The Milky Way and Beyond (34 page)

Hubble then boldly assumed that the P-L relation was universal and derived an estimate for the distance to NGC 6822, using Shapley's most recent (1925) version of the calibration of the relation. This calibration was wrong, as is now known, because of the confusion at that time over the nature of Cepheids. Shapley's calibration included certain Cepheids in globular clusters that subsequent investigators found to have their own fainter P-L relation. (Such Cepheids have been designated Type II Cepheids to distinguish them from the normal variety, which are referred to as Type I.) Thus, Hubble's distance for NGC 6822 was too small: he calculated a distance of only 700,000 light-years. Today it is recognized that the actual distance is closer to 2,000,000 light-years. In any case, this vast distance—even though underestimated—was large enough to convince Hubble that NGC 6822 must be a remote, separate galaxy, much too far away to be included even in Shapley's version of the Milky Way Galaxy system. Technically, then, this faint nebula can be considered the first recognized external galaxy. The Magellanic Clouds continued to be regarded simply as appendages to the Milky Way Galaxy, and the other bright nebulae, M31 and M33, were still being studied at the Mount Wilson Observatory. Although Hubble announced his discovery of Cepheids in M31 at a meeting in 1924, he did not complete his research and publish the results for this conspicuous spiral galaxy until five years later.

While the Cepheids made it possible to determine the distance and nature of NGC 6822, some of its other features corroborated the conclusion that it was a separate, distant galaxy. Hubble discovered within it five diffuse nebulae, which are glowing gaseous clouds composed mostly of ionized hydrogen, designated H II regions. (H stands for hydrogen and II indicates that most of it is ionized; H I, by contrast, signifies neutral hydrogen.) He found that these five H II regions had spectra like those of gas clouds in the Milky Way Galaxy system—e.g., the Orion Nebula and Eta Carinae. Calculating their diameters, Hubble ascertained that the sizes of the diffuse nebulae were normal, similar to those of local examples of giant H II regions.

Five other diffuse objects discerned by Hubble were definitely not gaseous nebulae. He compared them with globular clusters (both in the Milky Way Galaxy and in the Magellanic Clouds) and concluded that they were too small and faint to be normal globular clusters. Convinced that they were most likely distant galaxies seen through NGC 6822, he dismissed them from further consideration. Modern studies suggest that Hubble was too hasty. Though probably not true giant globular clusters, these objects are in all likelihood star clusters in the system, fainter, smaller in population, and probably somewhat younger than normal globular clusters.

The Dutch astronomer Jacobus Cornelius Kapteyn showed in the early 20th century that statistical techniques could be used to determine the stellar luminosity function for the solar neighbourhood. (The luminosity function is a curve that shows how many stars there are in a given volume for each different stellar luminosity.) Eager to test the nature of NGC 6822, Hubble counted stars in the galaxy to various brightness limits and found a luminosity function for its brightest stars. When he compared it with Kapteyn's, the agreement was excellent—another indication that the Cepheids had given about the right distance and that the basic properties of galaxies were fairly uniform. Step by step, Hubble and his contemporaries piled up evidence for the fundamental assumption that has since guided the astronomy of the extragalactic universe, the uniformity of nature. By its bold application, astronomers have moved from a limiting one-galaxy universe to an immense vastness of space populated by billions of galaxies, all grander in size and design than the Milky Way Galaxy system was once thought to be.

In 1929 Hubble published his epochal paper on M31, the great Andromeda Nebula. Based on 350 photographic plates taken at Mount Wilson, his study provided evidence that M31 is a giant stellar system like the Milky Way Galaxy.

Because M31 is much larger than the field of view of the 152- and 254-cm (60- and 100-inch) telescopes at Mount Wilson, Hubble concentrated on four regions, centred on the nucleus and at various distances along the major axis. The total area studied amounted to less than half the galaxy's size, and the other unexplored regions remained largely unknown for 50 years. (Modern comprehensive optical studies of M31 have been conducted only since about 1980.)

Hubble pointed out an important and puzzling feature of the resolvability of M31. Its central regions, including the nucleus and diffuse nuclear bulge, were not well resolved into stars, one reason that the true nature of M31 had previously been elusive. However, the outer parts along the spiral arms in particular were resolved into swarms of faint stars, seen superimposed over a structured background of light. Current understanding of this fact is that spiral galaxies typically have central bulges made up exclusively of very old stars, the brightest of which are too faint to be visible on Hubble's plates. Not until 1944 did the German-born astronomer Walter Baade finally resolve the bulge of M31. Using red-sensitive plates and very long exposures, he managed to detect the brightest red giants of this old population. Out in the arms there exist many young, bright, hot blue stars, and these are easily resolved. The brightest are so luminous that they can be seen even with moderate-sized telescopes.

The most important of Hubble's discoveries was that of M31's population of
Cepheid variables. Forty of the 50 variables detected turned out to be ordinary Cepheids with periods ranging from 10 to 48 days. A clear relation was found between their periods and luminosities, and the slope of the relation agreed with those for the Magellanic Clouds and NGC 6822. Hubble's comparison indicated that M31 must be 8.5 times more distant than the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC), which would imply a distance of two million light-years if the modern SMC distance was used (the 1929 value employed by Hubble was about two times too small). Clearly, M31 must be a distant, large galaxy.

Other features announced in Hubble's paper were M31's population of bright, irregular, slowly varying variables. One of the irregulars was exceedingly bright; it is among the most luminous stars in the galaxy and is a prototype of a class of high-luminosity stars now called Hubble-Sandage variables, which are found in many giant galaxies. Eighty-five novae, all behaving very much like those in the Milky Way Galaxy, were also analyzed. Hubble estimated that the true occurrence rate of novae in M31 must be about 30 per year, a figure that was later confirmed by the American astronomer Halton C. Arp in a systematic search.

Hubble found numerous star clusters in M31, especially globular clusters, 140 of which he eventually cataloged. He clinched the argument that M31 was a galaxy similar to the Milky Way Galaxy by calculating its mass and mass density. Using the velocities that had been measured for the inner parts of M31 by spectrographic work, he calculated (on the basis of the distance derived from the Cepheids) that M31's mass must be about 3.5 billion times that of the Sun. Today astronomers have much better data, which indicate that the galaxy's true total mass must be at least 100 times greater than Hubble's value, but even that value clearly showed that M31 is an immense system of stars. Furthermore, Hubble's estimates of star densities demonstrated that the stars in the outer arm areas of M31 are spread out with about the same density as in the Milky Way Galaxy system in the vicinity of the Sun.

Until about 1950, scientific knowledge of galaxies advanced slowly. Only a very small number of astronomers took up galaxy studies, and only a very few telescopes were suitable for significant research. It was an exclusive field, rather jealously guarded by its practitioners, and so progress was orderly but limited.

During the decade of the 1950s, the field began to change. Ever-larger optical telescopes became available, and the space program resulted in a sizable increase in the number of astronomers emerging from universities. New instrumentation enabled investigators to explore galaxies in entirely new ways, making it possible to detect their radio, infrared, and ultraviolet emissions and eventually even radiation at X-ray and gamma-ray
wavelengths. Whereas in the 1950s there was only one telescope larger than 254 cm (100 inches)—and only about 10 astronomers conducting research on galaxies worldwide—by the year 2000 the number of large telescopes had grown immensely, with 12 telescopes larger than 800 cm (300 inches), and the number of scientists devoted to galaxy study was in the thousands. By then, galaxies were being extensively studied with giant arrays of ground-based radio telescopes, Earth-orbiting optical, X-ray, ultraviolet, and infrared telescopes, and high-speed computers—studies that have given rise to remarkable advances in knowledge and understanding. The tremendous progress in both theoretical and observational work has led many to say that the turn of the 21st century happened during the “golden age” of extragalactic astronomy.

All galaxies are not spirals like our own Milky Way. Some are elliptical systems. Others, the irregulars, have no definite shape at all. Astronomers have devised systems of classification that encompass all these types.

Almost all current systems of galaxy classification are outgrowths of the initial scheme proposed by the American astronomer Edwin Hubble in 1926. In Hubble's scheme, which is based on the optical appearance of galaxy images on photographic plates, galaxies are divided into three general classes: ellipticals, spirals, and irregulars. Hubble subdivided these three classes into finer groups.

In The Hubble Atlas of Galaxies (1961), the American astronomer Allan R. Sandage drew on Hubble's notes and his own research on galaxy morphology to revise the Hubble classification scheme. Some of the features of this revised scheme are subject to argument because of the findings of very recent research, but its general features, especially the coding of types, remain viable. A description of the classes as defined by Sandage is given here, along with observations concerning needed refinements of some of the details.

These systems exhibit certain characteristic properties. They have complete rotational symmetry; i.e., they are figures of revolution with two equal principal axes. They have a third smaller axis that is the presumed axis of rotation. The surface brightness of ellipticals at optical wavelengths decreases monotonically outward from a maximum value at the centre, following a common mathematical law of the form:

I
=
I
₀
(
r
/
a
+1)
^−2
,

where
I
is the intensity of the light,
I
₀
is the central intensity,
r
is the radius, and
a
is a scale factor. The isophotal contours
exhibited by an elliptical system are similar ellipses with a common orientation, each centred on its nucleus. No galaxy of this type is flatter than
b
/
a
= 0.3, with
b
and
a
the minor and major axes of the elliptical image, respectively. Ellipticals contain neither interstellar dust nor bright stars of spectral types O and B. Many, however, contain evidence of the presence of low-density gas in their nuclear regions. Ellipticals are red in colour, and their spectra indicate that their light comes mostly from old stars, especially evolved red giants.

Subclasses of elliptical galaxies are defined by their apparent shape, which is of course not necessarily their three-dimensional shape. The designation is E
n
, where
n
is an integer defined by

n
= 10(
a
−
b
)/
a
.

A perfectly circular image will be an E0 galaxy, while a flatter object might be an E7 galaxy. (As explained above, elliptical galaxies are never flatter than this, so there are no E8, E9, or E10 galaxies.)

Although the above-cited criteria are generally accepted, current high-quality measurements have shown that some significant deviations exist. Most elliptical galaxies do not, for instance, exactly fit the intensity law formulated by Hubble; deviations are evident in their innermost parts and in their faint outer parts. Furthermore, many elliptical galaxies have slowly varying ellipticity, with the images being more circular in the central regions than in the outer parts. The major axes sometimes do not line up either; their position angles vary in the outer parts. Finally, astronomers have found that a few ellipticals do in fact have small numbers of luminous O and B stars as well as dust lanes.

Spirals are characterized by circular symmetry, a bright nucleus surrounded by a thin outer disk, and a superimposed spiral structure. They are divided into two parallel classes: normal spirals and barred spirals. The normal spirals have arms that emanate from the nucleus, while barred spirals have a bright linear feature called a bar that straddles the nucleus, with the arms unwinding from the ends of the bar. The nucleus of a spiral galaxy is a sharp-peaked area of smooth texture, which can be quite small or, in some cases, can make up the bulk of the galaxy. Both the arms and the disk of a spiral system are blue in colour, whereas its central areas are red like an elliptical galaxy. The normal spirals are designated S and the barred varieties SB. Each of these classes is subclassified into three types according to the size of the nucleus and the degree to which the spiral arms are coiled. The three types are denoted with the lowercase letters
a
,
b
, and
c
. There also exist galaxies that are intermediate between ellipticals and spirals. Such systems have the disk shape characteristic of the latter but no spiral arms. These intermediate forms bear the designation So.