D'oh!

__________________
- Learn a lot teaching others.

I thought he was headed toward pre-white dwarf phase red giants and their outgassing before any established planetary nebula is seen since he excludes the known Messier planetaries.

M40 makes little sense using this argument, however. It likely is not even a binary, but an optical double. It is enigmatic. Hipparcus shows negative parallax (though this is apparently not uncommon for close doubles).

Of course, we are probably trying too hard. He did say not to get into the physical characteristics.

Perhaps it's a usage thing. M40 is not mentioned in some albums, are there three others sometimes ignrored?

Perhaps it's a location thing. But, there doesn't appear to be four Messier's in Ursa Major (where M40 resides), since there are more than four. M40 is close to the pole, however.

Perhaps it's more an error thing. M40 was more of an error. You never hear much about M111, M112, or M113.

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The Sun, with all the planets revolving around it, and depending on it, can still ripen a bunch of grapes as though it had nothing else in the universe to do..." Author: Galileo supposedly.

Eroica has uncovered the identity of another one of the objects.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

I was not aware that M40 has been found to be an optical double. However, this fact is still immaterial to the answer. Do not get hung up on physical characteristics of any sort. BTW, I dropped another clue in my 4:38 AM post (#2727).

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

The verdict may still be out on it.

You would bring up taxes this time of year.

There are only a few Messier objects that don't fit a nice taxonomy. M40 being one, and M73, which was rejected, is another.

How about M1? [M2 is my next guess. ]

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The Sun, with all the planets revolving around it, and depending on it, can still ripen a bunch of grapes as though it had nothing else in the universe to do..." Author: Galileo supposedly.

M1 is not one of the objects (it doesn't fit the clues given so far anyway), nor is M2.

It seems that you're still concentrating on physical aspects. The thing that these four Messier objects have directly in common is solely a matter of taxonomy.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Aha!

I'm guessing the answer is M25, M40, M45 and M102.

These 4 objects are not in the New General Catalog. Unless M102 is misidentified as NGC 5866.

That's very close but no cigar for you I'm afraid.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

I'm just totally guessing cause all of this is over my head but am I close?
M24, M40, M73, M54

maryccc,

Two of the objects you mentioned are incorrect.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Well was formulaterp right? How many of his were right?

No, the answer was not totally correct. The answer can be derived rather easily with a little research now since the basis for the similarity has been uncovered.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

How about M24, M1, M17, M18

I'll guess mayrccc was right with M24. [M73 we already know is not correct, and we know M40 is correct.]

We know M1 is wrong. That reminds me.....M3?

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The Sun, with all the planets revolving around it, and depending on it, can still ripen a bunch of grapes as though it had nothing else in the universe to do..." Author: Galileo supposedly.

ok how about m24, m40, m73 and m102

maryccc,

If you had taken the time to go back through the thread, you would have discovered that two of your answers were ruled out long ago. Nobody is using the taxonomic similarity that formulaterp uncovered but applied incorrectly.

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

C3PO?
R-2-D2?


as long as we're guessing

__________________
"I will do my best to understand and explain the universe from big to small without invoking miracles, unrepeatable events, or divine intervention. In place of those things I will use observations, mathematics, and science."


-Cross
My travel blog

Some of my Astrophotography


Those that lack education have a hard time understanding its value. - Cross

LOL

Could you please tell me how many I had right in my last post?

What is a taxonomy?