Talk:Ring Nebula

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects  (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Ring Nebula is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

"the Ring Nebula proves the existence of hollow worlds" (from Hollow Earth).

How does it prove it? Is this ring nebula an hollow sphere like thing, that if was more solid could really be an hollow planet? 01:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

No, it's a gaseous plasma. That quote is from a pseudo-science book, and is misguided. Though it is perfectly acceptable to quote in context in the Hollow Earth article, where it is clearly given as an example of "bad science". Zexpe 17:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge with Ring Nebula (NGC 6822)[edit]

It is proposed to merge this article with Ring Nebula (NGC 6822).

Oppose: I'm not clear on the motivation for this proposed merger. Perhaps it is because of their similar names. However, since these are two distinct objects I disagree with a merger. At most, I would support a disambiguation page, but leave Ring Nebula pointing to here with a disambig note at the top. WilliamKF 03:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Oppose: but agreed that a disambiguation page is needed.Badgettrg 02:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Oppose: shouldn't it be merged with NGC 6822 instead if it relates to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
also are those 'official' names for Ring and Bubble nebulae in NGC 6822 that these merges are proposed for? aside from the fact that they look similar? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Oppose:It's clear that each page contain one nebula only.--Prince Max 18:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prince Max (scientist) (talkcontribs)
Oppose: Co-ordinates alone show that they are two differant objects, and there is an article somewhere that i cannot currently remember the name of that lists all the solar system objects with the same name. --Alphamone (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

How old?[edit]

The article states "Overall, the observed nebulosity has been currently estimated to be expanding for approximately 1,610±240 years." I'm confused - is this felt to be an estimate of the age of the object? (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC).

Evolution of planetary nebulae[edit]

I don't really understand why this part is in the M57 article... anyone interested can find out this info on the planetary nebula page, which has already been linked to. I've removed it from the article but if anyone has any complaints you can find it in the article historyKingMunch (talk) 01:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Newer Picture?[edit]

NASA and the ESA released a new image of the Ring Nebula that seems to be of a much higher quality. Does this qualify for being copied over to the Commons and being used here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Question about Article[edit]

Under properties, the central white dwarf is described as being about 1.2 solar masses. Later on, under the heading of planetary Nebula Nucleus, the central star is described as being 0.61 to 0.62 solar masses. Which is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)