
Ashley Zauderer, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian centre for Astrophysics who led the second study, which focused on the radio wave emissions, recalled thinking, “This is crazy.”
“I didn’t believe it,” she said. “I called a colleague and said, ‘Will you make sure I didn’t make a mistake? Look at this data; it’s too bright.’ “
But where there is death there is always life. Here’s another image from the Hubble telescope of three galaxies with the two on the right forming stars at a super fast rate. The pinkish blue areas are the nebulae of new star formations, and the blue spots are young stars. The yellowish areas in the centre are older stars and the fuzzy stuff is interstellar dust. The two bright stars in the foreground are actually inside our own Milky Way. So don’t cry for the stars, there are lots.




















olearymo
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 8:28 AMMaybe there could be a note showing that the first image is an artist’s impression?
It kind of implies it’s the actual image the scientists are excited about.
Quin
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 10:36 AMAren’t most of the best images of distant space artists’ impressions though?
Quin
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 10:37 AMI use the term ‘artist impression’ pretty loosely of course.
But most distant space images are at least coloured and touched up based on what people *think* they would look like with the naked eye.
I take your point that the above images is effectively a ‘painting’ haha.
olearymo
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 11:18 AMYeah, you’re basically right, but at least those things are photos that are touched up.
The one at the very top is entirely a computer generated image, I’m sure.
If it *were* a real photo, the news would be that it was the first ever photo of a black hole, never mind the star being sucked into it.
DR
Friday, August 26, 2011 at 2:54 PMIt’s actually a frame grab from a 3d rendered animation that was doing the rounds yesterday.