Posted on 05/23/2011 8:55:01 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has been trained on a single variable star that in 1923 altered the course of modern astronomy. V1 is a special class of pulsating star called a Cepheid variable that can be used to make reliable measurements of large cosmic distances. Credit: NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)
(Excerpt) Read more at nasa.gov ...
"Your browser or your browser's settings are not supported. To get the best experience possible, please download a compatible browser. If you know your browser is up to date, you should check to ensure that javascript is enabled."
s/b
"If you find this obnoxious boilerplate offensive, be assured that most of the world does, too."
The remedy is, quit relying on Javascript to push content, you simpleminded bastards.
The star helped Hubble show that Andromeda was beyond our galaxy and settled the debate over the status of the spiral nebulae. The universe became a much bigger place after Hubble's discovery, much to the dismay of astronomer Harlow Shapley, who believed the fuzzy nebulae were part of our Milky Way.Well, this is one of *those* topics, but for a different (though obvious) reason.
· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Prior to the discovery of V1 many astronomers thought spiral nebulae, such as Andromeda, were part of our Milky Way galaxy. Others weren't so sure. In fact, astronomers Shapley and Heber Curtis held a public debate in 1920 over the nature of these nebulae. During the debate, Shapley championed his measurement of 300,000 light-years for the size of the Milky Way. Though Shapley overestimated its size, he was correct in asserting that the Milky Way was much larger than the commonly accepted dimensions. He also argued that spiral nebulae were much smaller than the giant Milky Way and therefore must be part of our galaxy. But Curtis disagreed. He thought the Milky Way was smaller than Shapley claimed, leaving room for other island universes beyond our galaxy.Shapley was just plain wrong, calling him correct when he was so very, very wrong is just a courtesy to a Marxist piece of trash that deserves none.
· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar · | ||
bump
|
Please add my name to this list! I have been hoping to find a good web site to view such photos if you can suggest one, Sc.
Cephid Variables must be female stars.
Article says they blink, and have a 31 day ‘period’.
“Well, this is one of *those* topics, but for a different (though obvious) reason. “
Schadenfreude would work better were the dirty rotten bastard still alive. If it weren’t him there would have been another who’d have made life difficult for non-uniformitarians. It can’t be long before you find a reason to dig Sagan up so we can mock him instead. I’d like that even more.
altered the course of modern astronomyNot quite the same thing as "changing the universe".
Misuse of the anthropic principle?
Dave Soderblom of the Space Telescope Science InstituteI love it when scientists talk in technical terms.
"It's a landmark discovery that proved the universe is bigger and chock full of galaxies...."
It worked fine in my Firefox 4.0.1
I always liked this photo for how it accentuates the incredible world we live in and the value of life. Cheers.
My favorite recollection of Sagan was an old “educational” video of a young Sagan who kept confusing red shift and blue shift. He hadn’t quite got the rote memorization, editing out of the past, and plagiarism down that served him so well later in life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.