PDA

View Full Version : Object of the Week, September 26 2021 -- Fornax Dwarf, NGC 1049, and 5 other extragalactic globulars



akarsh
September 26th, 2021, 09:48 AM
[Posting in lieu of Alvin Huey, who will instead post on Oct 3rd]

All objects are in the constellation of Fornax.

Identifier(s)TypeRA (J2000)Dec (J2000)B magV magDiscoverer

NGC 1049 = Fornax 3
Globular Cluster
02:39:48
-34:15:29
13.6

John Herschel (1835)


Fornax 4
Globular Cluster
02:40:08
-34:32:11

13.9
Edwin Hubble and Walter Baade (1939)


Fornax 5
Globular Cluster
02:42:21
-34:06:06
14.5

Paul Hodge (1961)


Fornax 2
Globular Cluster
02:38:40
-34:48:05
14.5

Harlow Shapley (1939)


Fornax 1
Globular Cluster
02:37:02
-34:11:00

16.6
Paul Hodge (1961)


Fornax 6
Globular Cluster
02:40:04
-34:25:13
16.6

Harlow Shapley (1939)


Fornax Dwarf = Fornax dSph
Galaxy
02:39:59
-34:26:57
9.0
7.4
Harlow Shapley (1938)



History and Science

NGC 1049 was discovered by John Herschel on Oct 19, 1835, and Dreyer described it as "pB, S, R, stellar" in the NGC [1]. Much later, in 1938, Harlow Shapley reported on "Two Stellar Systems of a New Kind" [2]. Using plates obtained from the Boyden Observatory in South Africa, he had just discovered the first dwarf spheroidal galaxies -- the Sculptor and Fornax dwarfs. He recognized that these were part of the local group and that they had properties that were in common with globular clusters, spheroidal galaxies, and the Magellanic clouds. Whereas Shapley first wrote "There are no irregular nebulosities, no clumping of stellar images, no sharp or bright nuclei...", Hubble and Baade [3] subsequently identified that it has "at least two globular clusters" -- NGC 1049, and what is now known as Fornax 4. Shapley subsequently [4] reported another globular cluster (Fornax 2), and one more "very faint cluster of unidentified character", which is now known as Fornax 6. In 1961, Paul Hodge identified [5] two new globular clusters, now known as Fornax 5 and Fornax 1, by using larger photographs of the Fornax Dwarf.

Now comes an interesting subject. Hodge does reference Fornax 6 from Shapley's paper ([4]), but writes in [5] that it "is probably rather bluer than the globular clusters" ... "appears as a group of five stars of approximately 21st mag", and does not seem to consider it a globular. What is Fornax 6? Throwback to 2016, Steve Gottlieb made a post here on DSF [6] (https://www.deepskyforum.com/showthread.php?940-Fornax-globulars) on this subject, in which he quotes a 1998 paper [7]: "nearly half of the “stars” in cluster 6 appear to us to be nonstellar and seem to constitute a very faint compact group of galaxies". But in the 5 years between then and now, a couple new papers have emerged on Fornax 6. One of these recent papers from 2019 [8] asserts that it is a "diffuse but bona fide cluster that is likely undergoing tidal disruption" and that "most of the objects discussed in [7] that were thought to be nonstellar, are clearly multiple closely located stars". They provide a picture:

4463
(Picture of Fornax 6 from the Dark Energy Survey [8])

Further, they use Gaia data to corroborate that some Fornax 6 cluster stars have similar proper motion to the Fornax dSph. Even more hot-of-the-press material from May 2021 [9] used spectroscopy to identify 15--17 members of Fornax 6. By analyzing the chemical content and the statistics of the motions of the stars, they are able to further assert that Fornax 6 is a globular cluster, perhaps a younger one compared to the other clusters.

It appears that the recent scientific interest in Fornax Dwarf and its globulars stems from its relevance to understanding dark matter. Firstly, it is apparently anomalous for a dwarf galaxy like Fornax dSph to harbor as many as 6 globular clusters [9]. Further, my understanding of a brief literature search [9--11] is that, according to the prevalent model of how dark matter is distributed in such galaxies, the globulars in Fornax dSph should spiral rapidly (on astronomical timescales) into the core of the galaxy, and aggregate there to form a nucleus. Then, given that we are seeing multiple globulars close to the core, and no nucleus, is it just pure chance that we caught glimpses of these globulars towards the end of their life, or do we need to refine our models of dark matter? I believe this constitutes the "Fornax timing problem" [11], on which you can find many sophisticated papers.

4464
(Another image from [8] showing a few of the globs and the core of Fornax dSph)

4465
(Image from the KStars planetarium software showing overlay of globular clusters on the DSS2 Colored Image)

Visual Observation

I believe my interest in the globular clusters objects arose out of perusing Paul Hodge's "An Atlas of Local Group Galaxies" [12] for extragalactic targets. Using my 18" f/4.5, I checked off five of these globulars, excluding Fornax 6, on 20th Jan 2015 from an observing site in Central Texas (~31° N latitude). Subsequently, I submitted a detailed report to the Austin Astro. Soc. newsletter [13], but I will summarize my notes here. I put both the above list and the below based on my estimated order of difficulty.

1. NGC 1049 (Fornax 3): Surely, if there's one object you should attempt from this list, it's this one. I first saw this with my former 17.5" in 2009 from south India, where it rises much higher. With that aperture, despite my inexperience and the humidity, it was not tough. In 2015, I logged this as the easiest of the five globulars. I revisited it with my 18" in 2015 for completeness.

2. Fornax 4: This was the second easiest of the five. It was just a tad more condensed than NGC 1049, and only a small jump in difficulty from NGC 1049.

3. Fornax 5: The third easiest of the five, I logged it as quite reminiscent of Fornax 4, condensed and of nearly equal brightness.

4. Fornax 2: More diffuse than Fornax 4 and NGC 1049, I logged this as "a uniform glow at 205x. Was not at all as obvious as F4 or NGC 1049."

5. Fornax 1: Looking at my logs, this one must have been very challenging. I observed it 1.5 hours after transit, so it was low and I logged "at the @#$@#$ edge of visibility". I sensed it a multiple number of times, with the object popping in and out of the sky background. The size of the very, very, faint glow was comparable, if not larger than F2. I had the best view using a Pentax 14mm XS (147x)

I have been unsuccessful in observing the Fornax dSph itself -- as is well-known, its very low surface brightness makes it a challenging object even for the darkest of skies and the most seasoned observers, even more so in the northern hemisphere. Fornax 6 will be on my list if I get any observing in this season, with the west coast of the US drenched in wildfire smoke.

I already mentioned Steve's observing report of these objects with Jimi's 48" [6] which includes Fornax 6, but here are some more pointers I was able to unearth:
1. A November 2018 Sky & Telescope article by Steve on Extragalactic Globulars includes the 5 globulars, detailing observations with a 13", and noting that they should be visible in a 10".
2. I haven't read this one, but here's an article by Dana De Zoysa on CN that seems to go to greater depths: https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/articles/the-fornax-dwarf-and-its-five-globulars-part-1-r2696
3. Some of you may remember Fornax Dwarf and its globulars as being the subject of a recent discussion on amastro [14]. Paper [8] also features in this discussion.

This collection of objects should appeal to a wide range of audiences. I imagine that folks with access to big binoculars, southern or low northern latitudes, and extremely dark skies can take a crack at the Fornax Dwarf. Yet again, those who are not fortunate to have access to great skies, but have larger aperture scopes (13") can shoot for NGC 1049, F4 and F5. Those with larger aperture, darker skies or more observing experience can take a crack at F1. Hopefully, all of this is convincing that the Fornax Dwarf system is a target worthy of a try. So, as always:

Give it a go, and let us know!

[1] http://cseligman.com/text/atlas/ngc10.htm#1049
[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/142715b0 (Sadly, this one is paywalled despite being almost a century old)
[3] http://adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1939PASP...51...40B
[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1077970/pdf/pnas01610-0017.pdf
[5] http://adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1961AJ.....66...83H
[6] https://www.deepskyforum.com/showthread.php?940-Fornax-globulars
[7] https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/316164?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
[8] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ab14f5/pdf
[9] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2105.00064.pdf
[10] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.11522.pdf
[11] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.11887.pdf
[12] https://www.google.com/books/edition/An_Atlas_of_Local_Group_Galaxies/-RoBCAAAQBAJ
[13] http://austinastro.wildapricot.org/resources/Documents/ST%20Archive/ST201502.pdf (Page 15)
[14] https://groups.io/g/amastro/topic/77656115?p=,,,20,0,0,0::,,,0,0,0,77656115

Howard B
September 28th, 2021, 06:01 AM
Great post Akarsh - but the two labeled images aren't big enough to read. Can you re-post them at a bigger size?

I've observed NGC 1049, 1, 3, 4 and 5 of Fornax globs with Jimi and Steve one night a few years ago - not sure why we missed #2 - and will post those sketches in the next few days.

Uwe Glahn
September 28th, 2021, 04:58 PM
What a fun to catch the globs. Unfortunately the galaxy itself stands very low in the sky to got chances to see the fainter globs.

From 47°N, NGC 1049 stands out as a nice glow. With 16-inch I wrote: direct vision, somewhat laminar at 129x

Later from Namibia, all globs were visible with a 17-inch telescope. I wrote:
Fornax 1 - indicated with 182x; steadily visible with 114x as a structureless, small glow
Fornax 2 - direct vision with 114x and 182x; laminar glow with diffuse edges; no concentration to its middle
Fornax 3 (NGC 1049) - bright, direct vision; laminar and clearly concentrated to its middle
Fornax 4 - laminar glow with direct vision; not much concentrated
Fornax 5 - bright and showy with 114x; with 182x distinct center; diffuse edges
Fornax 6 - faintest Fornax glob, with higher magnification sure popping but no to hold steadily

akarsh
September 28th, 2021, 07:37 PM
Great post Akarsh - but the two labeled images aren't big enough to read. Can you re-post them at a bigger size?
Ah, I just figured out why this happened, and hopefully it's fixed for good -- PNG images were being down-scaled too much. I've updated the images now.



I've observed NGC 1049, 1, 3, 4 and 5 of Fornax globs with Jimi and Steve one night a few years ago - not sure why we missed #2 - and will post those sketches in the next few days.

NGC 1049 is the same as 3, so I presume you meant 6 instead of 3. Fornax 2 is one of the easier ones, whereas Fornax 6 and Fornax 1 are the toughies.

akarsh
September 28th, 2021, 07:43 PM
What a fun to catch the globs. Unfortunately the galaxy itself stands very low in the sky to got chances to see the fainter globs.

From 47°N, NGC 1049 stands out as a nice glow. With 16-inch I wrote: direct vision, somewhat laminar at 129x

Later from Namibia, all globs were visible with a 17-inch telescope. I wrote:
Fornax 1 - indicated with 182x; steadily visible with 114x as a structureless, small glow
Fornax 2 - direct vision with 114x and 182x; laminar glow with diffuse edges; no concentration to its middle
Fornax 3 (NGC 1049) - bright, direct vision; laminar and clearly concentrated to its middle
Fornax 4 - laminar glow with direct vision; not much concentrated
Fornax 5 - bright and showy with 114x; with 182x distinct center; diffuse edges
Fornax 6 - faintest Fornax glob, with higher magnification sure popping but no to hold steadily

I was almost sure you would post an observation from Namibia, Uwe. Did you manage to see the galaxy itself?

Steve Gottlieb
September 29th, 2021, 04:57 AM
I've observed NGC 1049, 1, 3, 4 and 5 of Fornax globs with Jimi and Steve one night a few years ago - not sure why we missed #2.

We can't count? But I also have brief notes on Fornax 6 at 488x (from 29 Oct '16):

Extremely faint, small, very low surface brightness spot, ~0.3' diameter. Located 7' due north of globular Fornax 4. Helping to pinpoint the location is a mag 15.8 star 1.6' W and a mag 16.5 star 2.1' WNW.

Uwe Glahn
September 29th, 2021, 06:12 PM
I was almost sure you would post an observation from Namibia, Uwe. Did you manage to see the galaxy itself?

Yes, I did. I simply forgot to mention the two observations.

At 47°N, but very good transparency of a High Alpine sky I wrote with my 16-inch: very faint and large glow sure indicated

At 23°S, equipped with 17-inch I wrote: round and 0,5° large glow with diffuse edges; easy noticeable and steadily visible with direct vision

akarsh
September 30th, 2021, 01:44 AM
We can't count?
Counting is a legitimately hard task after 4 nights of observing.

cloudbuster
September 30th, 2021, 01:28 PM
I observed this galaxy and its globular clusters with my 10" traveldob from the Roque de los Muchachos (La Palma) in better conditions than currently for sure...

My notes:

The Fornax Dwarf is seen as large and dim glow of light with no structure, gradually turning brighter towards the center. Very large! Within the dwarf galaxy a few extragalactic globular clusters are observed; Fornax 5 is tough, but definitely seen with AV as a weak, almost stellar dot. Fornax 4 is seen too and appears very similar. NGC 1049 is a bit easier. This one is seen clearly and with direct vision, but not much larger than the previous two. Lastly, Fornax 2 glimpsed, but this one is very dim and only now and then it blinks into AV, however it does appear slightly larger than the others. Fornax 1 and 6 could not be seen.

Regards, Martijn

Howard B
October 1st, 2021, 03:56 AM
Ok, here are my observations from October 2016 with Steve and Jimi, using his 48-inch scope:

4466 4467

Like Steve and Akarsh mentioned, counting at 3am can be tough, so that's as good an explanation as any on why we missed Fornax 2. I don't have any notes that I've seen the Fornax Dwarf Galaxy yet, so maybe I can see it and globular #2 in the coming weeks. This is why I love the OOTW - such a great way to find wonderful objects I haven't seen yet!

akarsh
October 6th, 2021, 07:49 PM
Having picked this OOTW, I felt obligated to at least attempt to complete observing it. I'm pleased to report an observation of Fornax Dwarf with 25x100 binoculars from Okie-Tex Star Party (36 °N). It was a very faint, large glow almost at the threshold of visibility. I hope to get a better night so I can get a stronger view. On the darkest night so far at the star party, I managed to pin-point the location of the glow with a very rough star atlas, which gives me confidence that the object was really seen. I followed up the subsequent night and further confirmed it. In my 18" using a 31mm Nagler eyepiece (~66x), the glow was rather more discernible than in the 25x100 binoculars.

I attempted Fornax 6 and tried to repeat Fornax 1 and was unsuccessful at both. Should give them another try.

Clear Skies
Akarsh

Skyheerlen
November 21st, 2022, 10:55 AM
Fornax Dwarf is not extremely difficult, depending on location and sky condition. A few years ago, it was relative easy with my Fujinon 16x70 bino at the Roque de los Muchacos, La Palma; last night, with a bit less favourable condition, close to the Llano de las Animas, La Palma, it was far more difficult with the same bino.

I've tried Fornax 6 a few times with Celestron C14 and 13" dob at the French Alps, SaharaSky (Morocco) as well as various locations at La Palma, but never succeeded.

ScottH
December 21st, 2022, 01:29 AM
12/18/22 Fornax Dwarf 21.3mpsas
In 6” at 39x (2.6° TFOV), globular cluster NGC 1049 is visible with averted vision as a very faint star while the broad expanse of the Fornax Dwarf itself is also visible! Two for one!!

Keep in mind I'm at latitude 36.1N.

Scott H.