Curses! You're probably thinking that those two values are the same - and you'd be damn right about that. I'd just been reading a Physics forum about discordant red shifts, and somebody there said "...such as M51..."
Foolishly, I didn't check my facts before passing on the error to you. Moral: always, always check 'facts' quoted on the Internet.
NGC 7603 is an interesting case of discordant redshifts. And I know my facts there, because I downloaded two papers about it. Ask for details if you're interested (but be warned that you need a dominant dullness gene to read scientific papers).
Oh, i'm quite used to it, i did a Physics bursary over the summer at Manchester Uni', and i had to read loads of papers for that, and yes i agree that they make no attempt to liven the papers up.
but please continue with this odd red shift buisness...
Try this, then. On the subject of fact-checking, I e-mailed Dr. Lopez-Corredoira to confirm the statement that I found on the Internet that Nature - the prestigious place for papers - refused to publish it.
Comments
Um... are you aware that the two parts of M51 exhibit different red shifts?
You found a real good photo there.
no i wasn't aware of that.
apparently you can see M51 with binoculars on a dark winters night..
ah, found them:
NGC 5195 - 465 +/- 10 km/s
M51 - 463 +/- 3 km/s
Curses! You're probably thinking that those two values are the same - and you'd be damn right about that. I'd just been reading a Physics forum about discordant red shifts, and somebody there said "...such as M51..."
Foolishly, I didn't check my facts before passing on the error to you. Moral: always, always check 'facts' quoted on the Internet.
NGC 7603 is an interesting case of discordant redshifts. And I know my facts there, because I downloaded two papers about it. Ask for details if you're interested (but be warned that you need a dominant dullness gene to read scientific papers).
Oh, i'm quite used to it, i did a Physics bursary over the summer at Manchester Uni', and i had to read loads of papers for that, and yes i agree that they make no attempt to liven the papers up.
but please continue with this odd red shift buisness...
Try this, then. On the subject of fact-checking, I e-mailed Dr. Lopez-Corredoira to confirm the statement that I found on the Internet that Nature - the prestigious place for papers - refused to publish it.
He confirmed it.