back to article Astroboffins spot a new type of galaxy bursting with stars

A team of astronomers has stumbled across a new kind of galaxy that may be the missing piece of the puzzle regarding how ancient galaxies grew to such massive sizes. There is a strange population of galaxies that formed when the universe was less than 2 billion years old compared to the current estimated age of around 14 …

Anonymous Coward

If you think for one second that I'm going to make a Starburst candy joke...

You'd be sadly mistaken, me laddo.

Go Science!

2
0
Bronze badge

arXiv

You can download the full article from https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08662 ; PDF.

3
0
Silver badge

Re: arXiv

Thanks.

0
0
Silver badge
Alien

Could this actually be dark matter becoming un-dark matter?

2
0
Silver badge
Alien

"Could this actually be dark matter becoming un-dark matter?"

Light dark matter?

2
0
Silver badge

Bah!

Coo! Let's go over for a look.

What do you mean, too busy arguing about Pluto to have invented the interstellar overdrive?

So much for "science".

2
0
Ogi
Bronze badge

Re: Bah!

> So much for "science".

You could argue that it isn't Science at fault, but engineering :P

Specifically, Theorists have proposed multiple ways of getting to star systems, of varying "out-there-ness", from theoretical wormholes and warp drives, to more pedestrian systems.

I think the most practical one that could be designed and built with current tech is the Orion propulsion system, however politics and engineering challenges meant it never got anywhere.

The problem, as always, is power. Society thrives on energy, and up until the 60's, humans actively sought out more and more powerful energy sources to drive our societies. However with Nuclear we took steps back, as a race we decided against grasping this even more powerful energy source, and recoiled. Hence the somewhat stagnating quality of life, economy and energy tech advancement (apart from refinements into existing tech).

Eventually we will get kicked in the balls and will have to move forward, but till then we won't really move beyond the current space tech.

1
0
Silver badge

Query....

Quote form article:

"Quasars are highly energetic and bright. It is widely believed that their energy comes from supermassive black holes located in the middle of nearby galaxies, pulling in surrounding material."

I thought that quasars themselves contained the supermassive blackholes; the above quote makes it sound like the energy source is located externally to the quasar?

From wikipedia1:

"A quasar consists of a supermassive black hole surrounded by an orbiting accretion disk of gas. As gas in the accretion disk falls toward the black hole, energy is released in the form of electromagnetic radiation."

Am I wrong in my understanding?

1I know, I know, not always reliable, etc, etc....

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Query....

I thought that quasars themselves contained the supermassive blackholes; the above quote makes it sound like the energy source is located externally to the quasar?

Quasars are also used to refer to the entire galaxy, hence quasars may contain quasars where "quasar" should not be confused with "quasar." ;)

I believe the root of the issue is that when quasars were first spotted in the late 1950s the term applied to the entire object since quasars were poorly observed and more poorly understood. In fact, they were first found by radio astronomers and invisible to optical astronomical instruments until 1962. (When it required 5 serendipitous lunar occultations of quasar 3C 273 and observations by the mighty Hale telescope to pinpoint the optical signature of the quasar.)

It was only later (1980s) that quasars were recognized as corresponding to the accretion disks of supermassive black holes in young galaxies, since black hole theory and observations had to catch up with quasars. The term "quasar" was then narrowed to the active source within the galaxy. So, it used to be acceptable to say, "That tiny, distant smudge is a quasar," but now astroboffins say, "That tiny smudge of a distant galaxy [redshit = 2 to 7] that we're only observing through gravitational lensing contains a quasar."

I'm not sure if both usages are still correct or if using the older one will get you glassed by semantically sensitive astronomers.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Query....

I think Katyanna is garbling things again. The abstract of the preprint harmjschoonhoven dug up makes it clear these astroboffins have found high-star-forming quasar-free galaxies next to quasar host galaxies. It looks like things have then got muddled in El Reg's copy. We probably should report it.

1
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Query....

"Quasars are also used to refer to the entire galaxy, hence quasars may contain quasars where "quasar" should not be confused with "quasar." ;)"

Right. Well then. That clears that up!

1
0
FAIL

Artist's Impression..

Can El Reg PLEASE stop using artists' impressions!

Looking back to my school text books of 60 years ago, an artist's impression of, for example, the moon or Mars looked nothing like the actual photographs from people or landers that visited them. (Assuming no conspiracies at this stage).

Why should I think an artist's impression today is any more accurate?

0
3
Silver badge
Coat

Re: Artist's Impression..

NASA and ESA spend all that money sending an artist out there to paint it, and you complain?

Mine's the spacesuit, thanks.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Artist's Impression..

Can El Reg PLEASE stop using artists' impressions!

Since the starburst galaxies in question were found at a distance of red shift = 2 (or about 11 billion light-years away from us), the best actual images available could be described as "meaningless white blobs that could be anything from a star to a bug on the telescope mirror." It seems like a perfect time for an artist's impression.

0
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: Artist's Impression..

"NASA and ESA spend all that money sending an artist out there to paint it, and you complain?"

Yes, they should be sending professional photographers. As well as providing more accurate images, doing so would mean the missions don't take as long - it's quick and easy to take a photograph, even for a professional when compared to an artist, who would take considerably longer.

1
0

Re: Artist's Impression..

Seriously, that's your problem? Human artists can only see visible light - a much bigger worry!

I've no problem sending artists, but at least give them a few bees and snakes to broaden their spectrum to UV and IR as well. And preferably some space whales - apparently they can see radio frequencies.

2
0
Silver badge

"My God! It's full of stars!"

1
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017