's the youngest known in our
galaxy.

The picture is lovely.

Jim
--
'Cloverfield' in nine words: "What is it?!" "We're gonna die!" BOOM!
Roll credits.

Find me at http://www.ursaminorbeta.co.uk

I'm not sure why they're so surprised.

From what I've seen, read, etc., most of the observations for a long while
have been looking OUT of our galaxy, since we're located a good ways from
the centre of our Milky Way galaxy. ...they found an incredible amount of
stuff!

The telescopes were built on sites that were convenient to do exactly that.

There are a few recent projects, the biggest now being the Very Large
Telescope (VLT) that are now capable of looking into the galaxy, because
it's located in South America.
That is also a problem, if you consider looking into a forest when you're in
the forest. (trees in the way)
The new space telescope will also look using infrared light, which can cut
through dust and dirt that blocks light our eyes are sensitive to.

There is just so much out there to look at...
They really should keep the Hubble going. It's the only tool available for
the job.

"M Holmes" wrote in message
...
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2008..._Advisory.html