Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!ethan From: ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac) Newsgroups: net.space Subject: Re: Size of the Galaxy Message-ID: <478@utastro.UUCP> Date: Fri, 7-Mar-86 10:33:04 EST Article-I.D.: utastro.478 Posted: Fri Mar 7 10:33:04 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 10-Mar-86 08:29:21 EST References: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].841623.860306.KFL> Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX Lines: 22 Summary: you're both right In article <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].841623.860306.KFL>, KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU ("Keith F. Lynch") writes: > > From: "Josh Knight" > > As an aside, it is interesting to note that in the early part of this > century, an incorrect accounting for interstellar absorption caused many > astronomers to believe our galaxy was a small elliptical one, rather > than the large spiral it really is. > > Actually, I think it was the other way around. For a while it was > thought that this galaxy was unusually large. > ...Keith Both your statements are literally correct. A small galaxy was imagined when interstellar absorption was not understood. Subsequently the size of the galaxy was overestimated. -- "Ma, I've been to another Ethan Vishniac planet!" {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan ethan@astro.UTEXAS.EDU Department of Astronomy University of Texas