Talk:Sagittarius A*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Sgr A* vs. Sgr A
The "A*" is probably a matter of notation. The bright stuff at the center has been called "Sagittarius A" for quite some time, and once resolution improved they discovered it had two parts, a hypernova remnant and something else I forget--these are "Sagittarius A East" and "West." Further improved resolution came up with a superpowerful radio point--and, with a point nestled within Sagittarius A, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to assign it a "*" to indicate this.
This is just conjecture; I'm not an astronomer. --The Centipede
- I've reverted the changes, and cleaned up the text to make the distinction between Sagittarius A and Sagittarius A* clearer. This article should probably actually be merged with/redirected to the Sagittarius A article, as there isn't much extra information presented here. --Christopher Thomas 02:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed merge with Sagittarius A
Why exactly is the merge being proposed? I'm not saying that it would be a _bad_ thing, I just don't see what's wrong with the current situation.
If a substantial number of lurkers come forward in favour of the merge, I'll be happy to merge it, but I'd prefer not to bother. --Christopher Thomas 05:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nay.
I came to this article look specifically for information on Sagittarius A*. Merging would be confusing and all together pointless Nintenfreak 21:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
- Agree. They are two different things that have very similar names for historic reasons. Sagittarius A is the central region of our galaxy. Sagittarius A* is the much smaller, detectable shell around the super-massive black hole at its heart. It's like saying we should combine the sun and solar system articles. agr 22:10, 30 March 2006
[edit] Nay2
No merge... above arguments say it all. Sagittarius A* is the ultimate hub of our galaxy, and is deserving of a wikipedia survey peg. NevilleDNZ 09:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I say Nay
No merge, A* is a more specific feature Zzzzzzzzzzz 00:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the merge templates, as we've had 3 votes against and one abstention since the merge was proposed. --Christopher Thomas 18:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Update mass
The page Supermassive black hole seems to be based on newer research and mentions a mass of 3.6 millions times the mass of the Sun. See also the UCLA article linked from there. --Andrei Badea 10:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] What's a supermassive blackhole eruption like?
Is this object going to erupt in 10 million years? Xaxafrad 05:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Nope. Deleted the nonsense. --IanOsgood 02:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
