Do It Ourselves Science - The Irregulars Project

[Half65]

waveney I found an error (I believe)
In the "Friends" line there is a typo "invoved" instead of "involved".
I'm right ?

[waveney]

waveney where is the italian version ? 

Sitting in my in box...  Sorry I have been VERY VERY busy, I should do it today.

[Half65]

I'm joking Richard. 
It's not an order. 

[david_nw]

weekly summary:

We have 15,896 candidates.  3535 of these now have the requisite 10 clicks, 1680 have been rejected as not irregular or duplicate.  291 of you have clicked 69,768 times, 3,908 candidates have never had anybody click on them.

Hmm those with the 10 clicks have now been overtaken by those who have never had anybody click on them.  We need more clicking to keep up...!

[waveney]

I have changed the way the candidates are ordered, which means that you are more likely to get those with spectra to analyse.  Hopefully these are brighter more interesting galaxies than some of the boring faint specs of blue.

The data is organised in blocks, 50% of the blocks currently being selected are the new spectra only blocks, 50% are those that were being used for the last few months. 

Please join in and help us find out some new interesting irregulars.

Classify here

[waveney]

weekly summary:

We have 16,096 candidates.  3893 of these now have the requisite 10 clicks, 1694 have been rejected as not irregular or duplicate.  294 of you have clicked 71,297 times, 3,774 candidates have never had anybody click on them.

Thank you

[Lovethetropics]

Sorry for being so slow lately...

[Alice]

Me too . . . but at least it's raining today so the glare of the sun won't blind me so much . . .

[lehensuge]

Bonsoir everybody,
I go abroad for 3 weeks, and I hope to meet the irregular quest again when I come back. AGN is maybe a threat ?
Lehensuge

[waveney]

Voorerpje is a short term user of clicks.  Irregulars will continue for a long time yet.

[lehensuge]

Bonjour Waveney,

I'm just coming back home. What's new in irregular project ?

[lehensuge]

Bonsoir, Waveney,

Is irregulars project always alive ?

I hesitate !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So long.

[waveney]

Bonsoir, Waveney,

Is irregulars project always alive ?

I hesitate !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So long.

Oh yes it is.  (Just on the quiet side until the Voorwerpje Hunt is finished)

[StephanieC]

I just got this image and went into "Finding Chart" on SkyServer. It shows a larger field, and there is another galaxy nearby. I wonder if these two are interacting and that is causing the irregular appearance. This is the second galaxy that going into the finding chart has given dramatically more information (and this is the first day I've tried these); the last one was a totally different shape when it was viewed from a distance. I am inclined to suggest that looking at the finding chart would be a useful starting point for evaluating these irregulars.

[waveney]

I just got this image and went into "Finding Chart" on SkyServer. It shows a larger field, and there is another galaxy nearby. I wonder if these two are interacting and that is causing the irregular appearance.

This is the second galaxy that going into the finding chart has given dramatically more information (and this is the first day I've tried these); the last one was a totally different shape when it was viewed from a distance. I am inclined to suggest that looking at the finding chart would be a useful starting point for evaluating these irregulars.

Hi Stephanie, I am glad you are taking an interest in irregulars.   They are a under analyzed class of galaxies, which we aim to find a lot more about in time.

This is not really the best place to ask questions about them (either in the Newbies thread, the irregular galaxies thread or the irregular checking examples under analysis tips would be better).  Also quoting the SDSS reference numbers makes following up much easier.

In this case I don't think they are interacting.   Both look to me like barred spirals rather than the traditional irregular undefinable splodge of an irregular.

I am sorry to have been so negative on your post.