ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



A galaxy far, farther away

Posted: Thursday, November 20, 2008 6:38 PM by Alan Boyle


A. Aloisi / STScI / ESA / NASA / AURA
The galaxy NGC 1569 sparkles with the light from millions of newborn stars in an
image from the Hubble Space Telescope. Click on the image for larger versions.

Long ago, astronomers spotted a galaxy far away and wondered why it was giving birth to so many stars. Using the Hubble Space Telescope, they have finally figured out the answer to the puzzle: The starburst galaxy turns out to be farther away than they thought.

Rather than being all by its lonesome, just 7 million light-years away, the starburst galaxy NGC 1569 is stuck in the middle of crowded galactic cluster nearly 11 million light-years away. The resulting gravitational interactions are probably squeezing the galaxy's gas so much that it's been forming stars at a rate more than 100 times faster than our own Milky Way ... for the past 100 million years or so.

"This was the strongest starburst galaxy in the nearby universe," Alessandra Aloisi, an astronomer at the Baltimore-based Space Telescope Science Institute and the European Space Agency, told me today. "It was really puzzling why it was forming stars at such a high rate. It wasn't fitting in with current theories."

Aloisi and some of her colleagues have been studying NGC 1569 for about 20 years, and they enlisted Hubble's cameras to help crack the case. For the key phase of the study, they were allotted 19 full orbits of Hubble's time, which translated into almost 19 hours' worth of observations. "I can tell you it's very hard to get such a big proposal approved," Aloisi said.

At first, the astronomers tried looking for a special kind of red giant star that fuses helium in its core to produce power. These stars are relatively dim, but if you can spot them, you can use them to estimate a galaxy's age.

"When we found no obvious trace of them, we suspected that the galaxy was farther away than originally believed," Aaron Grocholski, a colleague of Aloisi's at the institute and the lead author of a paper on the galaxy, said today in a news release. "We could only see the brightest red giant stars, but we were able to use these stars to recalibrate the galaxy's distance."

Such stars can serve as "standard candles" to correlate brightness with distance. But it takes a lot of telescope time to get the precise measurements that are required. Ground-based telescopes produced the earlier, closer estimates for the galaxy's distance - but only Hubble was able to resolve the individual red giant stars in NGC 1569 and determine that the galaxy was much more distant.

"Nobody before had thought that galaxy was much farther away," Aloisi said.

She and her colleagues had wondered what sort of mechanism could produce such a high rate of starbirth in an isolated galaxy. But the new distance estimate put the galaxy in close proximity to about 10 other galaxies, and it is well-known that the gravitational interactions between galaxies could be a powerful engine for star formation.

 "Now that we know the galaxy is in a cluster, that makes much more sense," Aloisi said.

The astronomers' observations were made in 1999 using Hubble's Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2, and in 2006 and 2007 with the Advanced Camera for Surveys. Results were published in the Oct. 20 issue of the Astrophysical Journal Letters. In addition to Aloisi and Grocholski, the co-authors included Marco Sirianni of ESA and the Space Telescope Science Institute, or STScI; Jennifer Mack and Roeland van der Marel of STScI; Luca Angeretti, Donatella Romano and Monica Tosi of Italy's Astronomical Observatory of Bologna; and Francesca Annibali, Laura Greggio and Enrico Held of the Astronomical Observatory of Padua.

Correction for 11:19 p.m. ET: Ugh, I typed "billion" instead of "million" in the original version of this item. The galaxy isn't that far away. The fix has been made, so sorry about this stupid kind of mistake (which has happened before). Thanks to all who pointed out the error of my ways.

More cases from this year's Hubble files:

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

The 11 billion and 7 billion light year distances are wrong. In the original article, the authors quoted 3.36 and 2.2 Mpc (million parsecs). These convert to 11.0 and 7.2 MILLION light years, respectively, not BILLION.

[ALAN ADDS: Thanks, Richard, it was a stupid typing mistake that I didn't catch. Thank heavens for sharp-eyed folks such as yourself. The reference has been corrected.]

Hey...that's the most directly exciting piece of writing RE anything science ever.
Your enthusiasm for the subject jumps off the page, and exists right there in the ether for an instant.
Pretty friggin' good, Al.
No kiddin'...it floored me.

somebody got this really wrong, should read millions instead of billions,  
                       dub

[ALAN ADDS: That would be me (see above). I've made the fix, thanks for setting me straight.]

Many years ago I came to the conclusion that the age of the universe was dependent on the power of the telescope. What I don’t understand is how we can still look at something like the galaxy NCG 1569 and come to conclusions that it’s forming new stars.  How do we know it’s not just a star burst or whatever and will eventually fade away?
Oh look..there's an alien face just upper left of center.

Galaxy formation is so very mindboggling...and to think that our science can't fully explain star formation and only relies on known apparent laws of physics. The idea of star formation happening over and over and on such a scale leaves me blank.
It is very funny how it is said that such galaxy is just 7 million light years away like if it were very close. Very mind blowing when you thing about the distances in the space. [...]

millions/billions...you ain't goin' there...absorb the feelings, Dudes!
I'd like either of you to clearly explain the difference between a million light years and a billion light years...no big equations.
Is it like the diference between Boston to San Francisco and Boston to Singapore, or what?
C'mon...

[ALAN ADDS: It's a mere three orders of magnitude... Like the difference between driving from Harvard to MIT (1.88 miles) and driving from Harvard to Houston, Texas (1857 miles).]

Does this mean it's on the other side of where the Big Bang happened.....the other side of the "balloon"?

[ALAN ADDS: No, the "balloon" doesn't work quite that way. Here's are a couple of links that address that "where did the big bang happen" question:]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077398/

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/17/33567.aspx

Excuse me while I boggle at the distances, but bearing in mind that the radius of the observable universe is about 14 billion light years, isn't 11 million light years actually almost next door? I would have cheerfully made your mistake too.
[...] As far as I can tell, nothing much was discovered here except for a mis-measurement. NOT that I was going to figure it out... but 20 years to figure out that the Galaxy was further away than we thought and everything still makes sense??  Ouch... I guess some science can take a long time to perform!!
Million or billion, it makes no difference to me.  The astonishing beauty of this brings tears to my eyes and to see back in time, to see creation happen, is both humbling and awe inspiring.  Thanks to everyone that works to study this and bring it to man to study or simply to wonder at and inspire.  
Is adequate time being given to each of the projects that require HST?  Does this article intimate that the process by which project selections are made is somehow lacking?  While I realize that the HST data will obviously surpass any ground based telescope's capabilities, what kind of problems does that reflect in our present understanding of the cosmos?

It would seem to me that if the astronomical community cannot rely on the data previously gathered, we should be looking at a change in protocols.  How much time is being allocated to "re-doing" data acquisitions that should have been previously verified. The mapping of the universe is, to my way of thinking, foundational to all of astrophysics. How much associated data has been mishandled?  We need to be getting less, more accurate data than the other way around.
Thanks for the clarification Alan.
That creates some perspective...with gas prices down, maybe I'll take the ride to Houston and experience the time ratio/difference along the way.
It reminds me of the old 'if the Earth is an orange on the school desk, the basketball out in the playground is Jupiter'...worked for me.
Especially when told that the Sun would be further away and bigger in perspective than the Moon.
Amazingly, all the planets look very much like those little postage stamp sized pics along the border of 1950s texts...even with all the exploratory advancements.
Nothing new under the Sun, eh?
Off to Houston...the walk between Harvard and MIT is littered with most of my old favorite barrooms, so I believe that distance, and guarantee that the time really can become relative...depending on how many stops along the way.
So, if the Millenium Falcon completed the "Kessel Run" in under 12 parsecs (1 parsec = 3.2 light years, or 38.4 light years total), he only covered .00035% of the distance required to reach this "baby factory" of a galaxy!
For us religious types, it makes the scripture of John's revelation, "and I John, saw a New Heaven and a New Earth coming down, and the former things were no more"
I love the way scientists keep lugging away at mysteries until they crack the case.  I like the way they can use things like red giant stars to calculate the distance from Earth.  Astronomy has come so far since I took Astronomy in college 30 years ago.

Galaxy formation and star birth are very interesting subjects.  Those "New" stars we're seeing are really about 11 million years old and it will take another 11 million years before our descendants see if they're still making stars in that galaxy.

Thanks Alan for putting this article out and correcting your previous typo!  Thanks also to the astute readers like Richard who are on the ball and noticed and reported the booboo.
thats awsome!!
Very cool!  It's amazing that with all that we DO know about the universe around us, there's always more to learn.  And even something that is relatively so "close" to us as this galaxy, we STILL didn't know how far away it really was until this study.

What a great time to be around to see all this stuff.  It's just too bad that most people don't even see the stars in the night sky due to light pollution.
ALAN ADDS: It's a mere three orders of magnitude... Like the difference between driving from Harvard to MIT (1.88 miles) and driving from Harvard to Houston, Texas (1857 miles).

Considering our current abilities I think it’s more like “Should I walk from Boston to St. Louis for lunch or from Boston to Mexico City?”
ALAN ADDS: It's a mere three orders of magnitude... Like the difference between driving from Harvard to MIT (1.88 miles) and driving from Harvard to Houston, Texas (1857 miles).

"Orders of magnitude", eh?  If the difference between 1.8 miles and 1800 miles is "ONLY" three orders of magnitude, then consider the following:

How many "orders of magnitude" exist between the Annual Earnings of an "Investment Banker" or an "Auto Executive", compared to 1) an "average US Citizen", 2) a guy working at Mickey D's for minimum wage, or 3) the growing amount of people in unemployment lines??

I'm thinking it's somewhere between 5 and 10 orders of magnitude.  So, how can the little guy jump over that many "orders of magnitude" to bail the big guys out?

I'm trying to bring the "vastness" of the Universe down to the size of something more familiar to us Earthlings, to help us "relate" to it, and try to understand it.  I think I've failed.

But wait; "If I made enough money this year, to buy enough gas to travel between HARVARD and MIT, How many times would an Auto Executive or Wall Street Banker, be able to fly his private jet around the WORLD??  

And, Who would be "younger" upon arrival at their destination. (If they didn't take any "relatives" along?)

Inner space... or Outer Space... which is the final  Frontier?
my friends uncle dug a meteor that they watched fall in the 1960's, they dug it up an it is in there basement.  It is one heavy rock!!!!!
Hey,jus wanna say that astronmy sure catches my eye.I,ve been loggin on here for sometime now.I too ama star gazer.All this about galaxies,planets,stars,universes,never stops to amaze me.Good work to the people that put these news about astronmy to the public.I too have a lot of questions about space,etc.But for now will jus leave it here.Will be tuned in........dennis cameron
I have perhaps a stupid question?  If we have never reached one of these far away places then how can we be sure they are as far away as we even say they are?
 I understand light years and how we see the stars from the past and that it takes say 10 light years for some places light to reach us but are we not guessing at the light years since we have no conformation that the object in question is what we say it is in distance, having never reached it.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1682394

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google