Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space

Europe Has Added 1.1 Billion Stars To Its Milky Way Map (vice.com) 74

Ben Sullivan, writing for Motherboard: The European Space Agency (ESA) has released the first batch of data from its Gaia star mapping project -- a mission that is currently on track to chart one billion stars in the Milky Way. The space telescope launched in 2013 and its first data dump contains the precise celestial position and brightness of a mammoth 1,142 million stars. The release also contains the distances and movements for more than two million stars so far. ESA's director of science Alvaro Gimenez told a press conference held at the European Space Astronomy Centre in Spain on Wednesday morning that the data release features around 490 billion astrometric, 118 billion photometric, and 10 billion spectroscopic measurements. "[The] Final survey will contain [around] 250,000 Solar System Objects, 1,000,000 galaxies, and 500,000 quasars," said Gimenez. Those numbers are almost unimaginable, but ESA has used the data so far to form an "all-sky" view of the stars in our galaxy and neighbouring galaxies, based on Gaia's observations from July 2014 to September 2015.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Europe Has Added 1.1 Billion Stars To Its Milky Way Map

Comments Filter:
  • It's full of stars!

    *Queue* Richard Strauss

  • by dingleberrie ( 545813 ) on Wednesday September 14, 2016 @09:21AM (#52885517)

    " -- a mission that is currently on track to chart one billion stars in the Milky Way."

    On track? It sounds like it passed that goal.

    • It would appear so, unless by a slim-to-none the editors of the submission stuffed up and it should be 1.1 million as given in the summary itself. </sarcasm> My kingdom for a good Slashdot editor.

      • by tsqr ( 808554 )

        It would appear so, unless by a slim-to-none the editors of the submission stuffed up and it should be 1.1 million as given in the summary itself. </sarcasm> My kingdom for a good Slashdot editor.

        I thought so as well, until I looked at TFA. Its title is identical to the summary's, and the 1.14 million figure appears there in the same context (actually, TFS is a direct quote from TFA). Anyway, whether they're on track for a billion or they've already got a billion, they've barely made a start (the Milky Way is estimated to include roughly 100 billion stars).

    • by Zaatxe ( 939368 )
      Actually counting and identifying the stars it the "easy part". But it takes time and several observations of each star to get information about the variable attributes, like proper motion, flux variations, etc. Most of the stars used don't have a reliable measurement of parallax and/or distance, only about 2 million stars have parallax measurements (most of them derived from the Tycho2 catalog from Hipparcos mission). The goal is to have all the attributes (or most of them) for all the stars, reaching one
  • by Anonymous Coward
    This will be very useful in the future when we take our place among the stars. Like navigational charts used in the journey to the New World this will assist us while we are journeying to other systems in our generational starships.
    • Well useful or not I found it quite profound. I had never seen the stars in our galaxy dance around us before in a simulation. Go look how far back and far forward in time you have to move before our familiar constellations zip apart across the sky. Now that is something else and it blew my mind.

  • Is anyone else confused that they named a star search program Gaia? Isn't that supposed to be another name for the Earth?

    • Gaia is actually a goddess as in "mother earth", and by coincident the name of the planet from which earth was terraformed, seeded and settled ...

    • Yes. FWIW, IIRC, GAIA started as an acronym for the instrument technology to be used, but that was later replaced but the name kept and de-capitalised.

  • The lion's share of this data is WAY out of date. Many of those stars don't even exist anymore. Where's the Echelon when you need them?
  • probably meant 1.1 million. 1 billion is the goal
    • by Zaatxe ( 939368 )
      No, that's 1.1 billion, the article is correct. (Source: I work at the team that produced the density map that illustrate the article)
      • thanks and sorry, the switch between english and french confused me. in french "," is a decimal :-{ pretty neat graphic by the way!
  • Parallax (Score:4, Informative)

    by Sebastopol ( 189276 ) on Wednesday September 14, 2016 @12:57PM (#52887245) Homepage

    After reading the historical book "Parallax: The race to measure the cosmos", I'm in awe of this machine. It took millennia and massive improvements in lens making technology and machining for astronomers to measure the first star's distance. Now a satellite can nail down a billion. Just amazing.

  • Rocky Mozell can sell to a billion fools.
  • they're going to call it quits after only mapping 1 percent of the Milky Way's stars? 99% just left flapping in the galactic breeze? talk about unmotivated

  • If you could visit one star system every second, it would take you approximately 31.7 years to visit a billion stars.

    We can't even visit one in a lifetime, except of course for the one we're orbiting.

    Even with Star Trek warp, a second is a pointless amount of time to spend. The captain and crew might want to spend at least a few hours doing a basic survey of the star and any planets, asteroids, or other interesting things orbiting nearby.

    Thus, even with sci-fi technology it's not possible to explore all of

Every nonzero finite dimensional inner product space has an orthonormal basis. It makes sense, when you don't think about it.

Working...