Stars of Constellations exist in what Spiral Arm of the Milky Way Galaxy?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Milky Way Galaxy consists of several spiral arms, including the Orion-Cygnus Arm, Perseus Arm, Scutum-Centaurus Arm, Norma and Outer Arm, and Carina-Sagittarius Arm. A comprehensive list of stars within these arms is not readily available, with existing resources like Wikipedia providing limited information. Observations of supernovae, such as Supernova 1987A in the Large Magellanic Cloud, demonstrate that such events can be visible to the naked eye under certain conditions. The discussion also highlights the limitations of human vision in resolving binary stars and the misconceptions surrounding the visibility of astronomical events.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the structure of the Milky Way Galaxy
  • Familiarity with supernova phenomena and their visibility
  • Knowledge of astronomical observation techniques
  • Basic concepts of binary star systems and their interactions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Orion-Cygnus Arm and its prominent stars
  • Explore the visibility conditions for supernovae in different galaxies
  • Learn about the characteristics of binary star systems and their observational limits
  • Investigate the historical observations of supernovae and their documentation
USEFUL FOR

Astronomy enthusiasts, astrophysicists, and anyone interested in the structure of the Milky Way and the phenomena of supernovae will benefit from this discussion.

Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
The Milky Way is a Barred Spiral Galaxy 100,00 -120,000 Across.

I was wondering if there is a website or list of what Stars of Constellations exist in what Spiral Arm.

I there exists:
Orion-Cygnus Arm
Perseus Arm
Scutum-Centaurus Arm
Norma and Outer Arm
Carina-Sagitarius Arm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_way gives some of the stars in the constellations without locations.

Is the a more comprehensive list?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
My guess: The stars in the constellations are all in the same arm as the sun. I suspect stars in other arms would not be observable individually.
 
Virtually every naked-eye star is in the Orion arm. Eta Leonis is an exception, but these are rare.
 
Have many people reported observing a super nova in real time. And if so, could you observe such an event with the naked eye, or could you only observe it with a high powered telescope!
 
Have many people have reported observing a super nova in real time. And if so, could you observe such an event with the naked eye, or would you require a high powered telescope? And if you did observe a super nova, with the naked eye, would of it occurred in the Milky Way galaxy, or another galaxy!
 
You can observe a supernova in other arms with the naked eye, if there is one, and if there is not too much gas in the line of sight. No supernova in our galaxy was observed since 1604, however.
 
Interesting. I live in the Southern Hemisphere and I think I may of witnessed a type m super nova about 15 years ago. Has there been any reports of stars going missing around 1996-97. I have been thinking a lot about what I observed that year. And the only thing which seems to fit with what I observed is the current theory surrounding the events of a type m super nova! Other people have been helpful, but feel that I maybe witnessed a meteor shower or perhaps imagined it. Thankyou.
 
A supernova would appear like a (very) bright star over hours or days, unlike a meteor shower.
 
  • #10
age123 said:
Have many people reported observing a super nova in real time. And if so, could you observe such an event with the naked eye, or could you only observe it with a high powered telescope!

Supernova 1987A, which occurred in the Large Magellanic Cloud (a satellite galaxy that orbits the Milky Way) was visible to the naked eye. It peaked at about visual magnitude +3, which is a medium bright star. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to go supernova - it could be as bright as the full moon!
 
  • #11
age123 said:
Interesting. I live in the Southern Hemisphere and I think I may of witnessed a type m super nova about 15 years ago. Has there been any reports of stars going missing around 1996-97. I have been thinking a lot about what I observed that year. And the only thing which seems to fit with what I observed is the current theory surrounding the events of a type m super nova! Other people have been helpful, but feel that I maybe witnessed a meteor shower or perhaps imagined it. Thankyou.
What exactly did you see? A very naked-eye supernova that nobody else saw would be pretty much impossible 15 years ago.

Today, so many astrophotographers are taking pictures that a supernova in any of the nearest few hundred galaxies would be noticed by several, independently.
 
  • #13
The event I witnessed was very different to a star shinning really brightly. It envolved two stars, that were position very close together. One in particular was flickering dull then bright on and off for about 10 seconds. Then the other one appeared to shoot at the other one, about 4-5 times. Then the star that did all the shooting exploded along the trajectory of the particles that it fired off and engulfed the entire star. It's quite difficult to explain. What do you think it was? I looked up a type m supernova, and the way it is described sounds very similar to what I witnessed.
 
  • #14
age123 said:
I looked up a type m supernova, and the way it is described sounds very similar to what I witnessed.
You cannot see binary stars as separate objects without a telescope, that is way beyond the physical limit of an eye. In addition, the timescale would be wrong.

Maybe you saw some airplane-related effects, or an optical illusion in some way. But not variable stars.
 
  • #15
mfb said:
You cannot see binary stars as separate objects without a telescope, that is way beyond the physical limit of an eye.

While I agree with your other points this couldn't be more wrong. You don't even need a telescope to split double stars. For instance the naked eye is enough to split the two main components of the quadruple system Mizar and Alcor in the Big Dipper's handle. With a small telescope you can split thousands of double stars.
 
  • #16
glappkaeft said:
While I agree with your other points this couldn't be more wrong. You don't even need a telescope to split double stars. For instance the naked eye is enough to split the two main components of the quadruple system Mizar and Alcor in the Big Dipper's handle. With a small telescope you can split thousands of double stars.
I admit that I'm not up to date with recent astronomy, but last time I checked, at over one light year apart, Alkor and Mizar form a binary in the same sense(and with similar certainty) that Alpha and Proxima Centauri do.

Still, we can use that example to show age123 why he coudn't possibly see a supernova acting like he saw.

Alkor and Mizar are ~80ly away, and ~1ly apart. They are separated by a 4arcminutes angle on the sky. This is some 3 times under the limit of human eye resolution(1.2 arcmin).
So, at that distance, it is in principle possible to separate two stars orbiting each other at 1/3rd of a light year.
This in turn, is some 10000 times farther than the orbital radius of binary stars that undergo the Ia supernova event age123 is alluding to.
Even if we imagined some mass transfer between the two stars at such a distance, it'd take a larger part of a year, not a few seconds. Otherwise the mass would have to travel faster than light.
Additionally, if a supernova exploded 80ly away from Earth, we'd all be dead, most likely.

But let's say the supernova is ~800ly away, at which distance we'd be pretty safe (although it would be close enough to have a good chance to outshine the Moon), and the binary elements are 6AU apart.
The angular separation between the binary components would now be 4arcmin/105 ≈ 0.00024 arcsec
or roughly thirty thousand times beyond human eye resolution capabilities.

Seeing the binary components of a Ia supernova with a naked eye would be similarly impossible as seeing the fine structure of DNA.

So, if somebody told you that they saw something vaguelly like a double helix in their cup of coffee, you would be just as sure as we are that whatever it was, it wasn't DNA.
 
  • #17
glappkaeft said:
While I agree with your other points this couldn't be more wrong. You don't even need a telescope to split double stars. For instance the naked eye is enough to split the two main components of the quadruple system Mizar and Alcor in the Big Dipper's handle. With a small telescope you can split thousands of double stars.
Ok, I should have been more specific at "binary stars". There are systems which are gravitationally bound and can be resolved by the naked eye. But gravitationally bound is not the point. If stars are so close that they interact with each other in a significant way (with mass flow, tidal forces or similar effects), you cannot resolve that system with the naked eye.
 
  • #18
mfb said:
Ok, I should have been more specific at "binary stars". There are systems which are gravitationally bound and can be resolved by the naked eye. But gravitationally bound is not the point. If stars are so close that they interact with each other in a significant way (with mass flow, tidal forces or similar effects), you cannot resolve that system with the naked eye.

Definitely. Or if you could separate them they would be way too close for comfort...
 
  • #19
age123 said:
The event I witnessed was very different to a star shinning really brightly. It envolved two stars, that were position very close together. One in particular was flickering dull then bright on and off for about 10 seconds. Then the other one appeared to shoot at the other one, about 4-5 times. Then the star that did all the shooting exploded along the trajectory of the particles that it fired off and engulfed the entire star. It's quite difficult to explain. What do you think it was? I looked up a type m supernova, and the way it is described sounds very similar to what I witnessed.

1. A supernova is nothing like you described.
2. There haven't been any bright supernova since 1987.
3. The extreme distance to stellar objects and the limited resolution of the eye makes it impossible to see any details anyways.
 
  • #20
age123 said:
The event I witnessed was very different to a star shinning really brightly. It envolved two stars, that were position very close together. One in particular was flickering dull then bright on and off for about 10 seconds. Then the other one appeared to shoot at the other one, about 4-5 times. Then the star that did all the shooting exploded along the trajectory of the particles that it fired off and engulfed the entire star. It's quite difficult to explain. What do you think it was? I looked up a type m supernova, and the way it is described sounds very similar to what I witnessed.

How far apart were the two stars that you saw in degrees? or in fingers width?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K