DOCSLIB.ORG

Extra Credit: a Peer Panel Evaluation (Up to +2% on Final Grade)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Extra Credit: a Peer Panel Evaluation (Up to +2% on Final Grade) Extra Credit: A Peer Panel Evaluation (up to +2% on final grade) * You will need to decide which area of research you are focusing on and which telescope you are arguing for BY THE END OF THIS WEEK and let me know via a survey response (await email for this). * you will need to have a first, complete draft done by END OF NEXT WEEK * you will need to read a few others’ essays and offer a useful critique with a set of your peers, suggest improvements, and give a grade according to the rubric (you will need to schedule this outside of class and return comments to the proposers BY TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29. * your final essay is due DECEMBER 1 at the beginning of class. THE DRAKE EQUATION. ARE WE ALONE? ARE WE ALONE? How many sun-like stars (with planets) have a planet in the habitable zone? Petigura et al. (2013) How many sun-like stars (with planets) have a planet in the habitable zone? Petigura et al. (2013) We didn’t have any clue until Kepler came along, just a few years ago. The best current estimate is that 20+10% of all sun-like stars have planets in their habitable zones. The Kepler Orrery: the incredible diversity of planetary systems. Shout out to Dan Fabrycky! The Kepler Orrery: the incredible diversity of planetary systems. Shout out to Dan Fabrycky! Time to zoom WAYYYY out… Time to zoom WAYYYY out… To do that, we better know how to measure distances to things well. “We are probably nearing the limit of all we can know about astronomy.” -1888 Simon Newcomb “We are probably nearing the limit of all we can know about astronomy.” -1888 “Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible.” -1902 Simon Newcomb We already know a few ways of measuring distances… But that’s it so far! Or is it? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. 1. We measured the distance to the sun using the transit of Venus! But that’s it so far! Or is it? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. 1. We measured the distance to the sun using the transit of Venus! 3. With technology we can actually use radar to measure distances to objects in our solar system (and verify the distance to the sun)… But that’s it so far! Or is it? Recall the main sequence fitting technique for measuring distances? A B apparent magnitude apparent color We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. 1. We measured the distance to the 4. Matching the Main-Sequence in sun using the transit of Venus! star clusters… 3. Radar (for the Solar System) How far can that get us? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. 1. We measured the distance to the 4. Matching the Main-Sequence in sun using the transit of Venus! star clusters… 3. Radar (for the Solar System) How far can that get us? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. How far out do Parallax measurements take us? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. How far out do Parallax measurements take us? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. How far out do Parallax measurements take us? We already know a few ways of measuring distances… 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. only a few hundred parsecs! How far out do Parallax measurements take us? 1. Radar (for the Solar System) / geometry 3. Matching the Main-Sequence in star clusters… 4. Standard Candles! (Like Cepheid Variables) 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. 1. Radar (for the Solar System) / geometry 3. Matching the Main-Sequence in star clusters… 4. Standard Candles! (Like Cepheid Variables) 2. We used PARALLAX to measure the distances to the nearest stars… but this is only good to a few hundred parsecs. The Cosmic Distance Ladder And the great Shapley/Curtis Debate. Charles Messier, created the astronomical catalog of 110 odd things he couldn’t explain, now called “Messier objects” (in 1771) which were basically not anything anyone could explain. Charles Messier, created the astronomical catalog of 110 odd things he couldn’t explain, now called “Messier objects” (in 1771) which were basically not anything anyone could explain. Charles Messier, created the astronomical catalog of 110 odd things he couldn’t explain, now called “Messier objects” (in 1771) which were basically not anything anyone could explain. Fast forward ~140 years, everyone’s made great progress in understanding star systems (not planets really), but the HR diagram is figured out, basics of stellar temperatures, composition, and distances with parallax, but many of the Messier Objects were still a mystery… Henrietta Swan Leavitt Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” If she couldn’t make parallax measurements for these stars, so no distances, why is this not a period-flux relationship? How does she know it’s a period-luminosity relationship? Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” If she couldn’t make parallax measurements for these stars, so no distances, why is this not a period-flux relationship? How does she know it’s a period-luminosity relationship? Henrietta Swan Leavitt She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” If she couldn’t make parallax measurements for these stars, so no distances, why is this not a period-flux relationship? How does she know it’s a period-luminosity relationship? Henrietta Swan Leavitt She didn’t know the distances! But she knew they were all at the same distance from the Earth, approximately. As long as they are the same distance away from us, a period-flux relationship is a period-luminosity relationship. She studied the variability of stars’ flux and deduced the “period-luminosity relationship” If she couldn’t make parallax measurements for these stars, so no distances, why is this not a period-flux relationship? How does she know it’s a period-luminosity relationship? Henrietta Swan Leavitt She didn’t know the distances! But she knew they were all at the same distance from the Earth, approximately. As long as they are the same distance away from us, a period-flux relationship is a period-luminosity relationship. Harlow Shapley Henrietta Swan Leavitt Harlow Shapley Henrietta Swan Leavitt Cepheid Variable Stars Cepheid Variable Stars are Standard Candles, Measures distance to star clusters, galaxies since we know their luminosity If a Cepheid Variable A is twice as (a) 0.5 / fainter far away as Cepheid Variable B it (b) 0.5 / brighter will be ______ times _______ on (c) 2 / fainter the sky than Cepheid Variable B. (d) 2 / brighter (e) 4 / fainter (f) 4 / brighter Cepheid Variable Stars Cepheid Variable Stars are Standard Candles, Measures distance to star clusters, galaxies since we know their luminosity If a Cepheid Variable A is twice as (a) 0.5 / fainter far away as Cepheid Variable B it (b) 0.5 / brighter will be ______ times _______ on (c) 2 / fainter the sky than Cepheid Variable B. (d) 2 / brighter (e) 4 / fainter (f) 4 / brighter Harlow Shapley Henrietta Swan Leavitt Unaware of her death four years prior, the Swedish mathematician Gösta Mittag-Leffler considered nominating Henrietta Swan Leavitt for the 1926 Nobel Prize in Physics, and wrote to Shapley requesting more information on her work on Cepheid variables. Shapley replied, let Mittag-Leffler know that Leavitt had died, and suggested that the true credit belonged to his (Shapley's) interpretation of her findings. She was never nominated, because the Nobel Prize is not awarded posthumously. (He was never nominated either, though his grandson is a Nobel Laureate in Mathematics!) Harlow Shapley Mapped the period-luminosity relationship for a few stars we actually knew the distances to from parallax! Those were another type of variable called RR Lyrae… Harlow Shapley Mapped the period-luminosity relationship for a few stars we actually knew the distances to from parallax! Those were another type of variable called RR Lyrae… and used that to measure the characteristic distance scale of the Milky Way! Harlow Shapley Due to the enormous size of the galaxy that he measured (he guessed 300,000 light years across) Shapley thought that spiral nebulae had to be stars forming (e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Birth of Stars and Planets
    Unit 6: The Birth of Stars and Planets This material was developed by the Friends of the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory with the assistance of a Natural Science and Engineering Research Council PromoScience grant and the NRC. It is a part of a larger project to present grade-appropriate material that matches 2020 curriculum requirements to help students understand planets, with a focus on exoplanets. This material is aimed at BC Grade 6 students. French versions are available. Instructions for teachers ● For questions and to give feedback contact: Calvin Schmidt [email protected], ​ ● All units build towards the Big Idea in the curriculum showing our solar system in the context of the Milky Way and the Universe, and provide background for understanding exoplanets. ● Look for Ideas for extending this section, Resources, and Review and discussion ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ questions at the end of each topic in this Unit. These should give more background on ​ each subject and spark further classroom ideas. We would be happy to help you ​ expand on each topic and develop your own ideas for your students. Contact us at ​ the [email protected]. ​ ​ Instructions for students ● If there are parts of this unit that you find confusing, please contact us at [email protected] for help. ​ ● We recommend you do a few sections at a time. We have provided links to learn more about each topic. ● You don’t have to do the sections in order, but we recommend that. Do sections you find interesting first and come back and do more at another time. ● It is helpful to try the activities rather than just read them.
    [Show full text]
  • How Supernovae Became the Basis of Observational Cosmology
    Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 19(2), 203–215 (2016). HOW SUPERNOVAE BECAME THE BASIS OF OBSERVATIONAL COSMOLOGY Maria Victorovna Pruzhinskaya Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Université Clermont Auvergne, Université Blaise Pascal, CNRS/IN2P3, Clermont-Ferrand, France; and Sternberg Astronomical Institute of Lomonosov Moscow State University, 119991, Moscow, Universitetsky prospect 13, Russia. Email: [email protected] and Sergey Mikhailovich Lisakov Laboratoire Lagrange, UMR7293, Université Nice Sophia-Antipolis, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, Boulevard de l'Observatoire, CS 34229, Nice, France. Email: [email protected] Abstract: This paper is dedicated to the discovery of one of the most important relationships in supernova cosmology—the relation between the peak luminosity of Type Ia supernovae and their luminosity decline rate after maximum light. The history of this relationship is quite long and interesting. The relationship was independently discovered by the American statistician and astronomer Bert Woodard Rust and the Soviet astronomer Yury Pavlovich Pskovskii in the 1970s. Using a limited sample of Type I supernovae they were able to show that the brighter the supernova is, the slower its luminosity declines after maximum. Only with the appearance of CCD cameras could Mark Phillips re-inspect this relationship on a new level of accuracy using a better sample of supernovae. His investigations confirmed the idea proposed earlier by Rust and Pskovskii. Keywords: supernovae, Pskovskii, Rust 1 INTRODUCTION However, from the moment that Albert Einstein (1879–1955; Whittaker, 1955) introduced into the In 1998–1999 astronomers discovered the accel- equations of the General Theory of Relativity a erating expansion of the Universe through the cosmological constant until the discovery of the observations of very far standard candles (for accelerating expansion of the Universe, nearly a review see Lipunov and Chernin, 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmic Times Teachers' Guide Table of Contents
    Cosmic Times Teachers’ Guide Table of Contents Cosmic Times Teachers’ Guide ....................................................................................... 1 1919 Cosmic Times ........................................................................................................... 3 Summary of the 1919 Articles...................................................................................................4 Sun’s Gravity Bends Starlight .................................................................................................4 Sidebar: Why a Total Eclipse?.................................................................................................4 Mount Wilson Astronomer Estimates Milky Way Ten Times Bigger Than Thought ............4 Expanding or Contracting? ......................................................................................................4 In Their Own Words................................................................................................................4 Notes on the 1919 Articles .........................................................................................................5 Sun's Gravity Bends Starlight..................................................................................................5 Sidebar: Why a Total Eclipse?.................................................................................................7 Mount Wilson Astronomer Estimates Milky Way Ten Times Bigger Than Thought ............7 Expanding or Contracting? ......................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Curtis/Shapley Debate – 1920 (This Text Is Taken from the Web –
    Curtis/Shapley Debate – 1920 (this text is taken from the Web – http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/diamond_jubilee/debate20.html) A Mediocre Discussion? “The Size and Shape of the Galaxy/Cosmos And the Existence of other Galaxies” Does it really matter that two astronomers debated each other in the beginning of the 20th century? It is now clear that a once little heard-of discussion was at the crux of a major change of humanity's view of our place in the universe. The events that happened in the first quarter of our century were together much more than a debate - this is a story of hu- manity's discovery of the vastness of our universe, a story of a seemingly small academic disagreement whose dramatic resolution staggered the world. It is a story of human drama - two champion astronomers struggling at the focus of a raging controversy whose solution represents an inspiring synthesis of old and new ideas. It is the story of monumen- tal insight and tragic error. It is a story of an astronomical legend. Does this sound melodramatic? It s all true. And it happened this century. In 1920 Harlow Shapley was a young ambitious astronomer. He had published a series of papers marking several fas- cinating astronomical discoveries - many times involving properties of stars in binary systems or globular clusters. He was a rising star himself - a golden boy of astronomy. In 1920 Heber D. Curtis was a bit older, more established, and very well respected in his own right. He had published a series of solid papers on good astronomical results - many times on the properties of spiral nebulae.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmology for Everyone
    Cosmology for Everyone http://cdn.spacetelescope.org/archives/images/wallpaper5/hubble_in_orbit1.jpg Dr. Steven Ball Professor of Physics LeTourneau University Hubble Telescope eXtreme Deep Field Modern Cosmology Begins ■ Albert Einstein (1879-1955) ■ Special Relativity (1905) ■ General Relativity (1915): matter-energy <=> space-time www.universetoday.com/56612/einsteins-general- relativity-tested-again-much-more-stringently/ www.science4all.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gravity.jpg Philosophical Bias to expect ■ Contrast to Newtonian Gravity, static cosmos (unchanging) objects follow curvature of space Had to modify equations to induced by matter yield static cosmos solution Expanding Universe ■ Alexander Friedmann (1888-1925) ■ Solved Einstein’s Field Equations (correcting algebraic mistake and eliminating cosmological constant) ■ Predicted expanding universe from 3 solutions: open (expands forever), closed (will collapse), and flat Size of universe en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Aleksandr_Fridman.png Time Great Debate of 1920 ■ Astronomers Harlow Shapley vs. Heber Curtis ■ Are the spiral nebulae part of the Milky Way Galaxy or island universes far beyond the Milky Way? ■ Inconclusive debate due to lack of observational evidence. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Andromeda_Galaxy_(with_h-alpha).jpg Expanding Universe Confirmed ■ Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) ■ Using Mt. Wilson Observatory 100 inch reflector telescope (1920) ■ By 1925 confirmed that the Andromeda nebula lies far beyond the Milky Way and is also a vast galaxy of stars ■ There are billions of galaxies stretching out in space billions of light years away from us. ■ By 1929 confirmed that the further a galaxy is from us, the faster it recedes from us. www.tumblr.com/search/mount+wilson+observatory Hubble’s Law ■ Expansion of Universe seen in slight change in wavelengths of spectral lines in receding galaxies (redshift z = Δλ/λ) ■ Hubble’s Law: Recesion Velocity = Constant times Distance (v = H d) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Redshift.png Using present data we now know Ho = 72±1 km/s/Mpc.
    [Show full text]
  • 6. the Great Debate: the Solar System's Place in the Galaxy
    6. THE GREAT DEBATE: THE SOLAR SYSTEM’S PLACE IN THE GALAXY AND THE GALAXY’S PLACE IN THE UNIVERSE I EQUIPMENT Computer with internet connection GOALS In this lab, you will learn: 1. How to use RR Lyrae variable stars in globular clusters to measure our distance from the center of the Milky Way galaxy (i.e., is the solar system at the center of the Milky Way?) 2. How to use RR Lyrae variable stars in globular clusters to measure the approximate size of the Milky Way. 3. How to use Cepheid variable stars in nearby galaxies to measure their sizes (i.e., is the Milky Way the primary object in the universe or is it merely one of countless many similar-sized objects in the universe?) 1 BACKGROUND A. THE GREAT DEBATE On April 26, 1920, astronomers Harlow Shapley (left) and Heber Curtis (right) debated the size of the then-known universe and our place in it at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History in Washington, DC, in an event that later became known as the Great Debate. Curtis argued that the solar system is near or at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, and that the Milky Way is about 10 kpc across. Shapley, on the other hand, argued that the solar system is in the outskirts of the Milky Way, and that the Milky Way is about 100 kpc across. In section A of the procedure, you will use RR Lyrae variable stars in globular clusters to measure (1) our distance from the center of the Milky Way, and (2) the approximate size of the Milky Way.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Issues on the Foundations of Modern Cosmology, Gravitation and Quantum Physics
    universe Review Some Issues on the Foundations of Modern Cosmology, Gravitation and Quantum Physics Emilio Elizalde 1,2 1 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, ICE/CSIC-IEEC, Campus UAB, Carrer de Can Magrans s/n, 08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona), Spain; [email protected] 2 International Laboratory for Theoretical Cosmology, Tomsk State University of Control Systems and Radioelectronics (TUSUR), 634050 Tomsk, Russia Received: 18 September 2020; Accepted: 19 October 2020; Published: 22 October 2020 Abstract: After the first clear evidence of the recession—at very high speeds—of the spiral nebulae was announced by V.M. Slipher in 1914, as a result of his work started in 1912, it still took several decades to properly understand the phenomenon in terms of an expansion of the Universe. Some historical issues around that crucial discovery and the contemporary attempts at determining the scale of the visible Universe will be discussed. Presently, very important questions to answer are: What is the precise value of the expansion rate? What drives the acceleration of the Universe’s expansion? The latter is called dark energy, but what is it actually? The possibility that this could be the result of a sort of Casimir effect at the cosmological level has not been discarded, yet. One of the main technical problems in tackling this issue is constituted by the regularization and corresponding renormalization procedures. Beautiful but rather non-trivial mathematics, involving the zeta function of pseudodifferential operators (associated with physical quantities), are key in this respect. A discussion of those items is provided here. Keywords: universe expansion; dark energy; quantum fluctuations; zeta function regularization; models of the universe 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Expansion of the Universe
    Today Galaxy Types Including Active Galaxies The Great Debate Expansion of the Universe Hubble Law 1 Types of Galaxies Spiral galaxies (like Milky Way): active star formation, most stars in a disk 2 Types of Galaxies Elliptical galaxies: little gas, so little star formation; no disk, all bulge; very big ones found in the centers of galaxy clusters 3 Types of Galaxies Irregular galaxies: lots of gas, lots of star formation, but irregularly shaped so no obvious disk; these are small galaxies 4 Galaxies like each other! If you see a galaxy there is likely to be another one nearby Many galaxies (like MW!), are in groups: collections of ~tens of galaxies Hickson 44 compact group 5 Galaxy Clusters Some collections of thousands of galaxies within same size as our local group Many more ellipticals in these clusters; ellipticals form from collisions between galaxies! Perseus Cluster: 250 million lyr away, Movie more6 than 1000 galaxies If the center of a galaxy is unusually bright, we call it an active galactic nucleus (AGN). Quasars are the most luminous examples; can be a million times brighter than a normal galaxy! Power source would fit inside our solar system; what could Active Nucleus in M87 it be? 7 © 2007 Pearson Education Inc., publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley The accretion of gas onto a supermassive black hole appears to be the only way to explain all the properties of quasars. 8 © 2007 Pearson Education Inc., publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley Other Galaxies - The Great Debate • Is the Milky Way a lonely “Island Universe?” • Or
    [Show full text]
  • AST101 the Nature of the Nebulae
    AST101 The Nature of the Nebulae Tuning Fork Diagram Nebulae The Nature of the Nebulae • 1912-1915: Vesto Slipher obtains spectra of spiral nebulae. Spectra are continuous, not emission line spectra. • Slipher shows spectra are redshifted to 1000 km/s, unlike anything else in Milky Way. • 1916-1923: Adriaan van Maanen claims to detect proper motions in M101 and 6 other spirals. Conclusion: they must be close. • The 1920 debate at the National Academy of Sciences. Spectra of Nebulae • Gaseous nebula (Orion nebula) • Spiral galaxy (M 83) The Great Debate Harlow Shapley Heber D Curtis Large Galaxy Small Galaxy Spirals: Gaseous nebulae Spirals: “Island Universes” http://apod.nasa.gov/diamond_jubilee/debate20.html Size of the Galaxy Distance scale • Trigonometric Parallax (to 300 ly) • Spectroscopic Parallax – Based on brightness of main sequence – Based on brightness of tip of giant branch Shapley’s Argument Spirals are nearby: • Van Maanen’s proper motions in M101 – Shown to be erroneous • S Andromedae like Nova Persei 1901 – S And is a supernova, unrecognized in 1920 Spirals are gaseous: • Bluer than Milky Way – We see redder bulge of spiral galaxies Spirals avoid plane of Milky Way • Suggests influence High Recessional Velocities • Suggests influence Curtis’ Argument Star counts require small Galaxy • Radius ~ 30,000 ly Globular cluster stars are dwarfs The brightest are giants S And unlike N Per 1901 Colors of galaxies look like stars The Effect of Dust Dust • Reddens light • Absorbs light, and makes things appear further away than they really are The existence of dust was unknown in 1920 Standard Candles In 1908, Henrietta Swan Leavitt noted a correlation between brightness and period in certain variable stars in the LMC.
    [Show full text]
  • Cosmic Times
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Early Edition Age of the Universe: Cosmic Times Size of the Universe: 2 Billion Years 1929 280 Million Light Years Andromeda Nebula Lies Outside Milky Way Galaxy Spiral Nebulae are indeed “Island Universes” stronomer Edwin Hubble of the Mount Wilson Observa­ Atory at Pasadena, Califor­ nia has solved a mystery. Spiral nebulae in our universe have been a mystery to astronomers. Nebu­ lae look like fuzzy pinwheels in the sky. Astronomers weren’t sure if these nebulae were in our own galaxy or outside of it. Hubble figured out that these objects are much farther away than other as­ tronomers thought. That means they are distant galaxies and not a part of our own Milky Way Galaxy. While figuring this out, Dr. Hubble also figured out how far away the Image credit: Hale Observatories, courtesy AIP Emilio Segre Visual Archives Andromeda Galaxy is from us. Edwin Hubble Dr. Hubble’s observations support Dr. Heber Curtis’ views. In a de­ reflecting telescope in the orld.w showed that there were individu­ bate with Dr. Harlow Shapley in Hubble said that the telescope fo­ al stars in the nebula. They also 1920, Dr. Curtis said that bright, cused a few of the closest, neigh­ showed that some of the stars spread-out nebulae are fairly boring spiral nebulae into swarms changed in brightness over time. close to earth and are a part of of stars. One of the nebulae was These changing stars, known as the Milky Way. Spiral nebulae, on the Andromeda Nebula. Hubble Cepheid variable stars, were the the other hand, are much farther estimates that the Andromeda key in figuring out distances to away and are not part of the Milky Nebula is as large and holds as nebulae.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1910.00666V1
    DRAFT VERSION OCTOBER 3, 2019 Preprint typeset using LATEX style emulateapj v. 12/16/11 A CEPHEID-BASED DISTANCE TO THE SEYFERT GALAXY NGC6814 MISTY C. BENTZ1,LAURA FERRARESE2,3,CHRISTOPHER A. ONKEN4,5 , BRADLEY M. PETERSON6,7,8 , MONICA VALLURI9, (Received; Accepted) Draft version October 3, 2019 ABSTRACT We present a Cepheid-based distance to the nearby Seyfert galaxy NGC6814 from Hubble Space Telescope observations. We obtained F555W and F814W imaging over the course of 12 visits with logarithmic time spacing in 2013 August−October. We detected and made photometric measurements for 16,469 unique sources across all images in both filters, from which we identify 90 excellent Cepheid candidates spanning a range of periods of 13−84days. We find evidence for incompleteness in the detection of candidates at periods <21days. Based on the analysis of Cepheid candidates above the incompleteness limit, we determine a distance modulus +0.031 for NGC6814 relative to the LMC of µrelLMC =13.200−0.031 mag. Adopting the recent constraint of the distance − +0.041 modulus to the LMC determined by Pietrzynski´ et al., we find m M = 31.677−0.041 which gives a distance of 21.65 ± 0.41Mpc to NGC6814. Subject headings: galaxies: active — galaxies: nuclei — galaxies: Seyfert 1. INTRODUCTION bulge luminosity (MBH −Lbulge, Kormendy & Richstone 1995; The Leavitt Law, describing the relationship between the Kormendy & Ho 2013). luminosity of Cepheid stars and their periods of variability Reverberation mapping (Blandford& McKee 1982; (Leavitt & Pickering 1912), is one of the most revolutionary Peterson 1993) is one of the few techniques that can be used discoveries in the field of astronomy.
    [Show full text]
  • CONTENTS This Article Is Based on the Conference from Dedicating the Meeting in Her Memory Opening Talk Given at the Just the Same
    January 2005 But this has not deterred the organizers of this CONTENTS This article is based on the conference from dedicating the meeting in her memory opening talk given at the just the same. This is not the first such conference conference Stellar Populations dedicated in her memory. The very first STScI Beatrice Tinsley: A Tribute 2003, held in Garching, Germany Symposium in 1985, also entitled Stellar Populations, Robert C. Kennicutt, Jr. on October 6–10, 2003. The was dedicated to Beatrice, and that meeting opened 1 conference was dedicated in with a similar dedicatory talk by Jim Gunn. memory of Beatrice M. Tinsley. For the many of you who never met Beatrice Nobel Prize for a “Computer” Photo by Moire Prescott Tinsley or worked on the subject when she was named Henrietta Leavitt active, it may come as a surprise that her colleagues would still be honoring her memory so (1868–1921) Beatrice Tinsley: A Tribute many years after her death. My task in this talk is to Pangratios Papacosta By Robert C. Kennicutt, Jr. explain why. I approach the task with some reluctance, because unlike Jim Gunn and her other 1 t has become customary in our profession, when close collaborators, I only met Tinsley briefly at the a distinguished scientist reaches the age of 60 or What Works for Women in end of her career (and at the beginning of my own), beyond, to organize a conference in his or her I so I cannot speak from firsthand observation. This is Undergraduate Physics? honor, a Festschrift. If Beatrice Tinsley were still with important because much of the greatness in this complex Barbara L.
    [Show full text]