NGC4395

NGC 4395 is said to be the home of the smallest known "massive" black hole to occupy the core of a galaxy at least when I wrote this. Astronomers have discovered the size of a galaxies core is proportional to the size of the black hole in the core. So not only is this guy's black hole small so is the core. I found an old article on the net and while it is only a bit over a year old already things have turned upside down since it was written. It suggests the core is small because it was eaten by the black hole but then also states the black hole is the smallest known. If it had eaten the core it's hard to then say it is small. That's the dieter's heaven. The more you eat the less you weigh. The article is at:
http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=2905 (Edit: This link is no longer available so maybe they realized the problem.)

It is now thought the lack of a core is due to it not having a normal sized black hole. Also, that explains why it has not much to eat, it never did so never gained much weight. Everything else in the article is still considered correct, check back next week, things change rapidly as our knowledge increases. We still don't know whether the size of the black hole governs the size of the core, bigger attracts more mass to the core, or the big core gave it a lot to eat and it thus grew large. It's the proverbial which came first issue. Right now most seem to think the black hole came first but this can't be proven as yet.

But for all the talk of the core having nothing to eat this galaxy has a Seyfert type 1 nucleus. This means the black hole is far more active than the larger one in the core of our galaxy which isn't active enough to rate Seyfert classification. Also, this is a rather small galaxy much like the large Magellanic cloud rather than a big classic barred spiral like ours. Somehow all that was lost in the article as well.

This is also a rather distorted spiral. The arms are anything but symmetrical and leave the core in a very disorganized fashion compared to most spirals. This is a characteristic of a Magellanic type spiral galaxy.

Edit: The above was written back in 2007 and not done well. Three knots in the galaxy are NGC 4399, NGC 4400 and 4401 but I've not done an annotated image to point them out. They are in Right Association order. They are the bright blue blobs below the core region. I hope to redo it when time allows. I must add that this one was discovered by William Herschel on January 2, 1786. It is in the second H400 program. Being an early image I underexposed the L channel more than normal so it is a rather noisy image. Another to reshoot but likely won't find time to do.

14" LX,200R @ f/10 L=3x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4395

NGC4402

NGC 4402 in the heart of the Virgo Galaxy Cluster is another spiral with its dust and gas being stripped by ram pressure due to its high velocity through the cluster's intergalactic medium. Like NGC 4522, the gas and dust are being blown upward -- actually left behind as the denser parts of the galaxy are little phased by the ram pressure). It may account for its curved dust lane as well. Even in my image the "lifting" of the dust in the dust lane due to ram pressure seems rather obvious having a 3D appearance. I didn't do any special processing, it just came out that way with my ordinary processing. The Hubble image and story about this is at http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic0911c/ .

Since this galaxy is located near Arp 120 (NGC 4435 and 4438) I framed it to include them. There seems to be some question if the two are interacting or not. One school says the relative speeds are so high they wouldn't be close enough for long enough to account for NGC 4438's tidal plumes. That school feels the plumes are due to ingesting a galaxy in the past. Though there's no sign of the remains of this galaxy.

The image contains many dwarf members of the Virgo cluster. The N in some of their classification means they are "nucleated", that is, have an obvious nucleus.

While I've included redshifts they are quite unreliable for this cluster. The members have high relative velocities making redshift a poor distance indicator. Some members have a blue shift others have such a low redshift the conversion to a distance is meaningless. I've included non-redshift estimates when available in parentheses. VCC entries are from the Virgo Cluster Catalog.

The other galaxies in the field make this one considerably more photogenic than was NGC 4522. To me, it's the idea that ram pressure can tear dust and gas right out a galaxy against its great gravity well that makes these "photogenic".

Edit: I need to add that NGC 4402 was discovered by Arthus von Auwers on March 5, 1862 or so many sources say. Others say he was just publicizing Stoney's discovery though the date is correct. Since it is easily seen in my 6" f/4 scope how was it missed all those years? Stoney was at Lord Rosse's observatory but used a 6.2" scope to find the galaxy.

NGC 4435 and NGC 4438 were discovered by William Herschel on April 8, 1784. Both are in the original H400 program. My only comment on it from April 20, 1985 with my 10" f/5 at 50x due to humidity limiting issues reads, "Forms a tight double with NGC 4438. Six other galaxies are seen in the same one-degree field of view." Nothing on the galaxy itself! My entry at the same time for NGC 4438 reads, "Large, highly elongated galaxy with a very irregular halo that stretches nearly to NGC 4435. M-084, M-086 NGC 4402, NGC 4413, NGC 4425 and NGC 4435 are all in the same field of view." Apparently, I was more taken by the field than the galaxy.

IC 3355 is a very blue irregular Magellanic class galaxy. Apparently, interaction with others in the area has triggered the formation of a lot of young blue stars. Arnold Schwassmann discovered it on November 17, 1900.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10' STL=11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4402

NGC4411

The area around the galaxy groups of NGC 4410 and NGC 4411 is a very galaxy dense region in Virgo but only 3 of the galaxies are likely members of the Virgo Cluster. They are NGC 4411a and b as well as VCC 933. The two NGC 4411 spirals have a nearly identical redshift that puts them 74 million light-years away but Tully Fisher measurements put them at a more realistic 55 million light-years. NGC 4411a is considered the true entry for NGC 4411 though some sources incorrectly give the honor to NGC 4411b. The sky takes no sides and calls both NGC 4411 but will use the correct one when forced to choose between them. NGC 4411a was discovered by Christian Peters in 1881. The star just off the core was seen by Arnold Schwassmann on January 23, 1900 and is entered into the IC as #3339. He may have mistaken the star for the core and thus did see the galaxy. NGC 4411b was probably seen by Bigourdan on April 25th, 1895 it never made it into the NGC or IC catalogs but is now known as NGC 4411b. While they apparently lie close together they don't show any sign of interaction.

That's not the case with the NGC 4410 group to the north. Why Arp failed to include it in his atlas I don't understand. NGC 4410 is a pair of interacting, highly distorted galaxies about 350 million light-years distant. It was discovered by John Herschel on January 18, 1828. Both are quite red galaxies with plumes going every which way. The major plume goes to the northeast apparently connecting with NGC 4410C and NGC 4410D. NGC 4410C was discovered by Bigourdan the same night he found NGC 4411b. Like the NGC 4410 pair, it too is a rather red S0 galaxy with an AGN core. This may indicate true interaction with NGC 4410. The plume then bends at NGC 4410C to head toward NGC 4410D though seems to go a bit south of that galaxy. Still, there is a faint plume north of it as well. It is the bluest of the four. Other than the plume going near it I can't see any hint of distortion or other sign of interaction. It might be there's no connection however that makes the kink in the plume's direction at NGC 4410C harder to explain.

While there are quite a few other members of the group. The group goes through NGC 4410K in my image though one is off the frame to the north. A couple, however, aren't real members, G and I are more than three times the distance of the others.

The image is full of interesting galaxies. On the far right is LEDA 1356246 which seems to be a pair of galaxies, the eastern one small and blue. They may be totally unrelated but without redshift data on the eastern one, I can't say.

On the eastern side near a very bright orange star is AGC 225023 which seems to have a large but faint plume to the south-southwest. There's a small galaxy on the southwest edge of it that's not listed at NED. It probably is background but it could be the remains of whatever created that large "wind effect" plume to use Arp's terminology.

I'm a bit puzzled by the galaxy cluster Abell 1541C which is listed as being at the distance of the Virgo Cluster and thus the NGC 4411 group to the west but nothing at that distance is around its location which is exactly the same as for Abell 1541A which matches the NGC 4410 group well to the northeast. The cluster at that location, Abell 1541, without a letter, which, while having no redshift distance listed seems to be the cluster anchored by two large galaxies at 1.18 to 1.20 billion light-years. Another somewhat smaller cluster at about the same distance is to the north is anchored by LEDA 94216.

Over 100 other galaxies had redshift data so are included in the annotated image along with one lone asteroid and a quasar with a z>2. Several other quasars were listed but are seen through bright galaxies and while I can find them in the Sloan image they didn't make it through my rather poor seeing so I didn't try to point out what I couldn't see. This is likely the densest annotated image I've attempted to date. It did take more than my usual 45 minutes to do!

Unfortunately, seeing was very poor for this one. I didn't look at it until months later so will try again next spring on a better night as this field deserves better than this. (Edit: Still hasn't happened.)

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4411

NGC4441

This is another great galaxy ignored by amateurs who mostly prefer retaking the same stuff over and over again. After searching several image forums and AstoBin I came up with exactly ZERO images of this great object. Looking a bit to find these great objects must be too difficult so many take the same old stuff over and over ad nauseam.

NGC 4441 is a very disturbed galaxy that belongs in Arp's catalog of peculiar galaxies. Arp included three in various stages of merger, Arp 104 (NGC 5218) being the earliest and Apr 214 (NGC 3718) Arp 160 (NGC 4194) and NGC 4441, that didn't make Arp's list as later stages of merger. https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2014/09/aa23548-14/aa23548-14.html

http://www.mantrapskies.com/image-archive/ARP_GALAXIES/ARP104/ARP104L9X10R5X10X3G4X10X3B2X10X3R.jpg
http://www.mantrapskies.com/image-archive/ARP_GALAXIES/ARP160/ARP160NGC4194L4X10RGB2X10R1CROP125.JPG
http://www.mantrapskies.com/image-archive/ARP_GALAXIES/ARP214-NGC3718/NGC3718L12X10RGB4X10R.JPG

Another paper https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2010/01/aa09686-08/aa09686-08.html says it is the result of the merger of a spiral and elliptical galaxy. In any case, it is one heck of a messed up galaxy. I suppose it will eventually settle down to be an elliptical galaxy.

Only 4441 isn't an Arp but could have been one. Why he chose to omit it I don't know. Also he put these obvious (with today's knowledge but not his back when the atlas was prepared) mergers into three different categories, Arp 104 in "Elliptical galaxies connected to spirals", Arp 160 in "Disturbed galaxies with interior absorption" and Arp 214 in "Galaxies; Irregularities, absorption and resolution" whatever that means. Where would he have put NGC 4441? I can think of a half dozen categories it would fit. Arp was interested in appearance not in the why so has no classification for mergers even though many of his entries are the result of either direct mergers or at least interaction with another galaxy.

Notice the odd narrow dust lane crossing just below the very core of the galaxy. It ends with a blob of dust at its right end. It may be due to the merging galaxy being at a nearly right angle to the face on galaxy.

The only other NGC galaxy in the image is just a basic SA0-: galaxy. Both were discovered by William Herschel on March 20, 1790. Neither are in either H400 observing program from the Astronomical League.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4441

NGC4448

NGC 4448 is a rather red flocculent galaxy in northern Coma Berenices some 44 to 52 million light-years distant. It was discovered by William Herschel in 1785. It made my list initially because it was a Herschel 400 galaxy but when I looked into it I saw it was quite interesting and the field contained some really strange galaxies so it got bumped up to high priority last spring. My entry from April 23, 1985 in my Herschel 400 log isn't very encouraging. It reads: "Large, oval galaxy, brighter toward center, otherwise featureless, little detail seen. Seems larger than indicated." This image of it certainly shows plenty of detail. It is classified as SB(r)ab with HII emission from the very core. Otherwise it seems to lake new stars. I don't know if the red is dust or old red stars. Probably both. Redshift puts it at the nearer distance while the median of 5 widely differing measurements by 4 different methods gives a distance of 52 million light-years. They range from 31 to 153 million light-years. If the distance is assumed to be 50 million light-years its size is 70,000 light-years which is a reasonable size for it.

The field contains a polar ring galaxy UGC 07576 at 330 million light years and a strange curved flat galaxy FGC 171A (no connection to FGC 171 which is in another part of the sky entirely). NED gives two positions for it one from the 2MFGC and the other from the FGC. The VV catalog considers it a pair of galaxies and says VV 279 is a triple galaxy. The two NED positions for the curved flat galaxy are at its core and a spot between the core and the north end of the galaxy. The error bars are somewhat larger than normal but not large enough to overlap the two positions. I have no idea if VV 279a is related as I find no redshift for it. The flat galaxy has a redshift that puts it only slightly further away than NGC 4448 so the two may be related. How it got its curved shape remains a mystery, to me at least.

The polar ring galaxy has a huge narrow polar ring. It may be really narrow or it might be just flat and seen edge on. One paper argues for the latter. I just call it strange. At 333 million light-years it is unrelated to the others. Assuming the stated distance the polar ring is some 145,000 light-years across while the main disk of the galaxy is only 60,000 light-years across.

The very blue UGC 7597 lies above and a bit east of NGC 4448. It appears to have a rather bright core (bar?) and a faint blue disk. It is a large galaxy about 100,000 light-years across. LEDA 1839783 at 290 million light-years looks like a small close by blue dwarf but is actually a rather large low surface brightness blue galaxy some 50,000 light-years in size.

All galaxies with redshifts noted at NED are shown in the annotated image as is one quasar. Those whose catalog name is just its sky coordinates are listed by G for galaxy or Q for quasar.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4448

NGC4449

NGC 4449 is very similar to the Large Magellanic Cloud, just a lot farther away at about 12.5 million light years, give or take a million or so. I've not been able to pin down a good distance measurement even though Hubble did take an excellent shot of it. Like the Large Magellanic cloud this galaxy is a starburst galaxy meaning star formation is going on at an unusually high rate throughout the galaxy. And like the Large Magellanic Cloud it is a galaxy without much organization. It has a long axis but stars clump at random down this axis showing no pattern. The blue color in my shot indicates areas of new stars which seem randomly scattered about the galaxy.

You can read more about this galaxy in Canes Venatici here http://spider.seds.org/spider/Misc/n4449_hst.html There's a link to the Hubble picture at the site as well as other photos of the galaxy.

Edit: The above is all I wrote back in 2007 when this was done. Until I can rewrite it here so additional information.

It was discovered by William Herschel on April 27, 1788 and is in the original H400 Observing Program. My notes from April 29, 1984 with a 12.5" f/5 scope at 150 power on an excellent night read, "Bright, much mottling in the center and to the north. A fine object! At 10th magnitude, it is easy and should show detail in a much smaller telescope that this." I also looked at it in my 10" f/5 and 6" f/4 but didn't make any notes, unfortunately. Until I can do more the Hubble page you can get to through the link above has information as does the Hubble site. http://hubblesite.org/image/2155/news_release/2007-26

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=5x10' RGB=1x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4449

NGC4490

Arp 269 is made up of NGC 4485 and NGC 4490. The big one is NGC 4490 which is sometimes known as the Cocoon Galaxy. They are located in Canes Venatici which is high overhead in the evening this time of year. These two have had a near collision that has ripped stars out of both and started massive star formation in them as shown by the many bright HII regions (pink). NGC 4490 gets the Cocoon name for being embedded in a faint cocoon of stars much as a pupa is in a cocoon. I've posted two versions of this guy. The first as it is more normally seen and then a very deep processing to better show the cocoon of stars that surrounds it. The distance to these two is rather vague. I see published papers giving distances ranging from 25 to 60 million light years. Those citing about 35 million seems better researched so that's what I'll go with. There's very little on the net about these guys other than published papers so I don't have any links that are of much use here. I would have thought it a target for Hubble but it isn't in their database that I can find. But Chandra has looked at it in X-ray light.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/graphics/press/03_releases/052703_images/ngc4485.jpg while an HST image of NGC 4485 can be seen at: http://cseligman.com/text/atlas/ngc4485hst.jpg

Arp put it in his classification for Group Character: Connected Arms. I don't see how this pair varies from many other interacting pairs he put under other categories in his atlas. NGC 4485 to the north is classified as IB(s)m pec while NGC 4490 is classified at NED as SB(s)d pec. The pair was discovered by William Herschel on January 14, 1788. Both are in the original Herschel 400 observing program as two individual listings. My notes from April 28, 1984 with a 12.5" f/6 telescope at up to 150x on an excellent night in the New Mexican desert read: "Small and dim with no detail. In the same field with much larger and brighter NGC 4490. A Mutt and Jeff pair. Appears slightly elongated. Hard to judge this one as my eye keeps jumping to NGC 4490." The entry for NGC 4490 reads: Bright with stellar nucleus. Some detail seen in arms. Appears to be a highly tilted spiral. A bit more tilted than M31. A fine object especially when paired with NGC 4485. Seems about 9.5 magnitude, brighter than Burnham says." It's obvious I'd not seen anything on this pair before looking at it as I thought I was looking at a classic spiral rather than a messed up one with no defined arms.

Our galaxy is very over due for a naked eye super nova event. Not one has blown in our galaxy, that we could see that is, since the invention of the telescope much to astronomer's dismay. We find them all the time in very distant galaxies where they are faint and difficult to study. So when one blows in a near by galaxy it causes lots of observatories to drop what they were doing and get their instruments trained on the exploding star. One did so in NGC 4490 shining "brightly". It blew in 2008 and is known as 2008ax being discovered on March 3 by Link Observatories automated supernova search telescope and by Japanese amateur Koichi Itagaki who has discovered over 100 supernova. This one was bright enough to be seen in amateur telescopes of 8" or larger size when viewed from a very dark location. It is shining at magnitude 13.2 as best as I can measure it against the background of the galaxy in my image.

The distance to NGC 4490 is a bit uncertain. I've seen estimates from 35 to 50 million light years. Maybe they'll have to pin it down a bit closer to get meaningful results from the study of this supernova. This is a very blue galaxy in which star birth has been going on at an extremely high rate due to interaction with a companion galaxy NGC 4485 also in the image. Many of these new stars are super-massive blue giants that are very short lived. Lasting only a few million years before they blow up. So it isn't at all surprising to find a supernova in this galaxy. My super nova image was taken in strong moonlight and had very limited color data due to clouds and lousy seeing. But it does show the supernova when it was about 13.5 magnitude. It apparently brightened a bit after my image was taken. Of course all this really happened at least 35 million years ago so this is old news to residents of the galaxy, assuming they could survive living in such an active galaxy with the intense radiation caused by its star birth condition. Be very glad we don't live in such a galaxy. The pink regions easily seen in my image are due to HII emission from areas where star birth is still going on. My lousy seeing and limited color data makes them hard to see in the super nova image.

Arp's image:
http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Arp/Figures/big_arp269.jpeg

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4490

NGC4496

Before reading the below look at the image full image -- not the annotated one. Are the two galaxies interacting? Are they at the same distance or is one in front of the other? If the latter which is in front? OK now read on and see if you are correct.

NGC 4496 is a pair of non-interacting galaxies in Virgo. Though some older papers say they are interacting redshift argues strongly against it. By redshift NGC 4496A (the northern and larger one) is about 95 million light-years away while NGC 4496B is 220 million light-years distant, over twice as far. Oddly it appears that NGC 4496B is in front of its larger "companion" but apparently we are seeing it through the stars of the larger galaxy. To add to the confusion there are two blue objects in NGC 4496A that show a redshift the same as NGC 4496B and are also listed as galaxies. Though they look more like star clusters in NGC 4496A the data says otherwise. I've marked them with G? in the annotated image. More confusing is that these objects don't appear reddened though NGC 4496 appears it could be reddened. I have no idea if the blue blob just south of NGC 4496B is a member of 4496B or A. If B it too should be somewhat reddened but isn't.

There's one more monkey wrench in this. All non-redshift determinations of the distance to NGC 4496A put it much closer. They average about 51 million light-years distant. If they are more correct it is a member of the Virgo Cluster though most papers go with the redshift and say it is not a member of the galaxy cluster.

One paper that considered them interacting calls VCC 1364 and possibly VCC 1359 debris from the interaction rather than separate galaxies. NED has no redshift for either but I included them in the annotated image. I vote against interaction and that these two are separate low surface brightness galaxies.

NED classes 4496A as SB(rs)m and 4496B as IB(s)m:. The NGC project only lists 4496A and says it is SBc. A confusing difference of opinion it would seem.

Were your right? Arp has long maintained cosmological redshift isn't necessarily a good distance indicator and high redshift objects, such as quasars can be far closer than redshift indicates. So far he has little proof on his side. While not involving quasar redshifts this pair certainly would be of interest to him I'd think. Odd he didn't put it on his list.

Besides the normal complement of galaxies, quasars, quasar candidates (UvES) and a galaxy cluster there are 5 asteroids in the image. One very bright and the others faint. All left unusually short trails as they are slowing down preparing for resumption of prograde motion.

Also, there's an interesting discussion at the NGC Project over the identity of this galaxy. Seems Herschel was rather quick in his entries for it and for another, NGC 4505. They conclude they are one and the same galaxy even though Herschel described 4496 as being a resolvable cluster! Also, the RC3 say VCC 1364 is NGC 4496 though I doubt it could have been seen in Herschel's day. Another paper on this problem but not bringing NGC 4505 in the discussion can be found at:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00627084?LI=true Oops. Could be found there when I typed this a few days ago. Now the site is "New and Improved" which means the article is now behind a paywall. Not worth paying for I assure you.

Edit: Seligman adds this, "...although their recessional velocities imply that they are at very different distances, redshift-independent distance estimates place them at the same distance, in which case they are an interacting pair and both members of the Virgo Cluster. In other words, this pair needs to be restudied, to clear up the considerable confusion about its true nature."

NGC 4496 were discovered by Albert Marth on March 28, 1864.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4496

NGC4517

NGC 4517 (aka NGC 4437) is a member of the Virgo Cluster and is seen nearly edge-on. It made the NGC list twice due to a plotting error by John Herschel. That is the NGC 4437 listing. Years earlier his dad William Herschel recorded it giving the correct position. That is the NGC 4517 listing I'm using here. It's the one seen nearly edge on at the bottom of my image. The one at the top is NGC 4517A, a small faint barred spiral also in the cluster. Both are about 65 million light-years away. I had better than normal seeing (less distortion from our atmosphere). NGC 4517A at the top is a very faint galaxy. Due to digital processing that compresses 65,000 brightness levels down to the 256 levels a computer monitor can display the brightness of this galaxy appears far brighter in comparison to NGC 4517 than it really is. This field seen with the eye in even a very large scope is dominated by NGC 4517. You have to have good observing skills to even see NGC 4517A as any more than a faint smudge at the limit of visibility.

The odd short double dash just above NGC 4517 is the asteroid Sazava at magnitude 16.2. Due to weather I took the first two luminosity images, a single frame of each color, red, green and blue then took two more luminosity images before cycling through the color filters again. Notice the second (right) dash is dimmer as clouds were obscuring the sky. By the time of the second blue frame the overcast had put an end to viewing so, I only have one blue frame and 2 of red and green though the seconds of both are poor due to the clouds. As are the second set of luminosity images.

Edit: This is a 2007 image and text so rather lacking. I did reprocess the TIFF data some in 2013. William Herschel discovered it on February 22, 1784. It isn't in either H400 program which surprised me. John Herschel found it on April 14, 1828. As he made a 5 minute error he didn't realize it was one his dad had found decades earlier. Thus, it got the NGC 4437 entry. Of course nothing was at that position and due to a typo later on in another catalog, some tried to say it was NGC 4417. But John's description of the galaxy and its relation to a star show it was NGC 4517 he was looking at.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RG=2x10' B=1x10', STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4517

NGC4522

NGC 4522 is a near edge on spiral in the Virgo Cluster. It resides in the constellation of Virgo as well (not all the cluster does) and is thought to be about 60 million light-years distant. Though its redshift would put it about twice that distance. This difference indicates it is really moving rapidly through the Virgo Cluster. So fast that its dust and gas is being stripped from it. Some of this is visible in my image. Note the upper right side of the galaxy appears missing. IR images show it is there but hidden by dust and gas being blown up and to the right. Some faint star clouds are visible rising above the disk area that are made up of new stars formed in this dust as it is compressed by the ram pressure of its high speed run through the cluster's intergalactic medium. You can read all about it and see the HST image of the galaxy at: http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic0911b/ .

What they don't mention is that it appears to have a double core. Even the HST image which resolves its stars shows an apparent double core. I suppose that could be due to dust obscuring the central part of the core giving the illusion it is double. There certainly is a lot of gas and dust in that area. I found nothing on this, however.

NED classifies the galaxy as SB(s)cd: sp HII. The NGC Project says simply, Sc. In any case, it is a quite interesting galaxy. Including the full extent of the faint stars off each end of the galaxy, it is some 81,000 light-years in diameter. Using the portion that shows in the JPEG image it is about 62,000 light-years in diameter assuming the 60 million light-year distance.

It has several companions in my image, IC 3715 an irregular dwarf to its east and UGCA 284 to the west, an elliptical galaxy. Then there's VCC 1496 a Dwarf E5 galaxy of low surface brightness to the southwest and VCC 1579 a bright S0 galaxy in the lower left corner. Several others are just outside my field.

There's a very tight pair of red galaxies to the upper right of NGC 4522; [WLH2009] 0550. It has two cores apparently in the same galactic halo. One has a redshift that puts it 1.37 billion light-years distant while the other as a "predicted" distance of also 1.37 billion light-years. This would seem to indicate these are two interacting galaxies or they are far enough apart they aren't interacting but are just along the same sight line giving that illusion. I see no tidal plumes to indicate interaction.

Well to the west of NGC 4522 and a bit south is the galaxy SDSS J123253.04+090703.0. It has a bright, near starlike core with two faint extensions on either side that are somewhat warped and get fatter as their distance from the core increases. Are the tidal plumes? I could find virtually nothing on this galaxy, unfortunately, not even a redshift.

Below NGC 4522 and a bit west is a rather nice galaxy cluster made up of both blue and gold members. I found it in two catalogs, one listing 19 members and an estimated distance of 3.43 billion light-years (NSCS J123335+090311) and another listing 15 members and a photographic redshift putting it 2.87 billion light-years away (WHL J123334.9+090304). Which is the more accurate I don't know. Though I've found the WHL entries usually more reliable.

Then there's a galaxy group (GG) of 4 or 6 galaxies to the southeast of NGC 4522. 5 members have a redshift measurement of which three say 1.18 billion light-years, another 1.16 billion light-years and oddly the one marked as the Bright Cluster Galaxy at 1.56 billion light-years. Though its distance was a guess based on the Friend of a Friend method. I don't pretend to understand this concept which is quite confusing to me considering its distance estimate is very different from the others, including another FoF estimate. I've drawn a line to where the galaxy group I've listed puts its center though that position is +/- 15 seconds of arc. Oddly its distance is greater than 4 of the members with an estimate though well below that of the BCG.

It appears to me that there are more faint fuzzy galaxies in the image than there are field stars from our galaxy. Though seeing wasn't all that great so that might fuzz some of the stars into galaxy like fuzz balls.

14" LX200R @ f/10, L=4x10' RGB=2x10' STL-11000XM, Paramount ME

Related Designations for NGC4522