NASA's Spitzer space telescope observes a perfectly sideways galaxy

Humza

Posts: 1,026   +171
Staff member
In context: Launched almost sixteen years ago, the $720 million Spitzer infrared space telescope had a planned mission time of 2.5 years that was extended to more than twice this figure keeping in view the on-board liquid helium supply. Six years later in 2009 when most of the telescope's instruments became inoperable due to the liquid helium running out, which was needed to maintain extremely cool temperatures, as low as −450 °F (−268 °C), the on-board infrared array camera (IRAC) remained the only working module that took an image of a perfectly sideways galaxy.

NASA's Spitzer space telescope is meant to retire in January next year but during its lifetime, it has observed many remarkable spectacles in the vastness of space, such as the Henize 206 nebula, the Cat's Paw nebula, magnetic field lines of the Cigar Galaxy and the Pandora's Cluster, to name a few.

This week, NASA's JPL shared an image taken by Spitzer's IRAC module which the agency says might look like a "lightsaber" floating in space but is actually an entire galaxy viewed sideways.

"The long red beam in the center of the image is a galaxy called NGC 5866. It lies 44 million light-years from Earth and has a diameter of roughly 60,000 light-years - a little more than half the diameter of our own Milky Way galaxy," says NASA, adding that due to the galaxy being sideways, most of the structural features are invisible.

With Spitzer's IRAC detecting infrared light, NASA says that the red color emitted from the galaxy corresponds to infrared wavelength produced by dust, that absorbs light from stars and then re-emits it at longer wavelengths.

NASA's JPL also hints that NGC 5866 hasn't collided with any other galaxy yet as the dust ring around it "lacks any sign of twists or distortions" that often appear as the result of a merger.

Given that the telescope, and scientists for that matter, can only observe what comes their way for such distant bodies, the sideways orientation of NGC 5866 is "challenging," says NASA. "Our view of this galaxy is somewhat like our view of the Milky Way galaxy: Because Earth lies inside the Milky Way, we can see it only edge-on rather than face-on," says the agency, but how the Milky Way looks face-on has been made possible by astronomers through simulation owing to our proximity to the rest of the galaxy.

The Sun-orbiting Spitzer telescope took this image during its "cold" mission, which ended a decade ago with three infrared wavelengths captured by the IRAC. "Blue light corresponds to Spitzer's observations at a wavelength of 3.6 microns, produced mainly by stars; green corresponds to 4.5 microns; and red corresponds to 8 microns," says NASA, with the blue haze around the galaxy produced by stars that make up most of the mass of this galaxy.

Permalink to story.

 
"The Sun-orbiting Spitzer telescope took this image during its "cold" mission, which ended a decade ago"

Does this mean we just now got the data fully transmitted to us 10 years later, or that they are just now releasing the pictures?

"has a diameter of roughly 60,000 light-years"

Do you mean thickness? How do you measure a disc's diameter from a side shot? I guess if you consider it is a perfect sphere...
 
"The Sun-orbiting Spitzer telescope took this image during its "cold" mission, which ended a decade ago"

Does this mean we just now got the data fully transmitted to us 10 years later, or that they are just now releasing the pictures?

"has a diameter of roughly 60,000 light-years"

Do you mean thickness? How do you measure a disc's diameter from a side shot? I guess if you consider it is a perfect sphere...
Take something like a hula hoop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hula_hoop Orient it such that all you see is one edge of it - in other words, it looks like a straight line. The length of that line, from end-to-end, is the diameter of the hula hoop. Does that make sense?

As to your question of getting the data 10-years later, I doubt it. From the article, it sounds like this was meant to be a tribute to the telescope; someone at NASA went through its image archive and chose this one for what they thought was a fitting tribute.
 
Take something like a hula hoop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hula_hoop Orient it such that all you see is one edge of it - in other words, it looks like a straight line. The length of that line, from end-to-end, is the diameter of the hula hoop. Does that make sense?

As I mentioned in the last sentence - if you just assume it is a perfect circle. I am more curious about the thickness of it since they are focusing more on it's side shot than the diameter. The significance is we [should] easily be able to measure this.
 
Take something like a hula hoop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hula_hoop Orient it such that all you see is one edge of it - in other words, it looks like a straight line. The length of that line, from end-to-end, is the diameter of the hula hoop. Does that make sense?

As I mentioned in the last sentence - if you just assume it is a perfect circle. I am more curious about the thickness of it since they are focusing more on it's side shot than the diameter. The significance is we [should] easily be able to measure this.
Certainly, the process is not much different. From my standpoint, it does not have to be a perfect circle. Say its a spiral galaxy, and one of the arms of the galaxy extends further out into space than the other. You would get the same measure of the diameter. Even if you were measuring such an object face on, it seems that the diameter would be measured from one end of the spiral arm to the other.

As to the thickness, the colors indicate the various emission spectra as it states in the article. The halo around the image is from material in the galaxy, and could rightly be called part of the galaxy such that measuring the thickness of the galaxy, proper, should, IMO, include all the material in the galaxy.

However, according to this, http://www.sun.org/images/edge-on-galaxy-ngc-5866 it sounds like the thickness of the disk, proper, in many galaxies is about 1,000 ly.

There is a fair amount of information on this galaxy out there. This one https://hubblesite.org/contents/media/images/2006/24/1932-Image.html gives an approximate scale on the image. From that scale, the thickness of the halo looks to be about 15,000 ly, and the thickness of the disk may be around 500 ly.
 
Certainly, the process is not much different. From my standpoint, it does not have to be a perfect circle. Say its a spiral galaxy, and one of the arms of the galaxy extends further out into space than the other. You would get the same measure of the diameter. Even if you were measuring such an object face on, it seems that the diameter would be measured from one end of the spiral arm to the other.

As to the thickness, the colors indicate the various emission spectra as it states in the article. The halo around the image is from material in the galaxy, and could rightly be called part of the galaxy such that measuring the thickness of the galaxy, proper, should, IMO, include all the material in the galaxy.

However, according to this, http://www.sun.org/images/edge-on-galaxy-ngc-5866 it sounds like the thickness of the disk, proper, in many galaxies is about 1,000 ly.

There is a fair amount of information on this galaxy out there. This one https://hubblesite.org/contents/media/images/2006/24/1932-Image.html gives an approximate scale on the image. From that scale, the thickness of the halo looks to be about 15,000 ly, and the thickness of the disk may be around 500 ly.

Thank you. Very cool links.

If you want to use an example of a hoola hoop, what if one end of it is smashed? It would be oblong and cannot be measured accurately. I.e. below

---> \____o--\

A viewpoint from the arrow (whether a spiral or circular galaxy) would make it look like a smaller diameter than it really is. The "o" being the center. Would it not? Especially given that they said it may have had an interaction with another galaxy.
 
Certainly, the process is not much different. From my standpoint, it does not have to be a perfect circle. Say its a spiral galaxy, and one of the arms of the galaxy extends further out into space than the other. You would get the same measure of the diameter. Even if you were measuring such an object face on, it seems that the diameter would be measured from one end of the spiral arm to the other.

As to the thickness, the colors indicate the various emission spectra as it states in the article. The halo around the image is from material in the galaxy, and could rightly be called part of the galaxy such that measuring the thickness of the galaxy, proper, should, IMO, include all the material in the galaxy.

However, according to this, http://www.sun.org/images/edge-on-galaxy-ngc-5866 it sounds like the thickness of the disk, proper, in many galaxies is about 1,000 ly.

There is a fair amount of information on this galaxy out there. This one https://hubblesite.org/contents/media/images/2006/24/1932-Image.html gives an approximate scale on the image. From that scale, the thickness of the halo looks to be about 15,000 ly, and the thickness of the disk may be around 500 ly.

Thank you. Very cool links.

If you want to use an example of a hoola hoop, what if one end of it is smashed? It would be oblong and cannot be measured accurately. I.e. below

---> \____o--\

A viewpoint from the arrow (whether a spiral or circular galaxy) would make it look like a smaller diameter than it really is. The "o" being the center. Would it not? Especially given that they said it may have had an interaction with another galaxy.
The answer is that they really do not know for sure. Lacking the ability to see the galaxy face on presents a situation where best guesses are the best that they can do. They do not know if it collided with another galaxy or not - but at least they state that and recognize the uncertainty. To that end, in at least one of those links, they state that the diameter of the galaxy is "approximately" 60,000 ly.
 
...[ ]..."has a diameter of roughly 60,000 light-years"....[ ]....
They're assuming this is a typical spiral galaxy, similar to the milky way or Andromeda.

Do you mean thickness? How do you measure a disc's diameter from a side shot? I guess if you consider it is a perfect sphere...
Sideways against the diameter, I have to assume the galaxy is being measured by its length, not its thickness. Cut a circle out of a piece of paper, then you have to extrapolate diameter by length, since for all intents "thickness", does not exist.

Here's our "Milky Way" home galaxy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_Way It's top view can't be seen from the earth either. Hence all top views of it, must be modeled from reference point in the sections we can see from the side

Here's the Andromeda galaxy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_Galaxy Our view of it appears to be about 30 degrees off horizontal.

For trivia's save, its radius is almost double that of the Milky Way.. Add some primitive inverse square law math, and that would mean the Milky Way covers only 1/4 of Andromeda's area in space.

As I mentioned in the last sentence - if you just assume it is a perfect circle. I am more curious about the thickness of it since they are focusing more on it's side shot than the diameter. The significance is we [should] easily be able to measure this.
They should be able to measure, or at least estimate the thickness, as the central hub is clearly visible. Perhaps our intrepid writer, or for than matter NASA, simply didn't bother to mention it.
 
Last edited:
The answer is that they really do not know for sure. Lacking the ability to see the galaxy face on presents a situation where best guesses are the best that they can do. They do not know if it collided with another galaxy or not - but at least they state that and recognize the uncertainty. To that end, in at least one of those links, they state that the diameter of the galaxy is "approximately" 60,000 ly.
I get hung up on the inverse square law's ramifications

So, its diameter being 1/2 of the Milky Way's, it would cover only 14 of the Milky Way's. And by extension, only 1/16 the Andromeda galaxy's area.

Thank you. Very cool links.

If you want to use an example of a hoola hoop, what if one end of it is smashed? It would be oblong and cannot be measured accurately. I.e. below

---> \____o--\

A viewpoint from the arrow (whether a spiral or circular galaxy) would make it look like a smaller diameter than it really is. The "o" being the center. Would it not? Especially given that they said it may have had an interaction with another galaxy.
You' can't claim a "definite diameter" for the Milky either. It has to be averaged, minimum, or maximum.

As for the object in this discussion, the possibility of. it being egg shaped or oblong, is less than that of it being circular, simply by virtue of the fact the objects formed in space do trend toward being spherical or circular.

The center of the milky is spherical, with the objects around it, being in the shape of a disc. For whatever, beyond my limited math skills, the shape of our galaxy, roughly equivalent to the predicted shape of the accretion disc around a black hole.(Arguably a spiral armed galaxy IS the accretion disc around a black hole).

Following that spherical or circular tendency, here's a link to "globular clusters": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globular_cluster
 
Back