Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

First Planet Of Extragalactic Origins Discovered

  • 19-11-2010 4:55pm
    #1
    Conor108
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,871 ✭✭✭


    ..........But it IS in the Milky Way.

    The headline was 'Researchers Find First Planet from Another Galaxy' so I was excitied but its one of those situations where the headline sounds better than the article.
    The star, known as HIP 13044, resides some 2,000 light years from Earth in a part of the galaxy known as the Helmi stream – a group of stars that belonged to a smaller galaxy that was absorbed by the Milky Way six to nine billion years ago. And the planet – HIP 13044 b, is interesting for a variety of reasons beyond the fact that it’s the first extragalactic planet ever detected.

    But still cool to know! :

    Linky


Comments

  • #2
    rccaulfield
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,015 ✭✭✭rccaulfield


    Saw that on Nasas youtube channel-Interesting alright! Makes me wonder how far can we actually see into Andromeda/other nearby galaxies? Is there a zoom in video anywhere?


  • #3
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    rccaulfield wrote: »
    Saw that on Nasas youtube channel-Interesting alright! Makes me wonder how far can we actually see into Andromeda/other nearby galaxies? Is there a zoom in video anywhere?

    Is there not some hi-res Hubble images of Andromeda or are they doctored?


  • #4
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Is there not some hi-res Hubble images of Andromeda or are they doctored?


    well, consider that the best images we have of pluto are tiny, fuzzy, crappy blobs, and thatll knock any assumptions we can see anything at any kind of close up resolution in andromeda on the head


  • #5
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Helix wrote: »
    well, consider that the best images we have of pluto are tiny, fuzzy, crappy blobs, and thatll knock any assumptions we can see anything at any kind of close up resolution in andromeda on the head

    Pluto is a tiny body with barley any light reflecting, Andromeda is infinitely bigger with billions of stars. Also, Hubble is designed to view things far away, Pluto is relatively close.

    Here's an article that explains my point better...

    Well, ..., thinking that the Hubble can see billions of light year into space is a bit of a misconception. Actually the Hubble telescope can not see an object unless that object emits light. The Hubble is a telescope and telescopes gather light. The more light you gather the more you can see. As a result, if an object is very dim, no matter if it is 250,000 miles or 3.5 billion miles distant Hubble will have a difficult time resolving the object. Contrast that with a very bright object millions of light years distant (e.g. M31) Hubble can gather more of the light coming to us and give us a better image then it can of Pluto that is only 3.5 billion miles away.


  • #6
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Nasa Pic...

    sig06-024_medium.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Pluto is a tiny body with barley any light reflecting, Andromeda is infinitely bigger with billions of stars. Also, Hubble is designed to view things far away, Pluto is relatively close.

    Here's an article that explains my point better...

    Well, ..., thinking that the Hubble can see billions of light year into space is a bit of a misconception. Actually the Hubble telescope can not see an object unless that object emits light. The Hubble is a telescope and telescopes gather light. The more light you gather the more you can see. As a result, if an object is very dim, no matter if it is 250,000 miles or 3.5 billion miles distant Hubble will have a difficult time resolving the object. Contrast that with a very bright object millions of light years distant (e.g. M31) Hubble can gather more of the light coming to us and give us a better image then it can of Pluto that is only 3.5 billion miles away.


    the question was "how far can we see into andromeda" my point was, not bloody very


Advertisement