http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=7349

Is there anyone with a scientific/astronomy background who could talk about this? Maybe has info about significance, implications if any for other galaxies/the universe? How rare is this? Have you heard of any new info regarding this, and is this interesting to you? Thanks in advance. I don't usually post in the science forum, I just read, so sorry if this comes off as simple-minded, or whatever. This is just interesting to me.

There are a handful of galaxies that seem to have these strange leading arms but this one is the most convincing case. So, as far as we know, it's extraordinarily rare. Why exactly this happens isn't very well understood though, as your article notes, the authors are suggesting some sort of merger with a smaller galaxy might've contributed to it. I don't know of any more recent developments with this galaxy but its a very interesting find nonetheless.

Hmm, can't help you on this one, but thanks for posting this. I would have missed it otherwise. I love little science anomolies like this one, hehe, maybe I need to find a new hobby.

i hold the key to the universe.i will show u the hiden seacred cites araund the planet,and connection to those cites to the universe which is very importand for us.the information that contain whithin crop circle,the gizza pyramid ,nezka lines, great wall of china,the maunds accross the planet they r all connected to the universe which means they contain infinite amounts of incoded information,which will give u the wisdom for interstelar travel how to utilze the gravity which is part of the same energy,no energy no gravity is that simple.if u whant to expend your mind into infinity study crop circles,it will make your left and reight brain work as one,and u will understand the message that it contain it,and it will work for u cuz all those simbols r incodet whithin your dna.i can share lot more.

Uh, ok... please share.

I'm wondering how a larger galaxy absorbing a smaller one would reverse the larger one's direction of spin, if in fact two merged? Maybe NGC 4622 has always been spinning the 'wrong' way. A different type of black hole at it's centre?

I'm not sure even the authors were completely sure of how it would work. In their paper on this they said they're further flesh out that particular issue in a second, forthcoming paper but I haven't been able to find that one (and this article and story, you might've noticed, are a few years old). The arms of spiral galaxies, however, don't always have the same stars in them; different stars move in and out over time. The arms themselves are more like standing waves altering the density of stars in their vicinity. I suppose it's conceivable that some sort of gravitational perturbation could mess with this standing wave, though the whole thing is a little fuzzy.

There are two things that spring to mind upon reading the article and then a few others on this particular galaxy.

The possibility of a collision between two galaxies is the most probable explanation for this phemomenon. A galaxy spinning counter clockwise or clockwise is essentially unimportant since there are many examples of both types.

The fact that the inner rings are spinning normally in relation to the central hub (counter clockwise) of the galaxy and the outer rings are spinning in the opposite direction suggest that the collision occured between two galaxies that were spinning in opposite directions, The larger of the two galaxies whose outer rings are spinning in a clockwise direction absorbed the smaller galaxy that was spinning in the counter clockwise direction as evidenced by the inner rings of the galaxy as well as its' hub.

The last piece of evidence is the existence of stellar nurseries producing new stars in the outer rings. This is not normal, since the outer rings contain the oldest stars and have little energy to produce new ones. New star formation is usual in the inner portion of the galactic disk where gravity is greater and so is galactic dust and hydrogen which are the elements necessary to originate a proto sun.

The fact that the pictures indicate the existence of new sun creation in the outer disk indicate that at some point in the past more energy and material was deliverd to the surrounding edges of this galaxy, making it possible for new stellar nurseries to come into existence.

All these indicators suggest that a collision took place and the galaxy has since then stablized into the image we see today.

Examples of galaxies colliding are frequent and eventually if the conditions are right the coalesce into a new galaxy.

The milky way galaxy is destined to do the same eventually with the Andromeda galaxy.

See the following link for a simulation: Galactic collision.

Yeah the only thing I can say is from the title of the topic here.
Now in the near earth object world of space , we dont know still the complete orbital sequence or how far they might cirle out encomphersing each outer orbit of the asteroid belt or the comet , one or the other. Im not 100% here , so dont critisize my post. I normaly like to post from factual information I do know I can back, ok?

I just remember it on the nasa channel in california, { half the day its just a panel of nothing on the tube, and then at night , they will show what the satelites and cameras have recordered and what they can configure in their computer etc.

So they were talking about the comets and neo, and the asteriod belt and the earths next close encounter with a asteriod that inevedably hit the earth,

The point was they can only predictict so much, because unlike a solar system, the orbital rings are still being discovered and the calculetions could be this or they could be that, they are realy still uncertain. I say this we are realy quite minute when you think about how big and vast the heavens are and numbers, anf thats because we didnt create the universe, but man wants to think they can put it on a lease and still walk the wild animal down the street, with confidence or great doubt so not to cause panic or something dont tell the public, or the rich are all saving up to fly out in space and leave us struggling behind. i think about this knid of senarios all the time,. I would rather be aware of nature and weather and space signs up in the air , observe the animals on the ground and learn the behavior enough to know , observing is the best way to know when things are of course or out of our hands, so it doesnt suprise me at all . In fact in the 2007 perdictions I think I stated something likee that or wrote in a comment that the earth can realy be hit at any time it well pleases its self to do , something made space , yes I beleive the intelligent design theory and I believe God our Father did, buts that me, ..Any way , if eveloution is factual in this we would be knowing and compluetiy studying the groth od apes and farming them to figure out how they handled there casastrohies, I still think its a unpredictable force to be reckoned with, Become aware like the indians did cuse they lived by it , and if watch enough carefully , you depend on it.

So I often wonder , do we really know that certain parts of technoligy is even true , whos to say that the wools being pulled over our eyes, its possible , Ive seen mankind and with some of the computers tech today offers , it would be a sinch and believable. just saying theres always room for doubt or question when it comes from anothers humann persuation or opinion, now if it was tangabliy realality , like we know the suin is there , thats different . i hope you can understand what i just said
basicaly i wasnt suprised and it wouldnt suprise me if the unverse was off its course , a non predicable force. its infinete so little at a time its like a jiggsaw puzzle we will probably never live to asee its completeion , but weve all built the framework to fill the rest in , but its not finished, infinete , non predictable, nor should mankind manipulate it . my opinion

got me typing though , a good thread

Abecrombie

Nice explaination, I sure would like to have seen that one!

HmMM? Maybe we're just used to seeing the top of the galaxy and in this case we are looking at the bottom of one?

I realize that there is no "up" and "down" in space and hence, no "top" and "bottom" but, the analogy still works. Spin a record on a pencil tip. First, look at it from the top side and then look at it from underneath. If you are old enough to remember records, you'll know what I mean. Think about the way a wheel turns counter clockwise when the bycycle is moving to your left and clockwise when the bicycle is moving to your right. Either way, the wheel is still turing the same way in relation to the rest of the bicycle. The bicycle is still moving "forward". See what I mean?

Would that classify as a "Perspective Illusion"?

One problem with what you said.

The galaxy is spinning in the direction of its open arms. In other words, the spirals are not trailing the central spin of the galaxy but preceding it. By rights this should be impossible, hence the thread.

Whoops! I missed that part. Yeah, that would make a lot of difference. Well, since I already made a fool out of myself once, I'll go all out. Maybe it's moving backwards in time. (?)

I quite agree. It just happens.