E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
ESA / NASA / JPL-Caltech
The European Space Agency's Herschel Space Telescope provides an infrared view of a twisted ring at the center of our galaxy.
If you look for signs and portents in the skies, you can't do much better than this: The Herschel Space Telescope has provided the best view yet of an infinity sign at the center of our Milky Way galaxy.
"This is what is so exciting about launching a new space telescope like Herschel," Sergio Molinari of the Institute of Space Physics in Rome said in an image advisory issued today. "We have a new and exciting mystery on our hands, right at the center of our own galaxy."
Molinari is the lead author of a research paper on the twisted ring, appearing in a recent issue of Astrophysical Journal Letters. Portions of the ring have been spotted before, but Herschel's image cuts through the dust at the galactic center to reveal the full structure in submillimeter wavelengths. This version of Herschel's view highlights the shape of the ring, which stretches across more than 600 light-years:
ESA / NASA / JPL-Caltech
This version of the Herschel image highlights the infinity sign or twisted ring at the Milky Way's center.
"We have looked at this region at the center of the Milky Way many times before in the infrared," said Alberto Noriega-Crespo of NASA's Infrared Processing and Analysis Center at Caltech, one of the paper's co-authors. "But when we looked at the high-resolution images using Herschel's submillimeter wavelengths, the presence of a ring is quite clear."
Astronomers say the ring is a dense, twisted tube of cold gas mixed with dust — and a cradle for infant stars. They used readings from the ground-based Nobeyama Radio Observatory in Japan to determine how fast gas was circulating around the ring. The radio observations showed that the ring is rolling as a unit, at the same speed as the rest of our galaxy.
The main mystery has to do with how the ring got twisted. The origins of the structure of galactic centers are not well understood, but astronomers suspect that our Milky Way's shape may have been affected by gravitational interactions with nearby galaxies — perhaps including the Andromeda Galaxy, our big celestial neighbor.
There's another mystery as well: The center of the twisted ring does not correspond with the actual center of our galaxy, a supermassive black hole known as Sagittarius A*. Noriega-Crespo said it's not clear why the centers don't match up.
"There's still so much about our galaxy to discover," he said.
Amen...
More about Herschel and our bent-up galaxy:
- Greatest hits from Herschel
- Is Milky Way bent like a sombrero? Si!
- Telescope witnesses Milky Way starbirth
- Slideshow: Month in Space Pictures
In addition to Molinari and Noriega-Crespo, authors of "A 100-Parsec Elliptical and Twisted Ring of Cold and Dense Molecular Clouds Revealed by Herschel Around the Galactic Center" include J. Bally, M. Compiegne, J.P. Bernard, D. Paradis, P. Martin, L. Testi, M. Barlow, T. Moore, R. Plume, B. Swinyard, A. Zavagno, L. Calzoletti, A.M. Di Giorgio, D. Elia, F. Faustini, P. Natoli, M. Pestalozzi, S. Pezzuto, F. Piacentini, G. Polenta, D. Polychroni, E. Schisano, A. Traficante, M. Veneziani, C. Battersby, M. Burton, S. Carey, Y. Fukui, J.Z. Li, S.D. Lord, L. Morgan, F. Motte, F. Schuller, G.S. Stringfellow, J.C. Tan, M. A. Thompson, D. Ward-Thompson, G. White and G. Umana.
Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page or following @b0yle on Twitter. You can also add me to your Google+ circle, and check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
Discoveries like this is why the James Webb Telescope needs to fly.
I agree, there is so much for us to learn. I know I'm going from nano to macro, but my first thought when viewing this image is a string (theory).
Dave Snyder
My thought exactly. To cancel the JWST now because of mismanagement is criminal IMO. Just hand out the necessary pink slips and bring in the people that can get this thing launched.
Isn't this a bit of a reach. It doesn't look like a twisted ring at all. It looks like what people want it to look like. Then, the super-imposed that ring over it and said "look, its a twisted ring", sort-of.
You are looking at one presentation of the phenomenon in a visual light image, which probably is done with false colour anyway. as the article states: ""We have looked at this region at the center of the Milky Way many times before in the infrared," said Noriega-Crespo (,...) "But when we looked at the high-resolution images using Herschel's submillimeter wavelengths, the presence of a ring is quite clear."
If you don't understand what the above means, get a dictionary and do a bit more research until you undertsand it. The statement in your post reveals that you don't understand the nature of this research. I don't say that in anasty way, just as a staement of fact. You are questioning the conclusions of people with PhD's in astronomy. They have spent years and years of study in the subject and they know what they are talking about.
I am not an astronomer, but was reasonably versed in physics. A structure such as this is perfectly reasonable if you consider that stars being ripped apart at a blackhole's event horizon throw out not only energy, but massive amounts of hot hydrogen and helium gas. We are a galaxy that has arms, which means that in certain areas where those arms touch the event horizon larger amounts of this material will be pushed outward at different times. This means elipses of different dimensions will be pushed outward relative to the number of stars being destroyed. The arms themselves have areas where the stars are distributed unevenly on the vertical axis of the Milky Way.
This totally explains the "twisted" and off-center ring of gases AND the reason that new star formation is occuring there, as these gases will be recompressed by the extreme gravity environment into formations dense enough to allow solar ignitions. Then these new stars will again be pulled inward toward the event horizon.
My understanding is that excess materials in the accretion disc should be shot out of the poles of the black hole's influence, not the sides.
Jherek, I know some PhD's that are some of the dumbest people I have ever met.
I'm not knocking these people, but just because someone gets a Doctorate does not mean they have a lick of sense.
Tony, I once knew a woman with a P.H.D. in psychiatry, While driving to a function pulled out her eye makeup, turned her mirror , and proceded to hold a stick in her eye, while taking her EYES OFF THE ROAD!!! Then got mad when I had her pull over for me to drive!!! Brilliant?, yes. Practical?????? uh not so much!!!!LOL
I agree. But there are some that THINK they are brilliant and are just dumb.
Tony your particular experience with a few people is hardly convincing proof that an astronomer doesn't know what he is talking about in regards to astronomical phenomena.
Furthermore, what do you mean by a "lick of sense""? Foolish in every day matters? I agree a person can be silly in regards to everyday matters but that does not mean they do not know their subject area inside and out. Einstein was a genius at mathematics and physics but could not remember to put his socks on in the morning.
Snow - This image could be showing the perturbed space around the black hole, but since they said that the center of the loop did not match up exactly Sagitarius A, my thoughts would turn to the possible effects of devouring a smaller galaxy somewhere in our galatic past.
Jherek, as I stated in my first response, "I'm not knocking THESE people...". I should have highlighted "these".
However, please don't wave education or status in my face and expect me to respect you or anyone else. Educated doesn't equal smart or intelligent. Position doesn't equal wisdom or leadership.
Einstein is a good example of a brilliant person who had a PhD. Many discoveries were made by people who did not have an education or limited education beyond self education. Much of this happened in the past. Unfortunately, there are a lot of amateurs out there today that are brilliant, but since they don't have the "right education" they are not taken seriously in today's structure.
Another wonderful thing about those highly educated in their fields is that they tend to stick with what is known. One of the things about Einstein was that he was thinking "outside the box" before his education, during his education and beyond.
Anyway, all I'm saying is that educated "does not necessarily mean" brilliant or intelligent.
Tony your do a great job of derailing the discussion and totally missing my point and the point of the article in question.
While you are knocking other people for not being up to your high standards of cleverness, you might want to look in the mirror and take that plank out of your eye before you take the speck out of another's eye.
Your criticism of the credibility of qualified astronomers is absurd and obtuse and I sincerely doubt you know anything about astronomy since you resort to ad hominem attacks on those who do, rather than offer any contrary opinions as to the validity of their data. Such an approach is meaningless and puerile.
You are now marked as "Ignore This Author". I don't waste my time reading the words of people such as yourself.
'Bye!
I see you did not read what I said. I'm not attacking astronomers. I'm stating that PhD's, just because they have a PhD, does not mean they are credible.
I'm not saying anything about the article, as you assume in your post above. That was Starfox.
Jane Goodall, who was brilliant and had a PhD, made enormous mistakes while observing chimps. Astronomy PhDs can make mistakes as well, as can Economist, as stated by others below.
Obviously, you are blinded by something. What, we may never know. Perhaps you feel your PhD is being attacked?
Any intelligent person who is trying to understand a new observation makes mistakes. This how you learn. Edison said it best, and I paraphrase, I didn't have a thousand mistakes (failures) I found a thousand different ways to not make a light bulb.
And that, TReed, is great. Making mistakes and learning from them is great. Making mistakes and claiming the mistake is the gospel truth is not.
Two professors where I work, each with a PhD. One learns new theories and incorporates them in their lessons, constantly improving her classes and updating her information. She's constantly worried she's not giving her students enough. One has been teaching the same crap for over 30 years, never updates the curriculum and constantly gives students outdated info. She also won't even consider a different view, even for an academic discussion.
I have no problem with one of these, I do the other. I don't have a problem with people with PhD's. I have a problem with people who think they are all that because they have a PhD, I have a problem with people who, since they have a PhD, cannot be wrong. I have a problem with people who think no one without a PhD could have an intelligent thought. (a lot of Einstein's theories came to him before he had a PhD).
Sorry for the rant.
This goes along with a story this week discussing that a person has a higher death risk with a complex disease, like cancer, by going to an older, seasoned doctor instead of a new doctor (practicing for 5 years or less). The younger doctors have trained in the latest procedures, whereas the older doctors don't have the time to keep up to date.
And Tony, I understand you perfectly clear. It is somewhat scary, that you are wasting your money, when you take a class and you know more than instructor. And unfortunately your description of the two you work with, is where one cares about what they are doing, the other doesn't.
BTW - rant on. It clears your mind.
Or perhaps an infinity symbol?
a twisted ring.. from OUR perspective.. and a circular whatever from any other view
Our psychological predisposition to make sense of everything we see leads us to believe whatever we see must be true. I am often intriqued with the reports of exciting discoveries around us. To look at this picture from another perspective we must determine what we are seeing to ascertain the depth of this view. Illusions can make us interpret visions quite incorrectly. I'm sure with computer re-imaging and enhanced filtering techniques that this image can be sharpened, colored and even rotated along several plane views and layered to surrounding stars for an explosive view that would render art afficiados speechless. If I could borow Victor Hugo's literary prodigy this painted canvas would literally stun it's viewers.
I believe their are others out there and they stay plenty far from us. Most people don`t really like kids around ,touching things they shouldn`t brecking things that aren`t theirs.
Beautiful!
And only 8,000 years old....Amazing!
Don't be silly. It's only 5,000 years old. lol
Is it just me, or are there two gaseous spheres at the center, one high, one low?
Fascinating stuff. Thanks NASA.
It's a great image but It's so abstract that seeing what they think looks like some kind of sign is far reaching. Next thing they will be saying is that they see a picture of Jesus.
You are looking at one presentation of the phenomenon in a visual light image, which probably is done with false colour anyway. as the article states: ""We have looked at this region at the center of the Milky Way many times before in the infrared," said Noriega-Crespo (,...) "But when we looked at the high-resolution images using Herschel's submillimeter wavelengths, the presence of a ring is quite clear."
If you don't understand what the above means, get a dictionary and do a bit more research until you undertsand it. The statement in your post reveals that you don't understand the nature of this research. I don't say that in anasty way, just as a staement of fact. You are questioning the conclusions of people with PhD's in astronomy. They have spent years and years of study in the subject and they know what they are talking about.
Jherek i was with you until you said "You are questioning the conclusions of people with PhD's in astronomy"! After most economists failed to identify the fundamental problems with what turned into a housing meltdown, I have started believing in common sense just a little bit.
Hey PJ--it wasn't the (politically neutral) economists, it was the politicians. The partisan economists said whatever would get them funded.
PJ I was talking about astronomy not economics.
Economics is a study and NOT a science. There are no fundamental agreed upon and uniformly applicable laws that govern economics; just lots of arguments between economists about which model is better. Economics compares to astronomy like alchemy compares to chemistry.
You are talking apples and oranges when you compare economics to astronomy.
If you ask me, pull back and look at the whole picture on the right side - the blue areas look like a hand (semi-closed fist) with a finger making a circle, the center looks like a bracelet (where the supposed center of the infinity sign is) and then the upper arm turns or fades from a red fire. That is just me. Others of course will be sure to argue with me. They will say they see the Pink Panther or possibly a short skirt from the British show, "Have you been served".
kinda looks like souls gathering, its simply amazing at the effects
it's very clear in the second image
And the ONE who Created It, Shaped it and put it there is The One True Living GOD-YAHWEH! Glory and Praise To HIS Name Forever and Ever!
Silly.
No weh it's the FSM.
So, Stumbly, are you saying that this is the great Spaghetti O?
Actually, kinda looks like a giant penus inside the blue area.
This is like the scientists' version of Our Lady of Guadalupe in a tortilla.
OK!! that one made me laugh!!
Any chance that this is the result of our galaxy's interaction with Sagittarius?
www.astro.virginia.edu/~mfs4n/sgr/
That's the problem with infinity, you never see it coming. And when you think you're finally there, you find out it moved further on down the galaxy.
Look REAL hard ( and a bit cross-eyed )....there it is....
4 2
I'm positive the space program isn't over. There is a replacement craft that will be unveiled at some point, and I'm pretty sure that it's a plane that can achieve escape velocity, then equipped with thrusters to fly in space... basically, a space plane.
You know why, because it's what I would of built.
We are seeing a 2-dimensional picture, the astronomers have distance data as well. If you could plot the data on a 3d 'picture' it might be clearer.
I agree that we may be having a knee-jerk reaction; like seeing an image of the virgin mary in a dorito chip. In all likelihood, the shape of this gaseous "infinity image" is meaningless in relationship to the center of our galaxy and other similar gases within the galaxy.
This is actually interesting, fascinating in fact; I love this kind of stuff. But it's also another opportunity for scientists to "prove" themselves wrong about things they were saying were "fact" 20 years ago. Same kind of thing happened with Hubble. That I find ironic.
Why are we wasting money, tax dollars, on stuff we will never visit or visit us? Shouldn't we solve a few problems here on the blue-green marble before we worry about such distant things?
Because understanding the universe may solve our energy needs. No one can foretell what can come from the things that are newly discovered. Besides, this picture is of our galaxy, our neighborhood and we shold know what os going on in our neighborhood. It is truly sad that you can't see that.
Nice eye candy. We live in a very wonderful universe. Unfortunately the people who populate our planet are mostly barbarians who have yet to leave the animal state. If you can get them to live in peace without greed and prejudice...then I'll be impressed.