Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

New Class of Galaxy Discovered 104

fructose sends along this excerpt from Space Daily: "A team of astronomers has discovered a group of rare galaxies called the 'Green Peas' with the help of citizen scientists working through an online project called Galaxy Zoo. The finding could lend unique insights into how galaxies form stars in the early universe. ... Of the 1 million galaxies in Galaxy Zoo's image bank, only about 250 are in the new 'Green Pea' type. Galaxy Zoo is claiming this as a success of the 'citizen scientist' effort that they spearheaded. ... The galaxies, which are between 1.5 billion and 5 billion light years away, are 10 times smaller than our own Milky Way galaxy and 100 times less massive. But surprisingly, given their small size, they are forming stars 10 times faster than the Milky Way. 'They're growing at an incredible rate,' said Kevin Schawinski, a postdoctoral associate at Yale and one of Galaxy Zoo's founders. 'These galaxies would have been normal in the early universe, but we just don't see such active galaxies today. Understanding the Green Peas may tell us something about how stars were formed in the early universe and how galaxies evolve.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Class of Galaxy Discovered

Comments Filter:
  • by HasselhoffThePaladin ( 1191269 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @10:38AM (#28866233)

    Given that it is the expansion of the galaxy that causes the creation of matter, it makes sense that smaller, more active galaxies would be able to create new stars.

    I don't know how to respond to this statement. This is the tenth time I've written something before erasing it to start over to sound less inflammatory. I guess I'd just like a citation to this "theory" of the diffusion of matter begetting more matter. It sounds like some whacked-out solid state universe theory.

  • by DoubleEdd ( 178052 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @10:39AM (#28866251)

    It's not quite so straightforward due to the complexities of how the peas are actually selected, I think. http://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.4155v1 is the paper - section 2 and 5 might be of interest with respect to this sort of question.

  • by nedlohs ( 1335013 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @10:40AM (#28866265)

    It's standard English and has been for hundreds of years.

    Yes mathematically it makes no sense, but language isn't mathematics. And look you understood that it meant 1/10th and 1/100th so from a linguistically it expressed what was intended just fine, even to people who think in math instead of language.

    Unless you're arguing "smaller' needs a qualifier to indicate it means volume. Even that seems a stretch since there are only two options, volume and mass, and the mass is taken by the 100x part.

  • Re:Why a new class? (Score:3, Informative)

    by DoubleEdd ( 178052 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @10:45AM (#28866335)

    HST images were needed to investigate the morphology - the shapes just couldn't be picked out in the original images as the galaxies are so compact. However, it looks like a number of them have complex shapes hinting that they are or have recently been involved in mergers with other galaxies. We don't have much to go on at the moment though.

  • Re:Why a new class? (Score:3, Informative)

    by DoubleEdd ( 178052 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @10:47AM (#28866381)

    Basically young stars have a different kind of emission to old stars. You can essentially count up the amount of light from young stars and work out how much star formation you need to have that population.

  • Re:Why a new class? (Score:4, Informative)

    by wanerious ( 712877 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @11:08AM (#28866697) Homepage
    If you look at a population of stars and see lots of blue or UV light, it must be coming from very hot, massive stars. We also know that these stars don't live very long, so they must have formed recently --- this area must then be a region of star formation. The degree to which the overall spectrum is skewed towards the blue gives a rough indication of the star formation rate.
  • by cayle clark ( 166742 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @11:39AM (#28867239) Homepage

    I've spent a lot of hours classifying galaxies at GalaxyZoo. The abstract sense of making a tiny contribution to research gets thin real fast. What keeps me coming back is the surprise factor. You'll click away sorting boring balls and streaks and then up pops a perfect barred-spiral, or a swooshy collision or an oddity that doesn't fit any of the categories, and wakes you up. There are millions of galaxies in the deep-field surveys that are the source, most of them never looked at individually, and you never know what the software will toss up next.

    The site has an active and supportive forum community, and it was in the forums that the users -- not the astronomy post-docs who run the site -- first commented on the little green balls, suggested they might represent a unique class, and started collecting them as posts on a thread. There are user-run threads going on for other odd types of galaxy some of which might ultimately turn into research topics as well.

  • by BradleyAndersen ( 1195415 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @11:46AM (#28867369)
    Mod parent up! (and me, since I was nice enough to suggest it) :)
  • by Chris Burke ( 6130 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @11:56AM (#28867607) Homepage

    Draw it on a number line: 10 is ten times larger than 1 because it is ten times farther from 0 on a number line. 1 is ten times less than x because it is ten times farther from y on a number line. Go on, fill in the values for x and y.

    No, 10 is ten times larger than 1 because the ratio of their sizes is 10:1.

    1 is ten times smaller than 10 because the ratio of their sizes is 1:10.

    It's about relative not absolute size difference. That's why they say "10 times smaller" rather than "10 units smaller". "Times" is your clue that you're dealing with multiplication, i.e. ratios.

    The language is perfectly clear, correct, and unambiguous. No, your reading comprehension is not fine.

  • by QuoteMstr ( 55051 ) <dan.colascione@gmail.com> on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @01:54PM (#28870009)

    The OP's insane speculation reminds me of the Electric Universe [wikipedia.org] crazies. Every field has its lunatic fringe.

  • by DragonWriter ( 970822 ) on Wednesday July 29, 2009 @04:08PM (#28872421)

    Personally,, I find a picture of the universe that has a definite beginning to be a form of stealth creationism.

    There may have been a time when we didn't have tools for explaining the universe besides appeals to personal aesthetics, but today we've got things like formulating hypothesis that explain past observations and lead to empirically falsifiable predictions of future observations, and then constructing experimenets to attempt to falsify those predictions.

  • by physburn ( 1095481 ) on Thursday July 30, 2009 @02:36AM (#28878249) Homepage Journal
    Somewhere between an elliptical galaxy and a globular cluster sitting on there own, with a very high rate of star formulation. Oh, and a very odd color, there aren't any green stars (nothing glows green hot its doesn't fit in the color vs temperate diagram), and the only common gas thats green is one of particular types of oxygen ions. The green color is due to the red-shift of the objects. Full of new stars the green pees (hate the name), would shine bright blue, until the red shift, turns the blue to green, (is that clear?)

    ---

    Astronomy [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]

New York... when civilization falls apart, remember, we were way ahead of you. - David Letterman

Working...