I How to calculate kinematic distances in the Milky Way

AI Thread Summary
Calculating kinematic distances to the Milky Way's spiral arms using the tangent point method yields accurate results for longitudes between 0 and 90 degrees, but fails for longitudes between 90 and 270 degrees. The equation used involves the velocities of the Sun and the observed cloud, derived from the Doppler Effect, but the results for the outer galaxy are incorrect. It is suggested that the definition of the observed velocity (Vobs) may not hold true for all longitudes, particularly when clouds are moving towards the observer. This discrepancy could lead to negative values for Vobs, complicating the distance calculations. Further insights or solutions to this issue are sought from the community.
Ben231111
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I have been trying to calculate the distances to the spiral arms (neutral Hydrogen clouds) and our equation seems to work perfectly for longitudes 0<l<90 but doesn't seem to work for the outer galaxy (i.e. between 90<l<270) - we get distances but they're not correct. After reading a lot of literature online it seems the outer distances should actually be easier to calculate given that there would only be one solution, rather than two like in the inner galaxy.

I'm using the tangent point method and the equation I am using to calculate the distance from the centre of the galaxy to the cloud is R = (Vsun*Rsun*sin(l))/(Vobs+Vsun*sin(l)) where Vsun is the velocity of the sun, Rsun is the distance from the Sun to the galactic centre.

Vobs is calculated from the Doppler Effect using Vobs = c*(1-f'/1420.405...) - vlsr where c is the speed of light, f' is the observed frequency and 1420.405... is the frequency of the Hydrogen emission.

I then use my R and calculate the distance d from the Sun to the cloud using d = Rsun*cos(l)±√((Rsun*cos(l))^2 - Rsun^2 + R^2)

As said before, this all seems to work fine for 0<l<90, but not for l>90. The only thought I have had is that the way I have defined Vobs (defined as the velocity of the cloud along the line of sight minus the velocity of the Sun along the line of sight) might be true for all l<90, but not necessarily true for l>90 - for some longitudes and distances (i.e between 90<l<270), Vobs may become negative as the cloud is now moving towards us, instead of away.

Any help with this is appreciated, thanks!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Any help?
Thanks
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top