Jump to content

30 secs banner.jpg

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

During observations and taking photos last night through my Celestron 8SE, captured bright rings emitting from a star in snapshots sequence at North America Nebula. Was that star explosion? 
 

Ps. The second shot from top should be the first of the sequence. 


647CF82A-0032-4DA6-AF69-F71B2CDAC121.thumb.jpeg.5987553e6fa07c0847edf305dfe7e02f.jpegCEFDBDE7-4CC4-40B1-BA89-27730C10A6B5.thumb.jpeg.f6d5f13d97580bd1f3e22a1e6175ed88.jpeg24132550-9943-4017-BC64-31B926EE1ED5.thumb.jpeg.a3454e96abfd237fe9b9f083a3d1c220.jpegB2588835-9C9D-426E-85BD-AAA47B6447F0.thumb.jpeg.295fbf874fd137c65df8e1e33e41b1d1.jpeg

EA73BF9C-520D-499A-9B06-DE28F389F783.jpeg

Edited by Pong
To add information
Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it was an internal reflection of the bright star off an unblackened surface within the scope. I’ve seen this a few times in the past, so unfortunately you haven’t captured a star explosion.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, definitively reflection of some sorts.

If it was some sort of flare - it would take many decades to move that far away from the star.

Say star is 100Ly away and largest arc is 2 arc minutes in size. Then feature size would be roughly 0.06Ly - or about 22 light days. Ejecta traveling at speed of light would take 22 days to cross that distance (not to mention that it usually travels much much slower).

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pong said:

Ok. Thanks. Why would it diminish in subsequent shots with less than a minute intervals?

Because it depends on angle and mount tracks across the sky and moves. Either it was due to something stationary with respect to mount or you have drift between subs (don't guide or guide but have guide scope and there is slight differential flexure - shifting mirror or something).

How much do your subs shift over the course of the session?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, vlaiv. So general Star explosion would be observable for a much longer period on earth. It makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I had the same thing when I took photo of the Sun it looked like a planet next to the Sun , Stu explained it was lens flare , may be it's because the angle of the light changes a little at the scope tracks but the some one will know 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Pong said:

So general Star explosion would be observable for a much longer period on earth. It makes sense.

Yes, best you can do is search for images of planetary nebulae or super nova remnants over years to see how slowly it expands when observed from a distance.

Have a look at this for example: M1 expanding over years: https://www.astrobin.com/full/327338/0/

If you are really interested in transient phenomena on stars - these can also be "observed" - but it requires specialist equipment and approach. I think that @andrew s does something like that with spectroscopic observations - records how spectra changes over time for stellar flares.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Yes, best you can do is search for images of planetary nebulae or super nova remnants over years to see how slowly it expands when observed from a distance.

Have a look at this for example: M1 expanding over years: https://www.astrobin.com/full/327338/0/

If you are really interested in transient phenomena on stars - these can also be "observed" - but it requires specialist equipment and approach. I think that @andrew s does something like that with spectroscopic observations - records how spectra changes over time for stellar flares.

That is an amazing timelapse of M1- thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

That looks like an internal reflection in the baffle tube.

I flocked the one in my old Skymax 90 and it got rid of those 'arcs'.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul M said:

Thank's for posting that link vlaiv.

Haven't seen that one before. That's quite some piece of work they did there!

I haven't either - but I did know that there are similar ones out there so I did a quick search and that one was among results.

It is fascinating - right?

I particularly like material spinning around neutron star and being ejected. I've seen that in an Hubble image in ~500nm narrow band - and planned to image it myself with Baader solar continuum filter that is narrowband like - but centered around 540nm.

Here it is in x-ray by Chandra:

240px-Crab_Nebula_pulsar_x-ray.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

It is fascinating - right?

It is!

I have a particular fondness of The Crab. It's exactly what I'd expected of an exploding star as a young boy seeing its image for the first time and then to see it as a living, dynamic object just adds to my interest.

I haven't convincingly picked out the pulsar in any of my own images yet but I'll be a happy bunny when I eventually do capture it! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely a reflection off the rear baffle tube.  I get the exact same oval image in my 127 Mak when using a 2" visual back and widest field 40mm SWA eyepiece as I move a bright star past the edge of the rear baffle's clear aperture.  It grows bigger the farther off axis I move it.

5 hours ago, Pixies said:

That looks like an internal reflection in the baffle tube.

I flocked the one in my old Skymax 90 and it got rid of those 'arcs'.

Flocking the rear baffle tube sounds like a great idea, though possibly difficult.  How did you accomplish it, @Pixies?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Louis D said:

Definitely a reflection off the rear baffle tube.  I get the exact same oval image in my 127 Mak when using a 2" visual back and widest field 40mm SWA eyepiece as I move a bright star past the edge of the rear baffle's clear aperture.  It grows bigger the farther off axis I move it.

Flocking the rear baffle tube sounds like a great idea, though possibly difficult.  How did you accomplish it, @Pixies?

Followed this vid, but with the flock (backing paper removed) wrapped around a pencil. Then sort of 'unrolled' it by rolling the pencil around the inside of the tube.

 

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

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.