the-maddest-robot

Astrophotographer & chemist, mid 20's Currently on the roof yelling at the clouds to get out of the way Mostly astrophotos I've taken, possibly other science related stuff

[the-maddest-robot]

3I/ATLAS, the interstellar comet

This is a picture of 3I/atlas (also known as C/2025 N1 (ATLAS), the third interstellar comet that has ever been detected. We know that it is an interstellar object due to its speed and trajectory: it's too fast to be gravitationally bound to the sun, and its trajectory is very hyperbolic.

It's currently at about 280 000 km from Earth (about 1.8 astronomical units); its closest approach was on the 19th of December with a distance of about 270 000 km. Since it's a relatively faint comet (current magnitude of 12.5), it's not visible with the naked eye and would require a rather large telescope and a very dark sky to be observed by the eye.

With my instrument I was able to take about 1h of photos (using LRGB filters). Despite the fact that the photo is not of the best quality, which was to be expected with a faint comet.

When imaging such an object, the duration of each photo has to be rather short (2 minutes in my case) since the comet would otherwise be blurry. This is due to its movement being noticeably faster than the background stars (see below in two images taken 6 minutes apart from one another)

In addition, this movement and the changes that can occur in a comet's activity will generally prevent you from combining images taken over a long period.

Both of those limitations, in addition to how faint it is, will prevent me from getting a better image. The weird blotchy smudges in the background of the main image correspond to stars that were near the comet. I tried to minimise their visibility since they can't be stacked at the same time as the comet, making them appear as long smudges in the image.

Additional information on the comet, as well as its up to date position and magnitude: https://theskylive.com/c2025n1-info https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/comets/3i-atlas/

3I/ATLAS - Wikipedia

(image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and ZWO LRGB filter. 20x120s for L in addition to 7x120s image for each RGB filter, total imaging time of 1h20, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)

[the-maddest-robot]

Better photo of the Orion nebula (aka M42)

I re-imaged the Orion Nebula, with less cloudy weather. I was able to get good 300, 60 and 30 seconds exposure this time which means that I was able to do a HDR composition. (HDR -> High Dynamic Range) This type of processing replaces the over exposed parts of the long exposure with pixels from the shorter exposure (with some scaling and masks to have smooth transitions/correct the histograms). It allows the use of long exposure on ''very'' bright objects helping to capture details in the darker parts of the image without overexposing/loosing details in the bright parts. previous images of M42

(image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and Baader 6.5nm Ha and OIII filter. 27x300s + 15x60s + some 30s for the Ha filter, 35x300s + 15x60s + some 30s for the OIII filter, in addition to 10x30s image for each RGB filter for the stars, total imaging time of about 6h, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)

[jbt7493]

its really cool that we discovered glass which is the material that doesnt have any chemical reactions with anything in the universe very useful for doing chemistry due to being able to put things in it to contain chemical reactions and never having it react with the things that are in it due to it being completely and entirely unreactive to every chemical

[aorish-deactivated20251222]

Posts from a 17th century chymist who's about to have their bones dissolved by hydrofluoric acid.

[e-102]

HYDROFLUORIC ACID MENTION‼️

💀🧪

[moncoeursaignant]

DICKS OUT FOR HYDROFLUORIC ACID!!!

[e-102]

NOT A GOOD IDEA!!!!!

[the-maddest-robot]

actually there is quite a bit of commun chemical that will attack/dissolve glass So of course HF (and the various HF complex : HF-pyridine,...) but also some fluorine salts can (slowly) etch glass such as cesium fluoride or ammonium fluoride (the bifluoride salts are a special case since they have the -HF2 anion which is somewhat in equilibrium with fluoride ion and HF when in solutions) in addition to those, most strong bases such sodium hydroxide aka caustic soda (the major component of most drain unclogged product) or potassium hydroxide can dissolve/etch glass rather efficiently (especially when heated up). Other bases (even weaker ones) can also etch glass if they are heated in dry organic solvent (something like 12h at 50°C)

the have a few pice of glassware that were badly etched by bases in the lab, I don't have picture of them unfortunately. finale, some acids such as phosphoric acid (the concentrate version) are known to attack glass when heated (it will require hight temperature than bases)

I should also point out that HF in it's most common forms is somewhat slow at dissolving glass, this is due to the formation of poorly soluble fluoride salts at the surface of the glass that slows down the dissolution. unfortunately, even diluted HF will etch the fuck out of our glassware though.

[the-maddest-robot]

got a photo of the previously mentioned glassware :

If I remember correctly, left was due to a 20% sodium hydroxide solution, the one in the center to potassium carbonate in acetonitrile and the one on the right is for comparison. The damage was done over 24-48h at around 22°C

[jbt7493]

its really cool that we discovered glass which is the material that doesnt have any chemical reactions with anything in the universe very useful for doing chemistry due to being able to put things in it to contain chemical reactions and never having it react with the things that are in it due to it being completely and entirely unreactive to every chemical

[aorish-deactivated20251222]

Posts from a 17th century chymist who's about to have their bones dissolved by hydrofluoric acid.

[e-102]

HYDROFLUORIC ACID MENTION‼️

💀🧪

[moncoeursaignant]

DICKS OUT FOR HYDROFLUORIC ACID!!!

[e-102]

NOT A GOOD IDEA!!!!!

[the-maddest-robot]

actually there is quite a bit of commun chemical that will attack/dissolve glass So of course HF (and the various HF complex : HF-pyridine,...) but also some fluorine salts can (slowly) etch glass such as cesium fluoride or ammonium fluoride (the bifluoride salts are a special case since they have the -HF2 anion which is somewhat in equilibrium with fluoride ion and HF when in solutions) in addition to those, most strong bases such sodium hydroxide aka caustic soda (the major component of most drain unclogged product) or potassium hydroxide can dissolve/etch glass rather efficiently (especially when heated up). Other bases (even weaker ones) can also etch glass if they are heated in dry organic solvent (something like 12h at 50°C)

the have a few pice of glassware that were badly etched by bases in the lab, I don't have picture of them unfortunately. finale, some acids such as phosphoric acid (the concentrate version) are known to attack glass when heated (it will require hight temperature than bases)

I should also point out that HF in it's most common forms is somewhat slow at dissolving glass, this is due to the formation of poorly soluble fluoride salts at the surface of the glass that slows down the dissolution. unfortunately, even diluted HF will etch the fuck out of our glassware though.

[the-maddest-robot]

The Orion nebula (aka M42)

This is a very bright emission/reflection nebula in the Orion Nebula (situated just below the belt). In low light pollution areas, it can be visible with the naked eye (better with binoculars). The nebula's apparent size is about 1°, around twice the size of the full moon. Due to its size and brightness, it's one of the most photographed deep sky objects.

It was the first test of my new remote telescope rig, not completely satisfied with the result, especially the outer parts and core of the nebula. Weather was not the best (some high altitude clouds) and the system is not completely calibrated/installed (still waiting on some equipment). This led to the 300s sub exposure to be ok and the 30s, originally intended to help with the core, to be only usable for the stars.

(my image is taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and Baader 6.5nm Ha and OIII filter. 12x300s for the Ha filter, 12x300s for the OIII filter, plus some 30s images in both OIII and Ha for better stars, total imaging time of about 2h, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)

[callese]

refseek.com

www.worldcat.org/

link.springer.com

http://bioline.org.br/

repec.org

science.gov

pdfdrive.com

[the-maddest-robot]

Pelican nebula (IC 5070)

This is an emission nebula situated in the Cygnus constellation below the star Deneb and just above NGC 7000 (the North America nebula), it is located about 1 800 light years from earth. Like its neighbour (ngc 7000) the pelican nebula is an emission nebula composed of ionised gas, mostly hydrogen but also helium, oxygen and others (the colourful luminous part of the image), and dust (the dark patches). Both NGC7000 and IC 5070 are star forming regions, unfortunately, in those two nebulae the vast majority of those protostars are hidden behind dust clouds and are thus not visible. IR telescope can see through some of the dust that's how we discovered most of them. Fortunately for me, in the case of the pelican nebula, one of those protostar is located in the tip of a pillar of cold gas and dust and is the source of a Herbig-Haro object. Herbig-Haro objects are the result of hot gas ejected hight speed at the poles of a protostars colliding with the surrounding gas causing it to heat up and glow. Here is a zoomed in and more contrasted version of the image (only using the hydrogen filters) where this object (Herbig-Haro 555) is more visible.

And here is an image (also using a hydrogen filter) from a publication by J. Bally and B. Reipurth on this specific object for comparison :

(my image is taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and Baader 6.5nm Ha and OIII filter. 50x300s for the Ha filter, 65x300s for the SII filter and 68x300s for the OIII filter, total imaging time 15h15min, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)

[the-maddest-robot]

I'm back with new photos !!! Finally on vacation with access to my telescope and a very good sky quality (as well as clear weather). So to start, here's a picture of the crescent nebula aka NGC 6888 taken using Ha and OIII filter (HOO colour combination). The soap bubble nebula (PN ju 1) is also visible on the left of the image

I had previously taken an image of NGC 6888 but I only had a Ha and LRGB filter at the time so I had less contrast in the image and the external shell (blue part of the central nebula) was way less visible. (in addition to a weird diffraction on the blue filter that results in bloated star halos)

The crescent nebula is a type of ''bubble'' nebula produced by a wolf-rayet star in this case WR 136 aka HD 192163. A Wolf-Rayet star is the last stage in the life of heavy stars (at least 20 times the mass of the sun). The surrounding nebula is the result of the interaction between the expelled outer layer of the stars and the high speed solar wind also coming from the central star. This wind will compress and heat the gas making it glow and shape it into a roughly spherical shell around the star. The soap bubble nebula is formed through a different process. It's a planetary nebula which is the result of a sun like star (between 1 and 8 times the mass of the sun) expelling its outer layer after becoming a red giant and before turning into a white dwarf. Those expelled gases are then ionised by the UV light emitted from the resulting white dwarf, making them glow. The red clouds in the background are hydrogen clouds which are part of the outer fringes of IC 1318 (the Gamma Cygni Nebula or Sadr Region) an emission nebula located around the star Sadr in the Cygnus constellation

close up of the soap bubble on the left and of the crescent nebula on the right :

starless version of the full image :

(Image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and Baader 6.5nm Ha and OIII filter. 28x300s for the Ha filter and 45x300s for the OIII filter, total imaging time 6h, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)

[riant-draws]

I have a math problem for you; how many pearls can fit within the volume of, say, a standard iterator chamber :)

little did you know, I'm an ex-engineering major. you are getting a Very Serious Answer

(disclaimer: i said EX-engineering major. there's a reason i quit and her name is thermodynamics. smarter people: this is your invitation to correct me if i wildly mess this up, which would be a great opportunity to embarrass me because most of this is basic algebra lol)

So! Since his puppet doesn't have an official height, we're going to work within my headcanons, which means that Pebbles' puppet is about four feet tall because I say so. (If you're curious about that, I've talked about the significance of his size more here—scroll to the bold text).

In physics, you do a lot of assuming, so we're also gonna assume that physics works the same in rain world as on Earth, assume that Pebbles' chamber is a perfect cube, assume that the pearls are congruent and perfectly spherical, and we're going to ignore the presence of his puppet and its arm (because determining the volumes of those and subtracting them would just overcomplicate things).

First, we need to find out how big his chamber is:

So, his chamber's volume is 67877.368 cubic feet.

Now, we need the volume of a single pearl, since they're all the same size:

Easy so far? Well, here's where it gets interesting...

CLOSE PACKING

Now we're talking about packing efficiency. Equal-sized spheres pack in specific, high-density arrangements (here's a Wikipedia page, and here's another, and a relevant section of a chem textbook). The densest we can get is pi/(3(sqrt(2))), shown below, which uses the face centered cubic (FCC) lattice.

This density percentage is how much of the total volume can be occupied by the spheres, which, in the case of FCC packing, is about 74%. (See the links above for where I got that bit of info.) And you'd think: "Great! We can just calculate 74% of the total volume of Pebbles' puppet chamber, and that'd be the answer!" Well... not exactly: it doesn't account for the pearls being inside of a container—specifically with how they interact with the cube's interior edges. The equation just assumes they're floating in space, but that's not true in this case since you can't have pearls clipping through the walls. (The reason this isn't accounted for is because packing efficiency is typically a concern in the context of how atoms fit together and form crystalline structures—they're inherently not "boxed into" anything.)

However. Trying to calculate exactly how many spheres can pile into a cube without the outer ones half clipping out of it is... difficult. At least, it is for me. So, since I'm already doing things like approximating the chamber as a cube and ignoring the puppet, why not go the whole nine yards and ignore clipping (for my sanity's sake, if nothing else). If you really wanted to, you could solve for the surface area of the chamber and subtract the clipped pearls to probably get a more accurate estimate (though hexagonal close packing, HCP, would be more efficient for this), but since we're dealing with volume, it wouldn't make a super significant difference, which is also why I'm opting to ignore it. Just know that the below result will be an overestimate.

So, to answer the original question: How many pearls are we talking?

597,967 pearls is our answer!

again, it's likely a decent overestimate due to clipping, but as I said earlier, we're already approximating anyway so whatever lol

more info here (might be the most clear and succinct explanation I've found)

here's a paper about this if I've somehow piqued your interest

[the-maddest-robot]

so if my calculation are correct their is about 67,099 clipped pearls (if we keep to the original assumption of a perfect square chamber with sides of 40.729ft)

that would bring the total number of not-clipped pearls to:

530,868 pearls

calculations :

for FCC packing, each cells has a side length a of : a = (2/√2)*R with R the radius of the sphere giving us : a = 0.3847 ft (rounded)

this meaning that we could fit about 106 cells in a 40.792 ft length (40.792 / 0.3847 = 106.0359) so each face of the chamber has 106*106 = 11,236 cells.

On one face of a subgroup we have 1 pearl that is clipped (0.5 + 4*0.125) so in total the chamber has 11,236*6*1 = 67,416 clipped pearls But this has counted the clipped pearls of the edges twice and the corners three times so we have to correct for that : one edge of the subgroup has 0.25 pearls so we have to subtract 106*0.25*12 = 318 pearls unfortunately this has overcorrected the corners in the other direction and we need to remouve them once again. So the correction factor should be 318 - (8*0.125) = 318-1 = 317 leading use to the total amount of clipped pearls being :  67,416-317 = 67,099 and the total pearl number (clipped corrected) being : 597,967 - 67,099 = 530,868

(this result if probably a slight underestimation due to the rounding)

currently having flashbacks to the crystallography lectures were the professor was using piled up bar stools to demonstrate rotational symmetries in cristal lattice. Oh and his presentation was compose of about 30% of images of patterned wallpaper, once-again to show exemples of symmetries and translations (at least this had the advantage of being a rather clear exemples)

[shithowdy]

i thought my laptop was on its last leg because it was running at six billion degrees and using 100% disk space at all times and then i turned off shadows and some other windows effects and it was immediately cured. i just did the same to my roommate's computer and its performance issues were also immediately cured. okay. i guess.

so i guess if you have creaky freezy windows 10/11 try searching "advanced system settings", go to performance settings, and uncheck "show shadows under windows" and anything else you don't want. hope that helps someone else.

[shithowdy]

hey this is apparently helping a lot of people! adding that on top of this you can also go to settings > personalization > colors and turn off transparency to also boost performance. this wasn't the Big Fix for me but might as well do that too if you're trying to optimize.

[shithowdy]

past a certain note threshold on tumblr posts you unlock a bloodborne-esque insight and the strange lives of this site's users become visible to you

[flipocrite]

(x)

[theothin]

we fucking found them?

[prof-grace-aspen]

Ok I know we joke about this but I just went to the settings and first clicked "adjust for best performance" and then re-checked only 1 box:

"Smooth edges of screen fonts"

My computer was running hot before I turned everything off; the office I'm in is very warm, I could feel the heat of my CPU through the keyboard. The fans were going, not as loud as they usually get, but they were still blasting.

Y'all.

I can barely feel the warmth through the keyboard now. It's been like 2 minutes. The fan is nearly silent.

Click the Windows key and start typing "System settings", and "View Advanced system settings" will pop up. Then click "Settings" under Performance:

Then you'll see this:

TURN IT ALL OFF.

I turned "Show window contents while dragging" and then turned that off again. It's up to you.

[khashanakalashtar]

My computer is so quiet and reasonably-temperatured now and I barely notice a difference in utility, why is windows like this

maybe I can even play computer games again

[paintpencilink]

The second best thing you can do for a Win10 computer is turn off whatever unnecessary services it's decided it needs to run in the background always. Some services it does need, but others are useless. Here's an article that goes into step by steps.

10AppsManager lets you uninstall bloatware. Winaero Tweaker lets you disable crap like Cortana/Copilot, ads, telemetry, internet search results when you search from the taskbar, and all kinds of other stuff, plus it gives you lots of other little options that are just nice to have (like, it can restore the old MS Paint program in place of Paint 3D). Both are totally free.

Oh, and check your startup programs in the Task Manager tab to make sure your computer isn't automatically starting eight million programs every time it boots. But I think people mostly know about that. (Unless this is me going "they only know one or two feldspars... and quartz of course.")

The first best thing you can do for a Windows computer is install Linux Mint. But some of us do need a few pesky Windows-specific programs. Bleh. Still, if you're up for a project, you can have both (and it's awesome). Here's an article about setting up a dual boot Windows/Mint system.

[the-maddest-robot]

rebloging because changing those settings really helped reduce overheating (and somewhat reduced battery consumption) on the mini PC I use for my astro gear.

[the-maddest-robot]

This is the heart nebula (or at least as much of it as I can take with my setup without doing a mosaic) also known as IC 1805 or NGC 896. It is around 7 000 light years from us, in the constellation Cassiopeia. Despite its distance to us it still appears about twice as big as the moon in the sky, which speaks volumes when it comes to its actual size (about 200 light years in diameter).

This being an emission nebula its light mostly comes from gasses ionised by nearby stars.

This nebula also has an open cluster at it's center (a bit closer to us than the rest of the nebula), Melotte 15:

This cluster is bout 1,5 million years old which is very young for such a stellar object. It is composed a a few very heavy and bright stars and many fainter lighter stars.

The starless version :

(Image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera and Baader 6.5nm narrowband filter. 25x300s for the Ha filter, 26x300s for the SII filter and 26x300s for the OIII filter, total imaging time 6h 25min, stacking and processing done in PixInsight. Photo taken mid-January) Other versions with a different colour combinations (a bit less pleased of how they turned out).

If you want to see the nebula in its entirety, you can check out this NASA Astronomy picture of the day made by Adam Jensen.

[hazard-symbols-that-fuck-hard]

found on a fridge in my lab, haha

[the-maddest-robot]

This reminded me of the isonitrile freezer at my previous internship.

For those who don't know, isonitriles (aka isocyanides) are a class of compounds that contain this motif:

They are known to smell very bad and many synthesis pathways to those compounds were discovered because of their stench. (I personally think they smell like a mixture of rotten cabbage and burned rubber but more ''artificial'')

So in that lab, we had a freezer dedicated to them, and even with sealed bottles in à -20°C freezers in a separated and ventilated cabinet, you would still be able to detect their odour if you stood next to it (not strongly, but still detectable).

We had to move that freezer to a new lab, it stayed unplugged for 15 to 20 minutes, and in the 5 minutes we need to power it back in the new lab, the entire room had filled with that isonitrile stench (mind you that freezer had not been open during the entire operation). Thankfully we did that on a Friday afternoon and by Monday the smell had disappeared.

Just for reference this is from the MSDS of benzyl isonitrile :

[headspace-hotel]

oh yeah speaking of grass.

i can't think of any epiphytic grasses and I can't understand why they wouldn't exist. it seems like the perfect niche for a grass.

[narcicious]

Oh hey, I was also just thinking about this recently when teaching paleontology! Looking into it a bit, this is also something pointed out in the literature, see Taylor et al., 2021: "Vascular epiphytes contribute disproportionately to global centres of plant diversity". In fact, Taylor et al. state that <0.2% of Poaceae are epiphytic, which was a bit of a surprise that that number was >0%. That number comes from Zotz et al., 2021: "EpiList 1.0: a global checklist of vascular epiphytes", which include the EpiList (I love scientists naming things) as a public repository (https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.3326)! From that list, I was able to find exactly one type of epiphytic Poaceae, listed as "Tripogon sp.". The source given for this listing was a chapter from the book "Plant Dessication Tolerance" published in 2011 titled "Evolution, Diversity, and Habitats of Poikilohydrous Vascular Plants", written by Stefan Porembski. It states that Tripogon spp. normally grow lithophytically but "[v]ery rarely desiccation tolerant Poaceae (Tripogon spp., in India) and Cyperaceae (Coleochloa spp., tropical Africa) can be found growing epiphytically." There was, unfortunately, no source given for this claim, so I haven't yet been able to find any more information on this weird epiphytic growth habit in Tripogon, but I am fascinated nonetheless.

[headspace-hotel]

That's wild. So there really are almost no grasses at all that are epiphytes???

(For the audience, an epiphyte is a plant that grows on another plant, like plants that grow on tree branches or something like that)

So strange!

Like I would have thought that the grass blades would do great dangling down from branches since they could just keep growing until reaching the ground, and the drought tolerance of grasses and fibrous roots would also help, and they're monocots just like orchids which are commonly epiphytes, and growing in a tree gives a height advantage to wind-distributed pollen...

This is seriously a weird mystery to me somebody help figure this one out lol

[paleodictyoptera]

So a few quick wiki and iNat searches later and I get a feeling it has something to do with just how much monocot diversity can be found in epiphytes already. Something along the lines of well established lineages forcing out potential colonizers? Also, Astelias and Lomandras are both commonly called grasses but they're unique branches within the Asparagales unrelated to Poaceae.

[headspace-hotel]

Hmm and also grasses are pretty new in terms of evolutionary history so maybe they just can't beat the more established guys at their own game

Plus grasses are really slaying in the terrestrial niche so there probably isn't much pressure to evolve to exploit new niches.

I bet it's herbivory. Orchids and many ferns really get their shit wrecked by deer chomping on them, so any orchid that could get up in a tree where the herbivores can't reach would have a serious advantage over those losers on the ground getting chomped.

Meanwhile grasses are hardly fazed by herbivory. Those little freaks LIKE that shit.

[headspace-hotel]

I bet we'll have treegrass sooner or later, evolution eventually starts doing stuff Just Cause It Can, but the grass lineage is pretty new, so we gotta give it time

Wonder if i can speed up the process a little. Get some Poa annua and breed it for rooting characteristics necessary to anchor in tree bark

(I choose Poa annua because that species is the first vascular plant to colonize all seven continents since becoming an invasive species in a small part of Antarctica, and the first plant to evolve resistance to seven herbicide modes of action at once—observed in a Poa annua in a golf course in Tennessee. It is a great conqueror.)

(I would make a GREAT mad scientist.)

[morgan-molliniere]

can't believe that in this post, the biggest news to me was that grasses are relatively new in evolutionary history

[headspace-hotel]

Yeah so it's not intuitive since grasses are so common nowadays, and seem to be everywhere, but grass didn't even appear until near the end of dinosaur times, and it didn't spread all over the world and create large grassland biomes in warm and tropical climates until the last several million years.

Flowering plants in general didn't appear until relatively late. (Grass is a flowering plant, even though it doesn't have the brightly colored petals we usually associate with flowers, because it is pollinated by wind and not insects.)

For most of Earth's history, a lot of the places that are full of grasses and wildflowers now, were filled with plants from groups that nowadays only have a few surviving species. For example, horsetails: a class of plants that used to be everywhere and have a lot of different families, but now the only survivors are the genus Equisetum.

Another example is the lycophytes, also known as clubmosses, which is confusing because they are not mosses, they are actually a sister group to all other vascular plants.

Lycophytes that exist today are small, but there used to be huge ones that grew into massive trees, in fact the forests that formed a lot of our coal deposits were made of these plants (This art is by Falconaumanni of Wikipedia!)

These weird trees were actually extinct before the dinosaurs even came around. Their niche was filled in by the group known as Gymnosperms, which includes conifers, cycads, Ginkgo (an entire order that contains only ONE species still alive), and...some other stuff that is too weird to properly discuss here.

[emmielemie]

Ok which chemistry is better?

Physical Chemistry

Inorganic Chemistry

Organic Chemistry

Voting ended onMar 28, 2025

[the-maddest-robot]

Ok, so I finished the processing of my new photo of the Flaming Star Nebula (IC 405)

Image taken in SII and Ha with a few RGB images to have the correct star colours. This is technically an SHH combination image but with a narrowband normalisation and a lot of curve modifications (with and without colour masks) to get colours/contrast that I liked. I already had taken a photo of this nebula, but it was using mostly RGB data with a bit of Ha (and a lot less integration time). It did show the dust reflection way better, but I like the contrast we can see inside the nebula's gas on this one. Thanks to @shaythempronouns for suggesting the use of an SII filter to image this nebula. Starless version :

(Image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera ZWO LRGB filters and Baader 6.5nm narrowband filter. 5x120s image for each colour filter (RGB), 29x300s for the Ha filter and 33x300s for the SII filter, total imaging time 6h 35min, stacking and processing done in PixInsight. Photo taken mid-January)

[shaythempronouns]

sometimes astronomy camera companies will post about their horrible attempts to fix hardware problems with software. normally these are unremarkable.

and then sometimes they contain a beautiful single sentence that will live in your brain forever

[the-maddest-robot]

Photo a few galaxies, M81 / bode's galaxy (centre), M82/the cigar galaxy (left) and NGC 3077 (right)

In addition to those three galaxies, there are many other (much) smaller ones hidden among the stars (a few examples):

The red-ish filament visible around M82 are ionised hydrogen gas and dust pushed outwards by galactic-superwind

Those are tough to be a combination of solar winds created by young stars and the shockwaves of frequent supernovas. They mostly occur in starburst galaxy a type of galaxies that experience heightened stars formation generally due to recent gravitational interaction with other galaxies, in the case of M82 the trigger is most likely its neighbour M81.

(Image taken using a CarbonStar 150/600 newtonian telescope with a 0.95 coma corrector, ZWO ASI294 monochrome camera ZWO LRGB filters and Baader 6.5nm Ha filter. 12x180s image for each colour filter (RGB), 6x300s for the Ha filter, total imaging time 2h 54min, stacking and processing done in PixInsight.)