Comments on: Night FLIERs

By: Astro Web — El Hubble examina cuatro estrellas muertas

Astro Web — El Hubble examina cuatro estrellas muertas — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 18:36:23 +0000

[...] IC 4593 estÃ¡ abajo a la izquierda y se encuentra en la constelaciÃ³n septentrional de HÃ©rcules. Mi buen amigo Phil Plait realizÃ³ un buen escrito sobre este objeto asÃ que os enlazo a este sitio para ver la exclusiva. [...]

By: sara

sara — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 06:19:37 +0000

send to me a bout galileh. a bout his life and his pains at italia and his discaver. my veblog is persian. it’s:gandom023.blogfa.com.

By: Buzz Parsec

Buzz Parsec — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:49:42 +0000

Could the mass and locations of the progenitor star’s planets be infered from the structure of the nebula? Or is what we see here actually much larger than a typical planetary system, implying that by the time the nebula has expanded enough to be larger than a point source and have any visible structure, it is vastly bigger than the orbits of any planets originally orbiting the star, and has been distorted too much to be useful? I.E., what’s the image scale? (The link says it’s about 7000 lightyears distant, which seems pretty far to see something as small as a solar system, but there’s no angular size listed that I could see.)

Anyway, if the swirls and whirls are caused by abrupt changes in angular momentum as the expanding nebula encounters and absorbs planets, then presumably the rare smooth ones are from planetless stars, and the common contorted nebulae are from stars with planets. Which means planetary nebulae have something to do with planets after all

By: Motorhomes

Motorhomes — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:07:12 +0000

Great picture! I love your blog. Just found it as a matter of fact.

By: El Hubble examina cuatro estrellas muertas on MuiDark

El Hubble examina cuatro estrellas muertas on MuiDark — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:24:32 +0000

By: Tim G

Tim G — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:50:50 +0000

Grade 10 Science,

If you use a rotating coordinate system, the the math works out if you use a center-fleeing (centrifugal) force, such as one that would “flatten out” stellar wind.

Since he used the phrase, “flatten out”, I thought that centrifugal (center-fleeing) would be the more appropriate term.

By: Grade 10 Science

Grade 10 Science — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 21:34:32 +0000

I had a physics teacher who told me that centrifugal force doesn’t actually exist. It’s ALL centripetal force. Just sayin’ is all.

By: Paul G.

Paul G. — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:21:35 +0000

This image reminds me of scenes from the movie “The Fountain” Although that star is about to go bang. Have you seen that movie Phil? I think it would be a great one for a BA review.

By: SF Reader

SF Reader — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:54:53 +0000

Looks like the well-named FLIERs are the ships that the last few of the locals are using to escape their dying star. Tricky bit of navigating, to use your entire star like an Orion booster…

By: Ken B

Ken B — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:21:36 +0000

The terms “centrifugal” and “centripetal” are not the same thing.

You can get several hits on Google for the meanings here:

http://www.google.com/search?q=centrifugal+versus+centripetal

I’m not sure which one would be correct here.

By: Tim G

Tim G — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:12:56 +0000

Nebulae are very short lived (by astronomical time scales). You can see them evolve from steams of photos taken over a period of just a few years.

Phil, shouldn’t that be centrifugal?

By: Neatorama » Blog Archive » Planetary Nebula

Neatorama » Blog Archive » Planetary Nebula — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 03:16:09 +0000

[...] easily understood manner) what happens to cause a planetary nebula, and why this one is so pretty. Link [...]

By: Richard B. Drumm

Richard B. Drumm — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:15:19 +0000

The prettiest PN I’ve personally seen is the Cat’s Eye, NGC 6543:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap070513.html
The first time I saw this Hubble image I said “That’s pretty!”
Then a few seconds later I said “It’s precessing!” because of the multiple axes of symmetry. This image is both my computers’ background.

IC4593 on the other hand is a lopsided mess! Like the Cat’s Eye it has jets, outflows from the rotational poles focused into jets by magnetic fields to be sure, but there’s so much else going on here it’s all a jumble. Where to start?

- There’s the pointy thing at 12:30 that looks angular, like a pyramid almost (don’t tell Hoagland, please!),

- Then there’s the innermost cyan-colored layer that is semi-spiraled with angular corners,

- Then there’s the “J” shape to the base of the upper jet,

- Then there’s the pinched base of the lower jet,

- Then there’s the red spot at 2:00…

It’s all a glorious mess! This’ll keep the theorists busy for years! What fun! I’ll keep the Cat’s Eye on my Macintosh, though, it’s prettier…
Rich

By: BlondeReb3

BlondeReb3 — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 00:08:35 +0000

Now if we got to see pretty pictures like that in my undergraduate astronomy class, I bet more people would have paid attention rather than complaining!

That may be the prettiest nebula I’ve seen!

By: Quiet_Desperation

Quiet_Desperation — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 23:57:21 +0000

>>> Iâ€™ll cut to the chase and say they arenâ€™t well-understood

Ah, well, obviously they are intelligently designed!

By: Grand Lunar

Grand Lunar — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:43:08 +0000

The image reminds me of a few scenes from “2001″, where Dave is seeing those weird shapes after he meets the monolith at Jupiter. If you have the time Phil, watch the film and see what you think (I assume, of coruse, that you have the movie!).

I bet the James Webb ‘scope can reveal deep mysteries in objects such as this. Could it be possible at all that those knots are planets that are being effected?