Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T05:47:47.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpretation of velocity distribution of the inner regions of the Galaxy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

G. de Vaucouleurs
G. de Vaucouleurs*
Affiliation:
University of Texas

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

I. The large positive and negative velocities in the 21-cm line profiles near the galactic centre have indicated the presence of substantial departures from circular motions in the central parts of the Galaxy. The Leiden astronomers (Oort and Rougoor 1958; Rougoor and Oort 1960) have interpreted these observations in terms of an “expanding arm” at a mean distance of about 3 kpc from the centre. It is not clear how these arms or arcs are related to the regular spiral structure, if the Galaxy is an ordinary spiral similar to M31 as commonly assumed. If, on the other hand, the Galaxy is similar to the SAB(r) or SAB(rs) systems, as suggested by the multiplicity of the spiral pattern discussed in another communication, a different interpretation of the velocity distribution is possible.

Type
Section 1: The Galaxy
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 20: The Galaxy and the Magellanic Clouds , 1964 , pp. 195 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Academy of Science 1964 

References

Bostick, W. H. (1958).— Rev. Mod. Phys. 30: 1090–4=Symp. IAU 8: 1090–4. [Cambridge, Mass. 1957.] CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burbidge, E. M., and Burbidge, G. R. (1962).— Ap. J. 135: 694–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burbidge, E. M., Burbidge, G. R., and Prendergast, K. H. (1962).— Ap. J. 136: 128–32.Google Scholar
Feast, M. W., Thackeray, A. D., and Wesselink, A. J. (1961).— M.N. 122: 433–53.Google Scholar
Gold, T., and Hoyle, F. (1959).—“Paris Symposium on Radio Astronomy.” (Ed. Bracewell, R. N..) Symp. IAU 9: 583–8. [Paris 1958.] (Stanford Univ. Press.)Google Scholar
Lallemand, A., Duchesne, M., and Walker, M. F. (1960).— P.A.S.P. 72: 76–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGee, R. X., and Murray, J. D. (1961).— Aust. J. Phys. 14: 260–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mills, B. Y. (1956).— Observatory 76: 65–7.Google Scholar
Mills, B. Y. (1959).— P.A.S.P. 71: 267–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oort, J. H., Kerr, F. J., and Westerhout, G. (1958).— M.N. 118: 379–89.Google Scholar
Oort, J. H., and Rougoor, G. W. (1958): Kon. Nederl. Akad. Wet. Amsterdam 67: 139–43.Google Scholar
Rougoor, G. W., and Oort, J. H. (1960).— Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (Washington) 46: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyfert, C. K. (1943).— Ap. J. 97: 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G. (1957).— A.J. 62: 13.Google Scholar
de Vaucouleurs, G. (1960).— Ap. J. 131: 265–81.Google Scholar