Cosmology on Microsoft Picture Manager

[The Man]

A program like Google sky, which should include up to date maps made from publicly funded satellite, and ground based, radio and x-ray sources, is long overdue.

Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL, whose joint purpose has itself been hijacked by defense, which has been hijacked by hijackers who run government, who employ hijackers to hijack hard evidence and true science.

They try to sell their version back to the public in books and publications with Saganesque data about cannibal galaxies, and wanna tell you, “…well there was this Big Bang,” there was no BB, man is gonna plunge back into the age of ignorance while it remains the province of the select few, with the right security clearance, to get an education.

Previous ages of ignorance produced The Masons, since the powers wanted skilled people around to build their castles and mausoleums, without their people getting smart, so they closed the schools and made education the province of the rich.

With good sky maps available, that have photographs and catalogues of deep fields, and astrometry and radio locating and red shift data, it does not take long to figure it all out.

Perhaps this thread should be moved to the conspiracy theory section? With MT’s recent posts, it would certainly seem more applicable there.

 

[slyjoe]

Well, I don't really feel I need to criticize, but I will point out that this sounds a lot like a case of an Astronomy wannabe that failed, possible for lack of math background. The attitude is right - blame it on someone else, preferably a nameless someone else so it cannot argue with him. This needs to be sent to the CT forum.

Hmmm - sounded to me like he's pissed off he can't get a security clearance.

I mean, astronomy isn't only done by the US government.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Hmmm - sounded to me like he's pissed off he can't get a security clearance.

I mean, astronomy isn't only done by the US government.

.

Worse, for him, all the data - including the raw data - taken by missions such as the HST must be publicly released, once the proprietary period is over (and for many of the most exciting sets of observations, there is no proprietary period).

Most of the big surveys, like SDSS, 2dF, COSMOS, and GOODS also have similar policies - immediate release of all data, which data may come from facilities owned by entities other than US government agencies ...

 

[wollery]

.

Worse, for him, all the data - including the raw data - taken by missions such as the HST must be publicly released, once the proprietary period is over (and for many of the most exciting sets of observations, there is no proprietary period).

Most of the big surveys, like SDSS, 2dF, COSMOS, and GOODS also have similar policies - immediate release of all data, which data may come from facilities owned by entities other than US government agencies ...

Well, actually, I know for certain that SDSS has a one year proprietary period, DR7 has just been released to the SDSS community, but is password protected, and can only be used in papers written by people working at SDSS member institutes. It will become generally available in a little under a year.

Almost all observations have a proprietary period.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

Well, actually, I know for certain that SDSS has a one year proprietary period, DR7 has just been released to the SDSS community, but is password protected, and can only be used in papers written by people working at SDSS member institutes. It will become generally available in a little under a year.

Almost all observations have a proprietary period.

.
Oops!

Not much point checking 2dF (the projects released their final reports, etc, some time ago now); what about GOODS and COSMOS? Hmm ... easy enough to find out ... and, as far as I know, both HDFs and the HUDF had no proprietary period (but am I mis-remembering?).

Agreed that most proposal-based observations, using 'large agency' facilities (such as the HST) have proprietary periods (various TOO observations are exempt, such as those of GRBs), but isn't the point of many multi-band, multi-facility, multi-agency surveys to release the data ASAP?

 

[wollery]

.
Oops!

Not much point checking 2dF (the projects released their final reports, etc, some time ago now); what about GOODS and COSMOS? Hmm ... easy enough to find out ... and, as far as I know, both HDFs and the HUDF had no proprietary period (but am I mis-remembering?).

Agreed that most proposal-based observations, using 'large agency' facilities (such as the HST) have proprietary periods (various TOO observations are exempt, such as those of GRBs), but isn't the point of many multi-band, multi-facility, multi-agency surveys to release the data ASAP?

Depends on how they're organised. SDSS (I believe) was set up mostly on contributions from member institutes, so gives them the one year proprietary period. No idea about GOODS or COSMOS.

 

[DeiRenDopa]

GOODS' Data Policy:

In the spirit of all Legacy Programs, data obtained with ESO facilities in direct support of the GOODS project will be immediately made public worldwide (see open letter by the ESO Director General). Reduced imaging data and source catalogs prepared by the EIS Team will be released by ESO within a few months from the conclusion of each observing run. Imaging and spectroscopic data obtained with ESO telescopes by proprietary programmes in the Chandra Deep Field South will also become public worldwide via the ESO Science Archive before the release of the SIRTF/GOODS data, or after the expiration of the one year proprietary period.

.

COSMOS' Archive:

Data obtained as part of the COSMOS Project can be downloaded from one of several archives:

1. Public COSMOS Archive {link}
This archive is maintained by IRSA {link} at IPAC {link}. All COSMOS data (images and catalogs) that has been publicly released are available through this interface.
2. Private (team-only) COSMOS Archive {link}
Also maintained by IRSA {link}, this archive includes all data obtained by the project that is available to the team. This site is password-protected. Data moves from this archive to the public archive according to a data policy, usually one year after the data was obtained.
3. MAST at STScI {link}
The HST data sets (ACS, WFPC2, and NICMOS) can be obtained from this archive in their raw and on-the-fly reduced form. These data have no proprietary period and can be downloaded as soon as they have been processed from the telescope. In addition, MAST is providing an archive of COSMOS High-Level Science Products {link} from HST and GALEX. These are the same processed data products available from the COSMOS archive at IRSA, but organized a bit differently.

.
So, some stuff has no proprietary period, other stuff does.

Another example of a widely used survey is FIRST ("Faint Images of the Radio Sky at Twenty-cm"):

Both the images {link} and the catalogs {link} constructed from the FIRST observations are being made available to the astronomical community as soon as sufficient quality-control tests have been completed. In addition, the raw visibility data are available from NRAO {link} as soon as the observations have been taken, so radio astronomers can make maps of particular fields of interest before our final images are available.

 

[wollery]

Cool, thanks DeiRen.

 

[devnull]

 

[Hokulele]

Sure they do ...Look on deep field images for rare shots of spidery looking juvenile galaxies drifting away from parent bodies, see the Andromeda Galaxy pairing called variously M31 and M32, and see the small bright, tightly knit cluster like object as an embryo galaxy, maybe Omega Centauri is an embryo galaxy of the Milky Way, possibly both it and M31 will expand to form major galaxies.

What is the average age of the stars in Omega Centauri and how does it compare to the average age of the stars in a galaxy such the Milky Way? How many new stars are forming in Omega Centauri and how does that number compare to the rate of star formation in a galaxy such as the Milky Way? Once you have answered these questions, how likely is it that globular clusters are juvenile galaxies?

 

[martu]

Can anyone translate this? I have no idea what Martin Timothy is claiming and I have read it twice. Which I regret.

 

[slyjoe]

Can anyone translate this? I have no idea what Martin Timothy is claiming and I have read it twice. Which I regret.

Who cares? Astronomy by Microsoft Picture Manager? I didn't expect anything but BS.

However, one of the reasons I read threads like this is that others (wollery, DeiRenDopa, Hokulele) weigh in with real educational information. So the thread is not a total waste.

 

[Martin Timothy]

Maybe Omega Centauri is an embryo galaxy of the Milky Way, possibly both it and M31 will expand to form major galaxies.

“…How likely is it that globular clusters are juvenile galaxies?” Probably unlikely, in this model they are formed in emission nebulae.

In the case of the Andromeda Galaxy which is the closest galaxy, M31 would have been born with it, and will drift away and expand firstly to become a low surface brightness galaxy that will eventually flatten into a disc, when it starts to rotate and spiral arms form, eventually it ignites to become an active galaxy. In the next phase the compressed matter in the spiral arms expands in emission nebulae, to form stars and globular clusters that drift to stations above and below the disc, as the spiral evolves into an ellipse.

The globular clusters form a placenta that effectively shields the galaxy from radiation, and a buffer zone against collisions and impacts with other galaxies.

The nucleus of the galaxy expands and gathers all the dust and debris, then contracts, the material it has collected goes into the torus, the donut of swirling dust and shattered stars that insulates the central surrounds of the black hole, or cluster of BH’s at the center of the galaxy. Centaurus A an exploding galaxy in that constellation, thought to be about twenty six light years away is presently undergoing that process.

Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL, with good sky maps available, that have photographs and catalogues of deep fields, and astrometry and radio locating and red shift data, it does not take long to figure it all out.

“…Raw data taken by missions such as the HST must be publicly released, once the proprietary period is over SDSS, 2dF, COSMOS, and GOODS have similar policies.”

The data that is released is most often too raw, with dazzling columns of figures and seemingly contradictory terms, it is seldom in a form that can be used for home astrometry, the photographs and charts they reproduce never have grid markers, so scale remains a mystery.

Similarly published data for the distance to NGC 253 goes from nine million LY up to just under thirteen million LY, surely radio data from Sagittarius A*, recognized as the heart of the MW galaxy, need only be analyzed with a radio spectrometer to find red shift, then go on from there.

Then since NGC 253 is two hundred and sixty times further away, locate the RS for that object, or multiply 24250, the latest estimate of the distance to A* by 260, and get 6,305 000 LY, less than half the top estimate given by Wikipedia. Use that figure to bring the distant side on galaxy on the same plate as NGC 253, in from 1350 million LY, to 945.75 million LY’s.

All that uncertainty disappears when correct clearly presented data is available, which is not the case at this time.

 

[Reality Check]

Maybe Omega Centauri is an embryo galaxy of the Milky Way, possibly both it and M31 will expand to form major galaxies. “…How likely is it that globular clusters are juvenile galaxies?” Probably unlikely, they are formed in the white of the egg if you will, when the galaxy formed.

White of egg = big cloud of hydrogen gas.

In the case of the Andromeda Galaxy which is the closest galaxy, M31 would have been born with it, and will drift away and expand firstly to become a low surface brightness galaxy that will eventually flatten into a disc, when it starts to rotate and spiral arms form, eventually it ignites to become an active galaxy. The next phase is, all the compressed matter in the spiral arms expands in emission nebulae to form stars that drift to stations above and below the disc, as the spiral evolves into an ellipse.

That is correct.

The globular clusters form a placenta that effectively shields the galaxy from radiation, and a buffer zone against collisions and impacts with other galaxies.

No - they are neither a placenta nor do they protect against radiation or collisions. Perhaps The Cookbook of Galactic Cannibalism will give you a clue.

The nucleus of the galaxy expands and gathers all the dust and debris, then contracts, the material it has collected goes into the torus, the donut of swirling dust and shattered stars that insulates the central surrounds of the black hole, or cluster of BH’s at the center of the galaxy. Centaurus A is an exploding galaxy in that constellation, thought to be about twenty six light years away is presently undergoing that process.

26 light years? That is wrong.

Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL, with good sky maps available, that have photographs and catalogues of deep fields, and astrometry and radio locating and red shift data, it does not take long to figure it all out.

“…Raw data taken by missions such as the HST must be publicly released, once the proprietary period is over SDSS, 2dF, COSMOS, and GOODS have similar policies.”

Read the posts!

The data that is released is most often too raw, with dazzling columns of figures and seemingly contradictory terms, it is seldom in a form that can be used for home astrometry, since the photographs and charts they reproduce never have grid markers, so scale remains a mystery.

So you want massaged data that hides the details?

Similarly published data for the distance to NGC 253 goes from nine million LY up to just under thirteen million LY, surely radio data from Sagittarius A*, recognized as the heart of the MW galaxy, need only be analyzed with a radio spectrometer to find red shift, then go on from there.

10% error is a good measurement in astonomy. If you do not know this then you are ignorant of astronomy which this thread obviously shows.

Then since NGC 253 is two hundred and sixty times further away, locate the RS for that object, or multiply 24250, the latest estimate of the distance to A* by 260, and get 6,305 000 LY, less than half the top estimate given by Wikipedia. Use that figure to bring the distant side on galaxy on the same plate as NGC 253, in from 1350 million LY, to 945.75 million LY’s.

All that uncertainty disappears when correct clearly presented data is available, which is not the case at this time.

Please quote your proof that all galaxies are the same size (a Nobel prize awaits you!).

 

[Tubbythin]

The globular clusters form a placenta that effectively shields the galaxy from radiation, and a buffer zone against collisions and impacts with other galaxies.

I'm really curious to know how you think they do that?

Centaurus A an exploding galaxy in that constellation, thought to be about twenty six light years away is presently undergoing that process.

I'm guessing you're missing a 'million' or something in there. 26 ly is only about 1/100 of the distance to the centre of the Milky Way from here.

Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL, with good sky maps available, that have photographs and catalogues of deep fields, and astrometry and radio locating and red shift data, it does not take long to figure it all out.

How can NASA hijack its own data?

The data that is released is most often too raw, with dazzling columns of figures and seemingly contradictory terms, it is seldom in a form that can be used for home astrometry, the photographs and charts they reproduce never have grid markers, so scale remains a mystery.

So not only are you complaining that NASA and the like who pay for these things in the first place have the almighty cheek to want to look at their results before anyone else, you're complaining that when it is released and available to you for free its not in exactly the form you yourself want it?
You want the data to be released free of charge, immediately and yet also sorted? And you think this is reasonable?

 

[wollery]

Maybe Omega Centauri is an embryo galaxy of the Milky Way, possibly both it and M31 will expand to form major galaxies.

No.

“…How likely is it that globular clusters are juvenile galaxies?” Probably unlikely, in this model they are formed in emission nebulae.

No.

In the case of the Andromeda Galaxy which is the closest galaxy, M31 would have been born with it, and will drift away and expand firstly to become a low surface brightness galaxy that will eventually flatten into a disc, when it starts to rotate and spiral arms form, eventually it ignites to become an active galaxy. In the next phase the compressed matter in the spiral arms expands in emission nebulae, to form stars and globular clusters that drift to stations above and below the disc, as the spiral evolves into an ellipse.

Possibly, but not in the sense that you mean born or evolve.

The globular clusters form a placenta that effectively shields the galaxy from radiation, and a buffer zone against collisions and impacts with other galaxies.

No.

The nucleus of the galaxy expands and gathers all the dust and debris, then contracts, the material it has collected goes into the torus, the donut of swirling dust and shattered stars that insulates the central surrounds of the black hole, or cluster of BH’s at the center of the galaxy. Centaurus A an exploding galaxy in that constellation, thought to be about twenty six light years away is presently undergoing that process.

Sort of.

Astrometry data is essential, so has it been hijacked by NASA and JPL,

No, it hasn't.

with good sky maps available, that have photographs and catalogues of deep fields, and astrometry and radio locating and red shift data, it does not take long to figure it all out.

Given that you "figure it out" using completely inadequate tools, faulty logic and poor maths, I'm not surprised it doesn't take long. I could come to all sorts of stupid conclusions in no time at all if I decided to analyse complex data with ridiculously inadequate tools, and didn't bother to apply rigorous logic and maths.

“…Raw data taken by missions such as the HST must be publicly released, once the proprietary period is over SDSS, 2dF, COSMOS, and GOODS have similar policies.”

The data that is released is most often too raw, with dazzling columns of figures and seemingly contradictory terms, it is seldom in a form that can be used for home astrometry,

That's because the raw data comes that way, it's what we astronomers have to deal with, and we have the computing tools to deal with it. How do you think the finished images appear? Magic?

the photographs and charts they reproduce never have grid markers, so scale remains a mystery.

Not true, many charts and images have scale markers. Seriously, go take a survey of papers on AstroPh, I guarantee there'll be plenty of images with scale markings.

Similarly published data for the distance to NGC 253 goes from nine million LY up to just under thirteen million LY, surely radio data from Sagittarius A*, recognized as the heart of the MW galaxy, need only be analyzed with a radio spectrometer to find red shift, then go on from there.

The redshift of Sag A* cannot be used as a comparison to the redshift of an external galaxy. If you don't understand why not then you really need to take a course in very basic astronomy.

Then since NGC 253 is two hundred and sixty times further away, locate the RS for that object, or multiply 24250, the latest estimate of the distance to A* by 260, and get 6,305 000 LY, less than half the top estimate given by Wikipedia. Use that figure to bring the distant side on galaxy on the same plate as NGC 253, in from 1350 million LY, to 945.75 million LY’s.

Spurious logic and math.

All that uncertainty disappears when correct clearly presented data is available, which is not the case at this time.

Nope. Correct, clearly presented data is available, you just wouldn't know it if it smacked you on the nose.

 

[Hokulele]

Nope. Correct, clearly presented data is available, you just wouldn't know it if it smacked you on the nose.

I suppose he could use a globular cluster to form a placental buffer zone against collisions and impacts with reality.

 

[Dancing David]

My monitor, my beautiful monitor, washed in coffee.

"All that uncertainty disappears when correct clearly presented data is available, which is not the case at this time."



http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080420.html

Look Ma, theyse makin baybies!

 

[Martin Timothy]

The APOD photograph is of the chance alignment of two galaxies, Saganists and Gee Whizzers have declared there is a galactic collision underway, nowhere is there any evidence of that, see the lack of distortion in the spiral arms of both galaxies.

Had there been a collision underway a considerable degree of distortion would be evident, no distortion... no collision.

Download from APOD > Microsoft Picture Manager > Edit > Crop…

See the smaller of the two galaxies has a semi diameter of 177 pixels measured from the brightest part of the central region, to clear space above the active part of the disc, whereas it is 437 pixels to clear space below the brightest part of the center of the larger galaxy at right, see also the distant galaxy at right that subtends an angle of forty pixels on the same frame, giving it a semi diameter of twenty pixels. Check Redshift data to find a similar proportion in the red shift of each object, then deduce distance.

For the fact that both galaxies are close together and look similar, is that they are probably identical twin galaxies spawned of the same galactic egg, that are now drifting apart.

 

[Reality Check]

The APOD photograph is of the chance alignment of two galaxies, Saganists and Gee Whizzers have declared there is a galactic collision underway, nowhere is there any evidence of that, see the lack of distortion in the spiral arms of both galaxies.

Had there been a collision underway a considerable degree of distortion would be evident, no distortion... no collision.

Download from APOD > Microsoft Picture Manager > Edit > Crop…

See the smaller of the two galaxies has a semi diameter of 177 pixels measured from the brightest part of the central region, to clear space above the active part of the disc, whereas it is 437 pixels to clear space below the brightest part of the center of the larger galaxy at right, see also the distant galaxy at right that subtends an angle of forty pixels on the same frame, giving it a semi diameter of twenty pixels. Check Redshift data to find a similar proportion in the red shift of each object, then deduce distance.

For the fact that both galaxies are close together and look similar, is that they are probably identical twin galaxies spawned of the same galactic egg, that are now drifting apart.

The red shift of NGC 2207 and IC 2163 is 2741 ± 15 and 2765 ± 20 km/s respectively. They are at the same redshift and the same distance (within the uncertainty).

How big do you think the galactic chicken was that laid the galactic egg?