Huge Galaxy Collision!!!

[Dr. Spitzer]

Check out Spitzer's newest press release:

 

Four galaxies are slamming into each other and kicking up billions of stars in one of the largest cosmic smash-ups ever observed.

 

The clashing galaxies, spotted by NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, will eventually merge into a single, behemoth galaxy up to 10 times as massive as our own Milky Way. This rare sighting provides an unprecedented look at how the most massive galaxies in the universe form.

 

"Most of the galaxy mergers we already knew about are like compact cars crashing together," said Kenneth Rines of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, Mass. "What we have here is like four sand trucks smashing together, flinging sand everywhere." Rines is lead author of a new paper accepted for publication in Astrophysical Journal Letters.

 

Here's the rest: Press Release: NASA's Spitzer Spies Monster Galaxy Pileup

 

its really amazing to think of just how MASSIVE this stuff is...

[Tormod]

Brilliant!

 

I was giving a presentation for kids on collisions in space and ended with galaxy collisions. I have three more days left of these presentations so this news is spot on for me. :)

[Buffy]

We were watching The Universe a few days ago and they had some good stuff in the "Alien Galaxies" episode on collisions (although I was a bit put off by the fact that they call all those other galaxies "alien"... :) ). The animations of what happens when they do is fascinating and pretty too!

 

Whirling points of light,

Buffy

[coldcreation]

Check out Spitzer's newest press release:

 

Here's the rest: Press Release: NASA's Spitzer Spies Monster Galaxy Pileup

 

its really amazing to think of just how MASSIVE this stuff is...

 

 

The artists rendition makes it look like a collision is occuring. However, if you look at the original image from NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope telescope (along with WIYN and Chandra X-ray Observatory) you will notice that this galaxy cluster is in a quasi-stable self-gravitating equilibrium configuration.

 

The idea that these galaxies will "ultimately merge into a single gargantuan galaxy" is just that: an idea. So far, there is no evidence that a merging of the objects is occuring. There are many examples of where it has been supposed a merger is taking place, where in fact, there is no evidence of merging (aside from the fact that the galaxies are in close proximity).

 

Certainly Halton Arp will claim the outer objects of the cluster are being ejected from the inner parent galaxies. That is another interpretation.

 

In sum, the galaxies are either gravitationally collapsing onto each other, expanding (ejecting) away from one another, or they are in equilibrium. I favor the latter for a variety of impelling reasons.

 

 

Differentiating between these three possibilities will be extremely important for the future of astronomy as well as cosmology.

 

 

Edited to add: Is there a high definition image of the system available online? For example, the HUDF image was (is) available online, a hefty 130 MB version.

 

 

CC

[coldcreation]

.

 

 

 

Ok, I found a slightly higher resolution image of the CL0958+4702 system.

 

 

http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2007/cl0958/cl0958.tif

 

 

This is only a 4.6 MB image: a far cry from the HUDF image (130 MB or so) available online. But is is still better than the small press release photo, and by far much better than the wispy tendrils and compact entrails shown in the overproduced, fanciful artist rendition.

 

Dr. Spitzer, it would be of general interest to provide online images in the infrared, visible light and X-ray seperately, as well as the composite image seen here (if they are available online please provide a link).

 

 

Dr. Spitzer,

 

As a caption to the above image it is written: "The center of this composite image shows four large galaxies that are colliding and will ultimately merge. "

 

Please provide evidence that backs up the above statement. Note: the "plume" itself is not evidence of merging since a plume would also exist if objects were ejected rather than the result of catastrophic collision. Note too that a plume could potentially exist under certain quasi-equilibrium conditions.

 

Proof, or, rather, evidence from the plume can only come when redshifts of all the objects and plume material (stars, etc.) have been determined (I assume redshifts are known for this group). In addition, it would be helpfull to show the contour lines that outline, say, the optical density of the system. Extolling cooling flow could be beneficial as well. Alignment or distribution of the objects should be considered. Luminous bridges connecting the objects (if any) should be examined.

 

After cosmological redshifts of each object is determined (I assume they are very close for these objects if they are to be considered close companions under the standard model guidlines) intrinsic redshifts need to be isolated to see which direction the objects tend to move, if at all.

 

Could you please provide the redshift of each object in the system, and explain how the redshift shows the objects are moving closer to one another. Also, has redshift been determined for the plume? What kind of tidal stripping is observed?

 

 

Final question: Should this system not undergo scrutiny (corroboration) from the Hubble Space Telescope (or a large ground-based telescope) before jumping to conclusions prematurely about possible merging (cannibalism) or dynamical evolution that ultimately may turn out to be erroneous?

 

We should not lose sight of the crucial assumtions that might be in error in very important ways. The shoot-from-the-hip conclusion universally adopted that cannibalism or merging is taking place in this (and in other) systems merely reflects our ignorance of the details of galaxy formation and dynamical evolution under extreme and under equilibrium conditions, as well as the absence of compelling alternative considerations.

 

Thanks in advance

 

CC

[Pluto]

Hello All

 

Not only are they merging but there are active so called black holes that are ejecting matter at top speed. Nice to have a party there.

[Dr. Spitzer]

okay, so I have to go find the scientists (which in this building can be kinda difficult) so it might take me some time to answer your 'hard science' questions... But I will answer what I can now.

 

This is only a 4.6 MB image: a far cry from the HUDF image (130 MB or so) available online. But is is still better than the small press release photo, and by far much better than the wispy tendrils and compact entrails shown in the overproduced, fanciful artist rendition.

 

These are all of the images we have released on this subject so far:

spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2007-13/visuals.shtml

And as far as I know the largest image we ever released on line was 8.6 and it covered a huge range of sky. You have to remember that infrared imagery can't be too high-def and that we are taking images of very small sections of the sky and of every distant objects.

 

And as for the artist rendition - Tim Pyle is very good at his job and does his best to look at the scientific data and present complex astronomy concepts in a simple, beautiful way so that people without a scientific background can understand them.

 

Final question: Should this system not undergo scrutiny (corroboration) from the Hubble Space Telescope (or a large ground-based telescope) before jumping to conclusions prematurely about possible merging (cannibalism) or dynamical evolution that ultimately may turn out to be erroneous?

 

The images were taken by Spitzer/IRAC, Chandra/ACIS, WIYN/OPTIC. And its not like any one telescope is actually writing the papers. This research was done primarily by K. Rines (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics).

 

Here is the link to the original paper, which includes the most information avaliable: arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011

[coldcreation]

okay, so I have to go find the scientists (which in this building can be kinda difficult) so it might take me some time to answer your 'hard science' questions... But I will answer what I can now.

 

Thanks for trying.

 

 

 

These are all of the images we have released on this subject so far:

spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2007-13/visuals.shtml

And as far as I know the largest image we ever released on line was 8.6 and it covered a huge range of sky. You have to remember that infrared imagery can't be too high-def and that we are taking images of very small sections of the sky and of every distant objects.

 

The size of the patch of sky makes no difference. What counts is the number of pixels, or the size, if you will. The HUDF image was a small chunk of sky too. So an image can be high-rez whether it contains 10,000 galaxies or just one star. 8.6 MB is small compared to the HUDF.

 

And as for the artist rendition - Tim Pyle is very good at his job and does his best to look at the scientific data and present complex astronomy concepts in a simple, beautiful way so that people without a scientific background can understand them.

 

So they say. Nothing speaks louder than the real thing; especially in astronomy, but too for Vanity Fair.

 

 

 

The images were taken by Spitzer/IRAC, Chandra/ACIS, WIYN/OPTIC. And its not like any one telescope is actually writing the papers. This research was done primarily by K. Rines (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics).

 

True, telescopes do not write papers :confused: . I would still recomend that the HST be pointed in the direction of CL0958+4702

 

Here is the link to the original paper, which includes the most information avaliable: arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011

 

Thanks. This is what I was looking for. I see some of the redshifts have been measured. I will read the work, then I'll be back.

 

Note that the paper start off with "We have identified perhaps the largest major galaxy merger ever seen."..[my highlight].

 

Perhaps the press release could have benefited from the same caginess (especially in light of the possibility that these objects may, in reality, not at all be merging).

 

 

 

CC

[coldcreation]

okay, so I have to go find the scientists (which in this building can be kinda difficult) so it might take me some time to answer your 'hard science' questions... But I will answer what I can now.

 

Have you found anyone?

 

 

 

The images were taken by Spitzer/IRAC, Chandra/ACIS, WIYN/OPTIC. And its not like any one telescope is actually writing the papers. This research was done primarily by K. Rines (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics).

 

Here is the link to the original paper, which includes the most information avaliable: http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011

 

I found nowhere in this entire paper, http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011, evidence for the claim that four galaxies are catastrophically merging, or on course to do so. Could you, Dr. Spitzer, please show where (if I have missed something important) the evidence, if any, primarily resides?

 

Please include, if you will, the figures conscerning the probability of association, i.e., if there is a physical association that exists between the objects present in the photographic plate (in the CL0958+4702 system), the probability that the observed configuration is not a chance occurence (that would be one minus the chance probability). And too, the chance probability that not two, not three, but four objects would all be traveling towards the same point in space.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

 

CC

[Pluto]

Hello All

 

Interesting link on merger with the Milky Way.

 

SDSC Blue Horizon Simulations

[Hilton Ratcliffe]

Hi all,

 

The huge variety of galaxies and the prevalence of core turbulence, together with observations of multiple galaxies in close proximity to one another (or as with the Milky Way small galaxies inside a larger "parent"), leads one to wonder whether they show these properties because of collisions. I suggest reference to the work of Curtis Struck on collisions: Galaxy Collisions astro-ph/9908269 and astro-ph/0511335. The complexity is daunting. We cannot resolve the motion of the collisional galaxies relative to one another, so whether or not they are in fact colliding is, as Coldcreation points out, just guesswork. The only other clue we have AFAIK is what overlaid isophotes look like. In the case of quasars at least, these would suggest that the galaxies are in fact moving apart, supporting the contention of Arp, the Burbidges, and others that the QSOs are being ejected.

 

The wonderful thing about astrophysics at this level is that the more we see, the more we are compelled to admit that we know less about the cosmos than we thought we did :shrug::).

 

Regards

Hilton

[Pluto]

Hello All

 

What happens when a super cluster of galaxies collide

 

 

Galaxies collide at impossible speeds - USATODAY.com

 

Two galaxy clusters have been spotted colliding at what was previously thought to be impossibly high speeds.

 

Astronomers estimate that the galaxy cluster collision known as Abell 576 involves two clusters-each containing hundreds of galaxies-crashing into one another at over 7 million miles per hour (3,300 km/s).

 

 

Now thats a wing ding of a party.

 

Some one should tell them that the universe is expanding. Or put a sign up.

[freehoodiatrial]

Hello All

 

Not only are they merging but there are active so called black holes that are ejecting matter at top speed. Nice to have a party there.

 

Hi, do you have some images you can give me of the black hole portions of this new discovery?

 

If this is new, then how can they make such a quick decision on it being a merge rather than as previously desribed to be in equilibrium? Space is so amazing and scary at the same time! Thanks for the information.

 

I didn't wait for the 4 mb TIF file to download. I guess I can open that extension on my computer, so I will try again. I thought my browser was broken, but I realize now that it may just be the size. I cannot imagine a photo being 130 mb. Wish I had a print out of that for my wall!

[Pluto]

Hello Free

 

I'm using another persons computer. When I get my on line I will post the images.

 

Until than google for jets, stellar black holes supermassive black holes and M87 galaxy.

 

Let me know what you find or wish to discusss.

 

SPACE.com -- Stellar Black Hole is Most Massive Known in Milky Way

 

[30.03] Jets from Stellar-Mass Black Holes

 

IngentaConnect Growth of stellar mass black holes in galactic nuclei

[coldcreation]

okay, so I have to go find the scientists (which in this building can be kinda difficult) so it might take me some time to answer your 'hard science' questions... But I will answer what I can now.

 

Have you found anyone?

 

 

 

The images were taken by Spitzer/IRAC, Chandra/ACIS, WIYN/OPTIC. And its not like any one telescope is actually writing the papers. This research was done primarily by K. Rines (Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics).

 

Here is the link to the original paper, which includes the most information avaliable: http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011

 

I found nowhere in this entire paper, http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0011, evidence for the claim that four galaxies are catastrophically merging, or on course to do so. Could you, Dr. Spitzer, please show where (if I have missed something important) the evidence, if any, primarily resides?

 

Please include, if you will, the figures conscerning the probability of association, i.e., if there is a physical association that exists between the objects present in the photographic plate (in the CL0958+4702 system), the probability that the observed configuration is not a chance occurence (that would be one minus the chance probability). And too, the chance probability that not two, not three, but four objects would all be traveling towards the same point in space.

 

 

CC

 

Dr. Spitzer,

 

Would you mind answering some of my points? I see you started a new thread without doing so.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

 

 

 

CC

[New-ideas]

The pictures on this thread are fairly dam amazing, I have a question though. You'll forgive me if these questions seem silly or stupid, I'm only 16 so my understanding of the cosmo's may have not quite got there yet :confused:

I'm aware quite a few galaxies (including our own) rovolve around a supermassive blackhole of some kind, my question is, what happens when two galaxies that orbit supermassive blackholes collide as is happening here, what happens when the two blackholes meet? does one cancel the other out, or is some process of merging involved?

I'd be grateful for any answers anyone can provide..

Thanks!

[Jay-qu]

The pictures on this thread are fairly dam amazing, I have a question though. You'll forgive me if these questions seem silly or stupid, I'm only 16 so my understanding of the cosmo's may have not quite got there yet :)

I'm aware quite a few galaxies (including our own) rovolve around a supermassive blackhole of some kind, my question is, what happens when two galaxies that orbit supermassive blackholes collide as is happening here, what happens when the two blackholes meet? does one cancel the other out, or is some process of merging involved?

I'd be grateful for any answers anyone can provide..

Thanks!

Hey New-ideas, dont worry not many people do know whats going on out there that are even more than twice your age :confused:

 

I can tell you they most certainly wont cancel out, but when massive galaxy collisions happen, most of the matter passes straight through because most of a galaxy consists of empty space, with the mass concentrated in stars.