Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

stargazine_ep33_banner.thumb.jpg.75d09b4b1b4e5bdb1393e57ce45e6a32.jpg

Mike JW

SHAKHABAZIAN COMPACT GALAXY GROUPS

Recommended Posts

THIS THREAD IS DEVOTED TO EEVA OBSERVATIONS OF THE SHK COMPACT GALAXY GROUPS - enjoy the journey.

In 1957 Shakhabazian noted on the Palomar Sky Atlas a group of 17 red stellar like objects clustered within 1 arc minute. It was thought they were a cluster of red stars. Later analysis (1972) showed them to be galaxies. This group then became known as Shakhabazian 1 (SHK 1). In 1973 a systematic search of the Palomar Sky Survey plates revealed more groups – compact groups of compact galaxies (CCCG). There are 377 groups. Being compact then their gravitational forces at play within the groups, are heating up interstellar gas, twisting some of the galaxies. There are three broad categories spherical, chains and peripheric (on the edge of the area). There are some which do not fit into these three categories. They are true groups and lie beyond our local super-cluster. Many groups have strong radio sources.

The criteria for the groups are as follows:

  • The groups consist of 5 to 15 members.
  • The apparent magnitude of the individual galaxies is between 14 and 19 mag.
  • The groups are compact, i.e., the distances between galaxies are only 3-5 times the diameters of galaxies.
  • Nearly all member galaxies are extremely red, with at most 1-2 blue galaxies in a group.
  • Members of groups are compact (relatively high surface brightness, borders not diffuse).
  • The groups are isolated.

ShCGs were originally called compact groups of compact galaxies because the images of most of the constituent galaxies in these groups seemed very compact. Later observations of these groups with high angular resolution revealed that member galaxies are mostly of E and S0 types. Also it has now been shown that the group members are not particularly compact so the more recent papers now call them Shakhbazian Compact Galaxy Groups (SCGGs) or SHKs. Red shifts for these groups are slowly being determined – about 70 groups so far.

RESOURCES - a list in excel format.

Shakhbazian Galaxy Groups.xlsx

Mike and Martin

Edited by Mike JW
sorted grammar
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shk 10

Evolution 8 @ 3.74  ZWO ASI290MM  SharpCap

Shk 10_290MM_15x20_Evo 8 @ 0.374_Edegem.png

Shk 10_Stack_29frames_580s-Annotated.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shall look forward to viewing SHK 10 at some point, with the challenge of locating all its members. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SHK 225  in Pegasus. Look carefully and you will this group in the centre. This is a small group with just 8 members.

458598579_SHK22505Nov20_08_42_51.thumb.jpg.587c230800f5a86919e25058b7bf2b52.jpg

Close up - these guys are faint. The fuzz at top right is PGC 1953277 - mag 17.6, (not part of the group). Drop straight down and a touch left, just below the centre is a fuzz with extensions - PGC 1952668, mag 18.6.(number 5 in the SHK group). The remaining 7 members are distributed around the centre of the image (not the bright star).

597715340_SHK22505Nov20_08_42_35.jpg.112b553039e9ded8da1e680ec04490df.jpg

 

SHK 340 - in Pisces. This SHK is slightly unusual because there are two distinct groupings near to each other. The 13 members of the obvious group are to the right of the fov. The obvious fuzz spots are all PGC, mag 17 galaxies (5 in total) with the remaining 7 in the area. I appear to have picked up other fainter galaxies (or very faint stars) as well in this area.

To the left of the fov can be seen a distorted circle of galaxies and a bright-ish star.

1570368401_SHK34005Nov20_08_36_06.jpg.6261adcdce2860bb5c83eb9a0f3f783f.jpg

 

Mike

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By Jove, Mike they are a bit faint. I had to look at these on a different laptop to see them more clearly.

Well done for tracking them down and observing/snapping them.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SHK 176 in Andromeda. I called this group - 'you must be joking'. Take a look at the full frame shot - I had to triple check that I was in the right area. There are 10 members - oh yeah!. Look to the left of the central bright star - surely not!

1839870519_SHK17608Nov20_13_50_52.thumb.jpg.3ce98973db7e87b407ded6d8eb1d67e3.jpg

Close up - it took me awhile to find the best setting to make them all obvious. Even then the 10th member is only just visible - dead centre - a faint elongated fuzz which NED gives as mag 18.5 and no further info. I really needed to collect some more subs but cloud was approaching.

506674060_SHK17608Nov20_14_16_30.jpg.6b69b8dde773e0dbed82f33a9dbfcd43.jpg

 

Mike

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 


 

Edited by Mike JW
posted in wrong thread
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12/01/21 - I spent much of the session in Triangulum which included these three SHK Groups. Visually they may not be appealing (many do make for some attractive patterns) but the challenge is to locate them and tease them out from the background. Very little data exists for the components.

SHK 178 - in the rush of the session, to maximise the clear window I was certain I had found this tiny group and had them reasonably central. However the following day I realised I was not on target, only to be delighted that I had just got them in the frame. The full frame shot is included to show the difficulty of the challenge. Good luck at spotting them! - and this is with a 15" scope.

1611260730_SHK17813Jan21_12_23_32.png.4d2a75611944883e6dc9e6cd4aa49e4f.png

Here is the zoomed in shot of the group near the top edge of the full frame.

The brightest galaxy is mag 17.1 (at the top), the rest form a circle below it and are mag 18 or fainter!!

1902234004_SHK17813Jan21_12_24_03.png.3eb00f0d6535c01aa566f38c8ff76f23.png

SHK 177 - I did better on this group - right in the centre this time. The brightest is mag 18.2 , there are 10 in the group. However head off down the shot a bit to the right of 6 o clock and there is a suspicious semi circle of stars? (look fuzzy to me - galaxies?)

1253811120_SHK17713Jan21_12_10_44.png.ef02a6c90c514ee0c567e141dc224441.png

Finally SHK 179  - they are in there! - honest! To the right of centre - a circle of 4 + star and then 4 more below it, the brightest is mag 17.9.  Quite right if you do not believe me.

826536923_SHK17913Jan21_12_37_36.png.454e5a276e83ab1dbeffa4ab282d6222.png

Here is the zoomed in shot

1845803437_SHK17913Jan21_12_38_07.png.db5e4ea299b97f6751df21d6862a5cd8.png

 

Three SHKs in the session was a sufficient challenge but rewarding to find them and to ponder what I was viewing.

Mike

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tracking these things down even with 'artificial aids' is a great part of the challenge. It would be no fun at all with a big sensor 😉 

Its great to see the Shakhbazian thread building up too. I'd like to think we could observe them all between us over the next few years. The minimum declination is quite modest at -15. 

I'd love to get hold of the original 1957 article which I believe has been translated. 

Martin

PS Here's an interesting relatively early article in English: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1976sgov.meet..251A

 

Edited by Martin Meredith
re-read the first post which answered the question, doh!
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minor point, but I noticed when doing a web search there are at least 4 ways to spell the author's surname that appear in the literature (Shakhbazian, Shakbazian, Shahbazian and Shahbazyan), often with two forms appearing on the same web page or article! Judging from the article I cited it seems the preferred one is Shahbazian, which unfortunately doesn't sit easily with the widely-adopted SHK designation...

Martin 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to the opportunities for confusion and missing things I notice that the abbreviation ShCG has  also been used for Shakhbazian compact galaxy group.

for example:

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/307726/fulltext/39976.text.html

Alvin Huey's guide to some of these groups is interesting. It may have been mentioned in this thread already. I could not find it so here's the link:

http://faintfuzzies.com/Files/ShkGroups v1.pdf

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bill.

The galaxy groups were first called SCGCGs (Shakbazian Compact Groups of Compact Galaxies), then SCGG (Shakbazian Compact Galaxy Groups) as it was realised that not all the galaxies were compact, then called ShCG (Shakbazian Compact Groups). 

Personally I do not find the Alvin Huey Guide of much use - the star charts (of the various guides) have never really worked for me. Give me RA/DEC co-ordinates and Pretty Deep Maps, combined with a DSO image of the area (I often use SkySafari for that when out observing) and I am a happy chap.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use Simbad a lot, and it can be quite hard sometimes to find the correct catalogue reference (e.g. Abell PNe use A66 <number> or PN A66 <number>)

For the various Shakbazian references, you just need to use ShK <number>

Callum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Callum - As you say we just need to use ShK and number.  I use https://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/VizieR?-meta.foot&-source=VII/89B as my online source of info, type in the SHK number, then on the next screen, click on the 'FULL' column, then when the next screen comes up click on the CDS portal button and up will come the aladin lite image........ The trouble with this is if I do this when observing it tends to slow down my laptop as I will have camera/jocular/ internet/lists/ST4 also running.  

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.