DISCOVER Magazine. Science, Technology and The Future
Current Issue
Subscribe Today »
  • Renew
  • Give a Gift
  • Archives
  • Customer Service
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Newsletter
  • Health & Medicine
  • Mind & Brain
  • Technology
  • Space
  • Human Origins
  • Living World
  • Environment
  • Physics & Math
  • Video
  • Photos
  • Podcast
  • RSS
Bad Astronomy
« Tilting at windmills
Ulysses’s odyssey comes to an end »

A swiftly UV galaxy

NASA’s Swift observatory is designed to detect high-energy radiation coming from the most powerful explosions in the Universe: gamma-ray bursts.

But it’s also equipped with a more normal telescope, one that has a 30 centimeter mirror — that’s smaller than the one I have in my garage! But, this telescope is in space, so the atmosphere doesn’t blur out the images. More importantly, the air above our heads absorbs ultraviolet light, preventing ground-based telescopes from even seeing any UV light.

So Swift’s UVOT (Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope) may not be big, but it can easily see UV coming from astronomical objects. And it has a wide field of view, allowing it to get fantastic images of bigger things… like galaxies.

That’s M33 (click to embiggen), a very nearby galaxy; it’s part of our neighborhood of galaxies called the Local Group. It’s a hair under 3 million light years away, and it’s smaller than the Milky Way, about half our size and a tenth our mass. It’s actually visible with binoculars as a fuzzy patch not too far from its big brother, the Andromeda galaxy.

The funny thing is, we know that UV light is predominantly given off by star-forming regions in galaxies; gas clouds where stars are actively being born. The amount of UV from M33 indicates that it is ablaze with stars, cranking them out at a rate far higher than the Milky Way. So even though it’s a bit on the smallish side, it’s certainly pulling its weight when it comes to making stars.

This image is pretty cool. It’s a mosaic of 39 individual images totaling 11 hours of exposure time, using three different UV filters, and it’s the most detailed UV image of an entire galaxy ever taken. Not bad for a telescope built to do an entirely different kind of science!

I worked on the education and public outreach for Swift for several years, and I remember first reading about the UVOT and thinking, wow that’s a pretty small telescope. I wonder what it will be able to do? Then after a moment or two of some mental math I began to realize that this was in fact a fairly powerful telescope; it’s no Hubble, but it can do some terrific science. And it can also make some very pretty pictures.

Share

February 26th, 2008 9:07 AM by Phil Plait in Astronomy, NASA, Pretty pictures, Science | 17 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

17 Responses to “A swiftly UV galaxy”

  1. 1.   Mark Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 9:13 am

    What’s up with that star(?) in the lower right part of M33 with the big UV(?) halo and the white streak going throught it?

  2. 2.   madge Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 9:24 am

    Very pretty indeed. Just goes to show that size ISN’T everything (she lied)

  3. 3.   Kilgore Trout Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 9:37 am

    I’m a Noobie so go easy on me, whats that odd spot to the right and a little below the centerline? It’s looks to me like maybe an issue with the telescope or the camera or but I’m curious in case it really is some sort of giant star with a glowing aura around it and some sort of stripe coming from it. I guess it could also be a much closer star but it looks like something that was added, at least to my untrained eye. Again I have no astronomy background, just a curious person. Thanks!

  4. 4.   KaiYves Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 9:43 am

    Oooh, a galaxy that’s my favorite color for my birthday!

  5. 5.   billsmithaz Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 9:56 am

    RE: the streak in the bottom right corner

    As the BA said, this image is a composite of a bunch of smaller images. The ‘streaks’ are simply some of the seams where the smaller images are joined together. If you look closely enough, you’ll find other similar, but smaller, streaks in the photo.

  6. 6.   The Bad Astronomer Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 10:03 am

    Swift uses CCDs, detectors pretty much like what’s in a your digital camera, but a lot more expensive. :) But they all suffer from what’s called blooming: when an object is too bright, the electrons in the detector can bleed down a column of pixels. You see it all the time in Hubble images, for example.

    In this case, it looks to me like the star was too bright and bled. The image itself was probably rotated before publishing, which is why the line isn’t vertical.

    As for the halo, I am not sure exactly why that’s there, but in CCDs it’s usually a problem with light being absorbed and basically scattered inside the detector. In the camera I used to use (STIS), the CCD was translucent to near infrared light, so the red light would get smeared a little bit around a bright red source. I had a project looking for low mass red dwarfs, so that made them easy to spot: just look for stars with halos! :)

  7. 7.   Pleco Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 10:22 am

    Could be an angel!

    /I jest

  8. 8.   Navneeth Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 10:52 am

    I think that streak could be what’s called a “diffraction spike.” This happens in a reflector due to the spider-vanes that hold the secondary mirror standing in the path of the light from the source to the primary mirror. If the ‘scope’s a refractor, which I think the Swift is not, then you can artificially create one. (Amateur astrophotographers use strings in front of the primary lens, or create them using photoshop.)

  9. 9.   Carey Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 11:10 am

    SOHO’s the best for CCD streaking.

    For a fun game, think of things that CCD can stand for in the context of “streaking”. :)

  10. 10.   Damon B. Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 11:25 am

    “It’s actually visible with binoculars as a fuzzy patch not too far from its big brother, the Andromeda galaxy.”

    The Andromeda Galaxy is male?!

    Here I’ve been calling it “she” the whole time… I’m so embarrassed!

  11. 11.   Jeffersonian Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 11:39 am

    “For a fun game, think of things that CCD can stand for in the context of “streaking”.

    Ha! Love it.

  12. 12.   John Paradox Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    The Andromeda Galaxy is male?!
    Here I’ve been calling it “she” the whole time… I’m so embarrassed!

    Obviously M33 is female, since it (she?) is making more stars.

    J/P=?

  13. 13.   DenverAstro Says:
    February 26th, 2008 at 8:06 pm

    Let’s see…a CM is 100 times larger than a MM, right? My refractor is 127mm which works out to about 5 inches, 300mm would then be about 12 inches in aperture, right? What kind of optics does this scope have and what is its focal length? This also says alot about what a telescope can do as you know better than I, Phil. I’m just curious here. I didn’t know that SWIFT had a scope like that on board. This is really cool, thanks for the post.

  14. 14.   Regner Trampedach Says:
    February 27th, 2008 at 6:28 am

    DenverAstro, 1cm = 10mm (centi = 1/100, milli=1/1000).
    Also units cannot be freely capitalized or decapitalized(?!?); 1mm is
    1 millimeter, but 1Mm is 1 megameter (mega = 1,000,000 = million)
    - that’s a difference of a factor of 10^9 (billion in US lingo).
    In the end you do work out the numbers correctly, though,
    with 30cm=300mm. That’s a pretty large refractor you have there,
    by the way – 127mm… Should be pretty good for M33.
    Cheers, Regner Trampedach

  15. 15.   Allen Thomson Says:
    February 27th, 2008 at 7:29 am

    Also for the Pareidolia Files. In the bigger version of the picture there are two eyes, a mouth and an ear in the nucleus.

  16. 16.   Kilgore Trout Says:
    February 27th, 2008 at 8:25 am

    Thanks for the explanation’s,
    Just to be sure I’m understanding correctly. The haloed spot really is a very bright star, but it looks bigger and brighter than it should because it screws up the camera? Basically. And the streak through it is just a seam from putting the composite pictures together? I would have thought they would be at right angles to the picture, of course maybe they were before the picture was rotated and cropped.
    Thanks again everyone, I’m really enjoying this site. Just makes me wish it wasn’t cold and cloudy at night.

  17. 17.   Mr Squid Says:
    February 28th, 2008 at 6:57 am

    The Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope on Swift (affectionately called UVOT) is a modified Ritchey-Chrétien telescope with a 30 cm primary mirror, a focal ratio of f/12.7, a field of view of 17′ x 17′ and a pixel scale of 0.5″/pixel. It can observe from about 1600 Angstrom to about 6000 Angstrom. It is one of three ultraviolet telescopes in orbit. There are more details at .

Leave a Reply





    • About Bad Astronomy


      Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He's written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic and fights the abuse of science, but his true love is praising the wonders of real science.


      The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking, movie reviews, and all that) can be found here.


      Contact me: The Bad Astronomer "at" gmail "dot" com


       
      Keep Libel Laws out of Science
       
       Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009.


    • Science Getaways


      Science Getaways: Vacation with your brain!


    • Subscribe to BA


      Subscribe to Bad Astronomy using RSS! RSS feed button


    • Death from the Skies!


      Order a copy of Death from the Skies! from Amazon, or Barnes and Noble.

      "If things worked the way I wanted them to, any reporter about to do another 'sensational' story on deadly meteors would consult this volume, and bang! common sense would find its way into the news. How strange would that world be?"
      -- Adam Savage, Mythbusters


      "Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
      -- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot Uprising


    • Recent Posts

      • White House asks for brutal planetary NASA budget cuts
      • A dying star with the wind in its hair
      • Maiden flight for ESA’s Vega rocket tonight
      • Another interactive way to scale the Universe
      • An ear to the ocean
    • Social/Networking/Cool Stuff


      Google+


       Twitter




       Facebook


    • Post Categories

    • Archives

    • Blogroll

      • Bad Astronomy (old site)
      • Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum
      • BAFacts Archive
      • Commenting Policy
      • Computer Support
      • Contact Information
      • DM: 80 Beats
      • DM: Cosmic Variance
      • DM: Discoblog
      • DM: Gene Expression
      • DM: NERS
      • DM: Science Not Fiction
      • DM: The Intersection
      • DM: The Loom
      • James Randi Educational Foundation
      • My use of the word "denier"
      • Planetary Society Blog
      • Politics and Religion posts
      • Press Kit
      • Q&BA Archive
      • The Antivax Bible
      • Universe Today
    • RSS DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space

      • White House asks for brutal planetary NASA budget cuts | Bad Astronomy
      • A dying star with the wind in its hair | Bad Astronomy
      • Maiden flight for ESA’s Vega rocket tonight | Bad Astronomy
      • Another interactive way to scale the Universe | Bad Astronomy
      • The staring eye of a crescent moon | Bad Astronomy
    • RSS DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom

      • A Planet of Viruses: Autographed Book Sale
      • Animal Friendships: My cover story for Time magazine
      • The Future of E-books–podcast of my interview on Wisconsin Public Radio
      • Thursday, February 16: Science and social media panel in New York
      • A Scientific Jonah: My profile of Joy Reidenberg in tomorrow’s New York Times


  • Kalmbach Publishing Co.

    Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.

    Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us