#NGC 121
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
cosmicfocus · 15 days ago
Text
47 Tucanae
A Bright Globular Cluster in Tucana NGC 104, Caldwell 106 The Sun sets late here on a December evening and it’s not truly dark until nearly ten pm, leaving only two hours before midnight. As I rolled the telescope out onto the driveway, Venus was shining like a diamond, high in the Western sky just after sunset. As the sky darkened, Jupiter shone brightly in the North and the brilliant star…
0 notes
spinningblueball · 5 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
NGC 121
90 notes · View notes
chibinotan · 7 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
Oldest Cluster in the Small Magellanic Cloud
66 notes · View notes
cryptominingbro · 5 years ago
Text
Deal Flow - отчет за Q3 по блокчейн-капиталу
https://crypto-hunter.info/deal-flow-otchet-za-q3-po-blokchejn-kapitalu/
Deal Flow - отчет за Q3 по блокчейн-капиталу
Tumblr media
В отчете Deal Flow за 3 квартал представлен полный список новых привлечений капитала, слияний и поглощений, ICO, IEO и STO в 3 квартале 2019 года. Deal Flow выявляет тенденции отрасли и следит за деньгами с помощью экспертного анализа и комментариев, предоставляя необходимую информацию о рынке для профессиональных крипто- инвесторов.
ЧИТАЙТЕ ПОЛНЫЙ ОТЧЕТ ЗДЕСЬ
В третьем квартале было проведено около 143 инвестиций в блокчейн / криптовалюты на общую сумму 632,5 млн долларов США, что на 68% меньше по сравнению со вторым кварталом.
Из 143 инвестиций 22 были продажей токенов и 121 были инвестициями в акционерный капитал. Было сделано больше инвестиций в акционерный капитал по сравнению со вторым кварталом и немного меньше текущих инвестиций. Из двадцати двух продаж токенов двадцать были IEO, больше, чем во втором квартале. Это подтверждает нашу гипотезу из отчета Q2 о том, что количество IEO будет достаточно постоянным, а не значительным.
Tumblr media
Как видно из рисунка 1 выше, в секторе «Блокчейн» и «Прочие» было двадцать четыре компании, привлекающие капитал. В категории «Другие» было наибольшее количество акций, и в нее входили компании в четырнадцати отраслях, в том числе в цепочках поставок, данных, недвижимости, билетов и т. В секторе торговли и инвестиций было больше всего компаний, привлекающих акционерный капитал — девятнадцать. В секторе Blockchain было больше компаний, осуществляющих продажу токенов. Восемь компаний из сектора Blockchain осуществляли продажи токенов, что больше, чем компании, которые подняли акции в криптовалюте, корпоративных решениях, финансовых услугах и игровых секторах.
Tumblr media
Несмотря на то, что значительная доля компаний в третьем квартале была распределена по разным отраслям и сгруппированы как «Прочие», они представляют только 12,6% от общего объема средств, привлеченных в третьем квартале, как показано на Рис. 2. Сектор блокчейна представлял чуть менее четверти всего привлеченного капитала, в то время как сектор торговли и инвестиций, сектор с наибольшим количеством компаний, занимающихся привлечением капитала, составляет всего 12,2% от всего привлеченного капитала. Как видно из рис. 3, 30% капитала, привлеченного в секторе блокчейнов, было связано с продажами токенов.
Tumblr media
Было установлено, что несколько крупных инвесторов в блокчейн / криптоинвесторы сделали более одной инвестиции в третьем квартале 2019 года, как видно на рисунке 4, Fenbushi Capital и NEO Global Capital (NGC) сделали по десять инвестиций каждая, Coinbase Ventures осуществила шесть инвестиций, Binance, Morgan Creek Capital, Multicoin Capital, Arrington XRP Capital и HashKey сделали по четыре инвестиции в каждой. BlockVC, Kenetic Capital и Polychain сделали по три инвестиции в каждой.
Tumblr media
Был ряд других инвесторов в крипто / блокчейн, которые сделали по крайней мере одну инвестицию в 3-м квартале, и они включают, Xpring, ConsenSys, Bain Capital Partners, Gumi Cryptos, Hashed, Dragonfly Capital Partners, NEM Ventures, Coinshares, Medici Ventures, Winklevoss Capital, Pantera Capital, Alphabit Fund и Placeholder. Несколько известных инвесторов, таких как Union Square Ventures, Lux Capital, Arrington XRP Capital, Hashkey Group и Fenbushi Capital, среди других приняли участие в продаже токенов Blockstack, которые привлекли $ 23 млн от государственных и частных инвесторов.
Tumblr media
В третьем квартале 2019 года многие традиционные фирмы и учреждения венчурного капитала осуществляли инвестиции, как показано выше на рис. 5. Fidelity осуществила две инвестиции напрямую и три инвестиции через свою дочернюю компанию Avon Ventures. Фирмы венчурного капитала первого уровня, Andreeseen Horowitz и Kleiner Perkins, сделали по две инвестиции каждая, в то время как Nomura и Naspers Ventures также сделали по две инвестиции каждая.
Tumblr media
Как видно из рисунка 6, несколько крупнейших компаний в крипто-торговле были куплены в третьем квартале. Кракен приобрел Interchange, поставщика услуг по учету, сверке и отчетности для хедж-фондов криптовалюты, управляющих активами и администраторов фондов. Bittrex приобрел Tradedash, торговый инструмент, который предлагает клиентам настраиваемый торговый опыт. Binance приобрела JEX, платформу для торговли крипто-активами, предлагающую услуги спот и торговли деривативами. Ripples Xpring приобрела Logos Network, начинающую разработку платежных решений, ориентированных на скорость и масштабируемость, и Ripple приобрела Algrim, основанную в Исландии компанию по криптовалюте и опытного разработчика платформ криптовалюты.
Для получения полного отчета и прогноза Deal Flow на 4 квартал перейдите по ссылке ниже.
ПРОЧИТАЙТЕ ПОЛНЫЙ ОТЧЕТ
0 notes
arxt1 · 5 years ago
Text
$NuSTAR$ Observations of Four Nearby X-ray Faint AGN: Low Luminosity or Heavy Obscuration?. (arXiv:2006.13583v1 [astro-ph.HE])
We present $NuSTAR$ observations of four active galactic nuclei (AGN) located within 15 Mpc. These AGN, namely ESO 121-G6, NGC 660, NGC 3486 and NGC 5195, have observed X-ray luminosities of $L_{\rm 2-10\ keV, obs} \lesssim$ 10$^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$, classifying them as low luminosity AGN (LLAGN). We perform broadband X-ray spectral analysis for the AGN by combining our $NuSTAR$ data with $Chandra$ or $XMM-Newton$ observations to directly measure their column densities ($N_{\rm H}$) and infer their intrinsic power. We complement our X-ray data with archival and new high angular resolution mid-infrared (mid-IR) data for all objects, except NGC 5195. Based on our X-ray spectral analysis, we found that both ESO 121-G6 and NGC 660 are heavily obscured ($N_{\rm H}$ > 10$^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$; $L_{\rm 2-10\ keV,\ int} \sim$ 10$^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$), and NGC 660 may be Compton-thick. We also note that the X-ray flux and spectral slope for ESO 121-G6 have significantly changed over the last decade, indicating significant changes in the obscuration and potentially accretion rate. On the other hand, NGC 3486 and NGC 5195 appear to be unobscured and just mildly obscured, respectively, with $L_{\rm 2-10\ keV,\ int} <$ 10$^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$; i.e., genuine LLAGN. Both of the heavily obscured AGN have $L_{\rm bol} >$ 10$^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$ and $\lambda_{\rm Edd} \gtrsim$ 10$^{-3}$, and are detected in high angular resolution mid-IR imaging, indicating the presence of obscuring dust on nuclear scale. NGC 3486 however, is undetected in high-resolution mid-IR imaging, and the current data do not provide stringent constraints on the presence or absence of obscuring nuclear dust in the AGN.
from astro-ph.HE updates on arXiv.org https://ift.tt/31cKDeL
0 notes
cryptobrief · 6 years ago
Link
Abstract: This is our third major piece on ICOs. In our first piece in September 2017 we focused on the interrelationships between ICO team members. In our second piece, in October 2018, we tracked the Ethereum balances in the ICO treasury accounts. In collaboration with TokenAnalyst, this piece focuses on the treasury balances of the ICO tokens themselves, on the Ethereum network. This report is based on tokens where the team controlled holding’s were worth an astonishing US$24.2 billion on issuance (In reality liquidity was too low for this value to be realized). Today this figure has fallen to around US$5 billion, with the difference primarily being caused by a fall in the market value of the tokens, alongside US$1.5 billion of transfers away from team address clusters (Possibly disposals).
(Source: BitMEX Research)
(Note: A reminder of the various interconnections between ICO team members, from our September 2017 interactive graphic)
Team controlled token holdings (Own tokens) – summary data
US$ billion Value of ICO coins allocated to token teams 21.5 Issuance to team post ICO 2.7 Total issuance to team controlled wallet 24.2 Coins leaving the team address cluster (Perhaps sales) (1.5) Profits/(losses) due to token price changes (12.0) Net impact of Noah (token burn) (4.4) Net Impact of EOS (1.2) Current team holdings 5.0
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018, based on data for 108 tokens)
Of the US$24 billion worth of tokens ICO project teams issued to themselves, 54% of the value has been lost due to coin price reductions. The peak valuation of the team holdings of their own token’s, using the individual price peak for each coin, is over US$80 billion. This larger figure implies US$70 billion of “losses” from the peak. Although with the peak valuation highly dubious due to a lack of liquidity and most of the tokens being granted to the teams essentially for nothing, classifying these price movements as losses may not be appropriate. Unlike ICO investors, the teams did not have an offering price or initial investment. However, some trading activity did occur at these ridiculously high valuations, therefore we believe it’s still interesting to consider these figures, while bearing these caveats in mind.
Based on current illiquid spot prices, the ICO teams still appear to own around US$5 billion of their own tokens, money they essentially got from nothing, depending on ones view. At the same time the teams may have realized gains of US$1.5 billion by selling tokens, based on coins leaving team address clusters. Although this figure may also be an overestimate, as coins could have left the team address cluster for a variety of reasons.
Data Caveats & weaknesses in calculation methodology
The liquidity of many of these tokens is low and therefore the US Dollar values may be gross overestimates, this applies to both the initial allocation, current value and the value of any losses. In some cases, the value of tokens given to the team, for instance with projects such as Veritaseum or Noah, were almost comically large relative to the real trading volume in the coins. Therefore it can be thought of as unrealistic to value the team holdings based on the exchange price of the tokens.
The challenge and uncertainty involved in producing this dataset surrounds the allocation of the tokens to the team address cluster. TokenAnalyst conducted this allocation. The methodology used was imperfect and we have not dug into individual projects. The data was obtained by analysing the token smart contracts and transaction patterns on the Ethereum blockchain and applying machine learning type techniques to establish a team controlled address cluster for the team of each project. The data is therefore a probabilistic estimate and is likely to be inaccurate at individual project level. However, the primary motivation for this report was to produce macro data about the team holdings of ICO tokens on Ethereum. Although this analysis has produced results which are far from perfect, we believe one can draw reasonable macro conclusions from the analysis.
As mentioned above, our analysis is based on looking at smart contract data and transaction patterns, not into the documents and policies of individual projects. Therefore its possible that we included tokens as part of a team balance, although in reality they are held as part of another form of reserves, escrow or some other category, where its not accurate to attribute the coins to the team’s own funds.
The data assumes the issuance date is the same date as when the first price data appeared on Coinmarketcap, this may not be a reliable assumption.
Summary data
Value of coins issued to team controlled address clusters (own tokens) – US$ million – Top 10
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Token data up to Dec 2018, data based on prices at the time(s) of issuance)
Loss in value of team controlled holding (own tokens) – US$ million – Top 10
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018)
Proportional loss in value of coins in team controlled address clusters (own tokens) – Top 10
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018)
Value of coins transferred out of team controlled address clusters (Own tokens) – US$ million – Top 10
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018. Huobi and Qash are exchanges and the tokens appear to have been sent to their respective platforms. It is possible the above figures represents sales/”cashing out”, although there could be other reasons for the transfers)
Current value of coins in team controlled address clusters (Own tokens) – US$ million – Top 10
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018)
The raw data – Team holdings of own tokens – US$ million
Token Value at ICO Post ICO issuance Transfers away from team cluster Loss in value Current value VERI 4,762 0 (15) (3,196) 1,552 NOAH 4,478 0 (4,423) 55 KIN 980 0 (0) (703) 277 AGI 863 0 (27) (814) 22 POLY 842 0 (17) (727) 99 HT 643 0 (366) (29) 248 GNO 636 0 0 (533) 103 QASH 617 0 (177) (300) 140 MKR 596 0 (46) (445) 105 TEL 452 0 (8) (408) 36 ITC 334 0 (7) (323) 4 ZRX 333 0 (9) (155) 169 ZIP 266 0 0 (226) 41 BLZ 256 0 (32) (207) 17 GTO 241 0 (67) (157) 17 BNB 219 110 0 118 447 BTO 198 0 (28) (165) 5 ICX 160 0 (79) (67) 14 ETHOS 153 0 (15) (123) 16 TNT 152 0 (10) (133) 9 CENNZ 143 0 (6) (121) 15 AST 141 0 (24) (104) 13 KEY 132 0 (2) (124) 6 BIX 118 2 0 (85) 35 CVC 117 0 (1) (75) 41 FSN 100 0 (6) (75) 19 OCN 100 0 (31) (64) 5 DEW 95 0 (1) (87) 7 SRN 89 0 (15) (69) 4 MDS 88 0 (8) (75) 5 EDO 83 0 (11) (58) 15 ABT 76 0 0 (71) 5 WTC 69 0 (50) 17 37 INS 68 0 0 (66) 2 PPT 65 0 (55) (5) 5 IHT 65 0 (2) (58) 5 CPT 65 0 (0) (43) 21 SPHTX 64 0 0 (60) 4 DRGN 58 0 (47) (2) 8 MCO 54 0 (89) 72 37 XYO 54 0 (6) (23) 25 RCN 54 0 0 (48) 6 DPY 47 0 (23) (22) 2 THETA 45 0 0 (30) 16 MANA 41 0 (95) 127 73 R 40 0 0 35 75 APPC 35 0 (24) (9) 2 CMT 33 0 (1) (25) 8 FUEL 32 2 0 (29) 5 CREDO 31 0 (0) (6) 25 DMT 31 0 (17) (12) 2 POWR 30 166 0 (154) 42 LRC 30 8 0 (21) 17 WPR 26 0 0 (24) 2 AMB 24 0 0 (17) 7 RNT 22 0 (1) (15) 7 ENG 22 0 0 (12) 10 COB 22 0 (10) (5) 7 GTC 20 126 0 (141) 6 REN 19 0 (3) (13) 3 DENT 19 635 0 (564) 90 UTT 19 0 (0) (11) 8 AE 13 0 (19) 6 0 DATA 11 0 (3) (6) 3 BRD 10 17 0 (21) 7 SNGLS 8 0 0 (3) 6 LEND 6 0 (7) 3 2 RLC 6 0 (5) 2 3 PLR 6 3 0 (4) 5 HVN 5 0 (5) 0 1 CVT 5 11 0 (8) 9 LYM 5 0 (4) 0 2 SAN 5 0 (7) 5 4 GNT 4 0 (12) 31 23 KICK 3 2 0 (4) 1 DGD 2 0 (5) 5 3 EDG 2 0 (29) 28 1 ENJ 2 0 (0) 1 2 RHOC 1 14 0 (13) 1 ARN 0 6 0 (6) 1 ELF 0 45 0 (40) 6 PAY 0 142 0 (132) 11 DAI 0 1 0 0 1 HPB 0 134 0 (119) 15 CRPT 0 3 0 (2) 1 HOT 0 7 0 0 7 SALT 0 95 0 (92) 3 NAS 0 71 0 (50) 21 NGC 0 12 0 (11) 1 CPC 0 12 0 (9) 3 GVT 0 3 0 (2) 2 SNM 0 14 0 (11) 2 BTM 0 9 0 (1) 8 QRL 0 7 0 (6) 2 NULS 0 71 0 (52) 19 POE 0 58 0 (54) 4 TEN 0 29 0 (15) 13 MTL 0 188 0 (177) 11 WINGS 0 18 0 (15) 3 SPANK 0 106 0 (93) 13 OMG 0 195 0 (154) 41 STORJ 0 133 0 (85) 48 BAT 0 38 0 14 52 VIBE 0 10 0 (8) 2 IOST 0 218 0 (185) 34 Total 21,513 2,723 (14,805) (4,396) 5,035
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Price data up to Jan 2019, token data up to Dec 2018)
Conclusion & summary data
This analysis highlights the lack of standards and transparency in the ICO market, especially when it comes to the allocation of tokens to the founding team’s wallet. Teams were often able to mint, burn, buy, and sell (their own) tokens at will, without analysts being able to easily track what is occuring. We would often see tokens in exchange clusters, and it was hard to tell whether the token project “paid” the exchange to list tokens or the token project just transferred their treasury to the exchange to cash out.
Although to be fair, perhaps we could improve the analysis by spending more time reading the specific documentation of the individual projects and by speaking to the teams involved. This would have resulted in a more robust dataset.
One thing about ICOs that many people often overlook, is that ICO teams often make profits in two ways from the issuance:
Firstly, by selling the newly issued tokens (often for Ethereum), and,
Secondly, by issuing themselves their own tokens.
Our October 2018 report focused on the former, while this report focuses on the latter. The summary table below combines the figures from both of our reports.
ICO team profits US$ billion ICO process Ethereum Raised 5.4 Own tokens issued to founding teams 24.2 Total raised 29.6 Changes in coin price Ethereum profits/(losses) – Mostly realised 0.8 Own token profits/(losses) – Mostly unrealised (17.6) Total profits/(losses) post issuance (16.8) Total ICO team profits 12.8
(Source: BitMEX Research, TokenAnlayst, the Ethereum blockchain, Coinmarketcap (for token prices)) (Notes: Ethereum price data to October 2018, Own token price data to January 2019)
Although, as we have repeatedly explained, there are many inaccuracies and assumptions involved in producing the data. Based on our methodology, it appears as if ICO teams have profited by almost US$13 billion from this ICO process. In our view, this money was made incredibly easily, with very little work, accountability or transparency. Therefore ICOs has proven an extremely attractive way for project founders to raise funds. The results for investors of course, have not been as attractive.
The ICO cycle now appears to be dying down to some extent and its much harder to raise funds than it was in late 2017. But with so much money made and lost, the events of 2017 and early 2018 are not likely to be quickly forgotten. Entrepreneurs will remember the success (and keep trying to raise money) and investors will remember the pain. A repeat of this cycle within a few years is therefore not as likely as many may think.
0 notes
ustribunenews-blog · 7 years ago
Text
Today's Image from NASA: NGC 253: Dusty Island Universe
Today’s Image from NASA: NGC 253: Dusty Island Universe
Image of the day from NASA. Fun Fact: Sculptor Galaxy was discovered by Caroline Herschel.
NGC 253: Dusty Island Universe , Copyright Stefano Cancelli
(more…)
View On WordPress
0 notes
askkopcommunity-blog · 8 years ago
Text
[IPTV서비스 올레 UHD tv/올레tv 라이브 채널편성표] UHD화질의 VOD영화와 콘텐츠를 4배 더 선명하게!
New Post has been published on http://kpopcommunityblog.com/iptv%ec%84%9c%eb%b9%84%ec%8a%a4-%ec%98%ac%eb%a0%88-uhd-tv%ec%98%ac%eb%a0%88tv-%eb%9d%bc%ec%9d%b4%eb%b8%8c-%ec%b1%84%eb%84%90%ed%8e%b8%ec%84%b1%ed%91%9c-uhd%ed%99%94%ec%a7%88%ec%9d%98-vod%ec%98%81/
[IPTV서비스 올레 UHD tv/올레tv 라이브 채널편성표] UHD화질의 VOD영화와 콘텐츠를 4배 더 선명하게!
UHD셋탑박스 하나면 있으면 우리집 TV를 FULL HD보다 4배 더 선명한
4K UHD급 완벽한 고화질로 UP!
UHD 전용관과 UHD 채널을 통해 UHD화질의 VOD영화와 콘텐츠를 이용할 수 있습니다.
국내 최고 품질의 초고속 인터넷 네트워크로 실시간
방송을 선명한 화질로 끊김없이 즐길 수 있는
IPTV서비스 올레 UHD tv/ 올레tv 라이브의 채널편성표입니다.
  지상파/종편/홈쇼핑
4 CJ오쇼핑(풀HD)
5 SBS(풀HD)
6 NS홈쇼핑(풀HD)
7 KBS2(풀HD)
8 GS SHOP(풀HD)
9 KBS1(풀HD)
10 홈&쇼핑(풀HD)
11 MBC(풀HD)
12 롯데홈쇼핑(풀HD)
13 EBS(풀HD)
14 현대홈쇼핑(풀HD)
15 JTBC(풀HD)
16 MBN(풀HD)
18 채널A(풀HD)
19 TV조선(풀HD)
20 K쇼핑(풀HD)
22 아임쇼핑
26 OBS(풀HD)
31 쇼핑엔T
33 현대홈쇼핑+샵(풀HD)
36 롯데원티비
38 GS MY SHOP
40 B Shopping(풀HD)
69 W 쇼핑(풀HD)
71 신세계쇼핑(풀HD)
드라마/오락/음악
17 tvN(풀HD)
27 Mnet(풀HD)
35 KBS Drama(풀HD)
37 SBS Plus(풀HD)
39 MBC드라마넷(풀HD)
41 KBS Joy(풀HD)
43 SBS funE(풀HD)
45 MBC Every1(풀HD)
46 SkyENT(풀HD)
47 QTV(풀HD)
48 E채널(풀HD)
68 CNTV(풀HD)
70 드라마H(풀HD)
72 드라맥스(풀HD)
74 드라마큐브(풀HD)
75 O tvn(풀HD)
76 올리브(풀HD)
77 온스타일(풀HD)
78 푸드TV(풀HD)
79 홈스토리(풀HD)
80 MBC QueeN(풀HD)
81 HD OBS W(풀HD)
82 GTV(풀HD)
83 KBS W(풀HD)
84 TLC(풀HD)
85 코미디TV(풀HD)
86 TRU TV
87 하이라이트TV(풀HD)
88 GMTV(풀HD)
89 i-Concerts(풀HD)
90 CLASSICA(풀HD)
91 예술 TV아르떼(풀HD)
92 아이넷TV(풀HD)
93 가요TV
96 SBS MTV(풀HD)
97 MBC MUSIC(풀HD)
98 Channel [V](풀HD)
99 K STAR(풀HD)
  영화/시리즈
1 SkyUHD1UHD
28 OCN(풀HD)
29 채널CGV(풀HD)
30 SkyDrama(풀HD)
32 슈퍼액션(풀HD)
34 XTM(풀HD)
101 Focus Movie(풀HD)
102 OCN시리즈(풀HD)
103 mplex(풀HD)
104 THE MOVIE(풀HD)
105 선댄스 채널(풀HD)
106 스크린(풀HD)
107 FOX(풀HD)
108 채널 J(풀HD)
109 동아TV(풀HD)
110 중화TV(풀HD)
111 AsiaN(풀HD)
112 히어로액션(풀HD)
113 AXN
114 텔레노벨라(풀HD)
115 디원(풀HD)
203 UXNUHD
초고화질 UHD 해상도  국내 최다 UHD VOD
실용적인 스마트 기능
  스포츠/레져
2 SkyTravel(풀HD)
21 SkyPetpark(풀HD)
51 SPOTV(풀HD)
52 SPOTV2(풀HD)
53 IB SPORTS (풀HD)
54 SkySports(풀HD)
55 The Golf Channel(풀HD)
56 JTBC Golf(풀HD)
57 SBSGOLF (풀HD)
58 SBS Sports(풀HD)
59 KBS N Sports(풀HD)
60 MBC SPORT+(풀HD)
61 JTBC3(풀HD)
116 빌리어즈티비(풀HD)
117 마운틴TV(풀HD)
118 FTV(풀HD)
119 FISHING TV(풀HD)
120 바둑TV(풀HD)
121 K-바둑(풀HD)
122 브레인TV(풀HD)
123 OGN(풀HD)
124 SPOTV Games(풀HD)
125 SPOTV+
127 Edge TV(풀HD)
128 놀티비(풀HD)
129 폴라리스TV(풀HD)
130 Sky힐링
     애니/유/교육
95 EBS2
131 Focus Kids(풀HD)
132 Tooniverse(풀HD)
133 ANIMAX(풀HD)
134 애니원(풀HD)
135 애니박스(풀HD)
136 니켈로디언(풀HD)
137 카툰네트워크(풀HD)
138 애니플러스(풀HD)
141 대교 어린이TV(풀HD)
142 JEI 재능TV(풀HD)
144 KBS Kids(풀HD)
145 EBS u(풀HD)
146 Baby TV
148 키즈원(풀HD)
149 KIDS-TV
150 Disney Channel (풀HD)
151 디즈니주니어(풀HD)
152 Cbeebies
153 키즈톡톡(풀HD)
154 JEI EnglishTV
155 정철영어 TV
156 EBS English
157 EBS PLUS1
158 EBS PLUS2
159 스마트교육방송
160 OUN(풀HD)
277 부메랑 
  다큐/교양/종교
49 SkyA&C(풀HD)
166 환경TV
168 NGC(풀HD)
169 History HD(풀HD)
170 NatGeo Wild(풀HD)
171 NatGeo People(풀HD)
172 BBC Earth
173 디스커버리(풀HD)
174 Animal Planet
175 YTN 사이언스(풀HD)
176 채널뷰
202 SkyUHD2UHD
231 평화방송
232 BBS불교방송(풀HD)
233 BTN불교TV(풀HD)
234 Good TV(풀HD)
235 C Channel(풀HD)
236 CTS기독교TV(풀HD)
237 CGNTV(풀HD)
238 CBS(풀HD)
    뉴스/경제
23 연합뉴스TV(풀HD)
24 YTN(풀HD)
25 SBS CNBC(풀HD)
180 한국경제TV(풀HD)
181 MTN(풀HD)
182 매일경제TV(풀HD)
183 이데일리TV
184 서울경제TV(풀HD)
185 토마토TV(풀HD)
186 아시아경제TV(풀HD)
187 부동산TV(풀HD)
188 부동산토마토(풀HD)
191 CNN International(풀HD)
192 BBC WN
193 Euro News
194 CCTV News
195 Fox News
196 Bloomberg
197 CNBC
    공공/공익/정보
63 KTV(풀HD)
64 국회방송
65 CBN(풀HD)
165 SkyICT(풀HD)
198 TV5MONDE
199 NHK WP
206 아리랑 TV(풀HD)
207 YTN Weather(풀HD)
208 MBC NET
212 일자리방송
213 법률방송
214 tbsTV(풀HD)
217 육아방송
219 복지TV
220 쿠키건강TV
유료
50 Dog TV(풀HD)
66 캐치온(풀HD)
67 캐치온 플러스(풀HD)
126 채널해피독
245 viki(풀HD)
246 미드나잇(풀HD)
247 Playboy TV(풀HD)
248 허니TV(풀HD)
249  펜트하우스tv
오픈
62 Star Sports
100 포커스TV
241 오픈스토리
250 산업방송 채널i Full HD
251 Trendy
252 한국직업방송
253 리얼TV
254 한국여론방송 Full HD
255 소상공인방송 Full HD
256 다큐스토리 Full HD
257 DW-TV Asia+
258 Australia Plus
259 한국승마방송
260 국방TV Full HD
261 STB상생방송 Full HD
262 CMTV
263 이벤트TV
264 bookTV
265 소비자TV
266 C TIME Full HD
267 STN
268 채널A 플러스
269 헝그리앱TV
270 캠퍼스TV
271 헬스메디TV Full HD
272 실버TV
273 CMC가족오락TV Full HD
274 FUN TV
275 실버아이TV
276 리빙TV
278 사회안전방송
279 JJC지방자치TV
280 CCTV4
281 KBSN Life
282 생활체육TV
283 다문화티브이
284 원음방송
285 내외경제TV
오디오
609 Dog & Mom
610 최신인기가요
611 최신 발라드 가요
612 최신 가요 댄스
613 최신 가요 차트
614 트로트가요무대
615 최신 트로트 히트
616 80, 90년대 가요
617 주부 애창 가요
618 최신 히트 팝스
619 Pop Nostalgia
620 다문화 음악 1
621 다문화 음악 2
622 Black Music
623 Rock Festival
624 All That Jazz
625 홈클래식
626 기독교 음악
627 불교 음악
628 카톨릭 음악
629 TV속 화제음악
630 OST 천국
631 엄마랑 EQ동요
632 Rainy Day
633 레이디스초이스
634 K-pop Allstars
635 러브 발라드
636 커피타임
637 클럽뮤직
638 파워스테이션
639 Cool & Hot
kt IPTV, 올레tv 채널 (채널번호 3번)은 기본 포함되는 채널입니다.
올레tv 25, 34 상품의 경우 월정액 상품이 포함되어 있습니다.
Full HD 화질은 올레tv 스마트 셋탑박스 이용 상품에서만 지원됩니다.
오디오 채널은 기본 제공 채널로 각 상품별 이용 가능 채널 수에는 포함되지 않습니다.
OBS(채널번호 26번)는 경인방송 채널로 서울/경인 지역만 시청 가능합니다.
UHD채널은 UHD팩 가입시 확인 할 수 있습니다.
 최신영화VOD, 최신VOD, VOD영화는 IPTV넘버원 올레tv에서…
0 notes
cosmicfocus · 2 years ago
Text
A Southern Emission Nebula
An emission nebula and open star cluster in the constellation of Ara.
NGC 6188, Caldwell 82, in Ara With Associated Open Star Cluster NGC 6193 Image exposure:121 MinutesImage Size:1.54º x 1.03ºImage date:2023-06-10 Don’t just look at the nebula. Look at the stars too. A nebula is nothing without its stars and this emission nebula has some vivid star clusters and numerous bright strings of stars associated with it. The main star cluster NGC 6193, which is…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
7 notes · View notes
spinningblueball · 6 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
NGC 121
147 notes · View notes
thenewenlightenmentage · 10 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
Nearby Galaxy's Star Cluster Sparkles
Photography by ESA/HUBBLE/NASA
NGC 121, a ten-billion-year-old star cluster seen in this July 14 Hubble Space Telescope picture, sits in a neighboring galaxy.
The star cluster is the oldest one residing in the Small Magellanic Cloud, a small galaxy circling our own Milky Way.
Star clusters orbit the center of galaxies; the Milky Way has about 150 of them. Why NGC 121 is much older than the other clusters in its galaxy is a mystery under study by astronomers.
96 notes · View notes
gingadan · 10 years ago
Photo
Tumblr media
NGC 121 (Globular Cluster), Constellation: Tucana, Distance: 200,000 light-years
(C) NASA/ESA
6 notes · View notes
arxt1 · 6 years ago
Text
Host galaxies of merging compact objects: mass, star formation rate, metallicity and colours. (arXiv:1903.00083v2 [astro-ph.GA] UPDATED)
Characterizing the properties of the host galaxies of merging compact objects provides essential clues to interpret current and future gravitational-wave detections. Here, we investigate the stellar mass, star formation rate (SFR), metallicity and colours of the host galaxies of merging compact objects in the local Universe, by combining the results of MOBSE population-synthesis models together with galaxy catalogs from the EAGLE simulation. We predict that the stellar mass of the host galaxy is an excellent tracer of the merger rate per galaxy ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ of double neutron stars (DNSs), double black holes (DBHs) and black hole-neutron star binaries (BHNSs). We find a significant correlation also between ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ and SFR. As a consequence, ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ correlates also with the $r-$band luminosity and with the $g-r$ colour of the host galaxies. Interestingly, $\gtrsim{}60$ %, $\gtrsim{}64$ % and $\gtrsim{}73$ % of all the DNSs, BHNSs and DBHs merging in the local Universe lie in early-type galaxies, such as NGC 4993. We predict a local DNS merger rate density of $\sim{}238~{\rm Gpc}^{-3}~{\rm yr}~^{-1}$ and a DNS merger rate $\sim{}16-121$ Myr$^{-1}$ for Milky Way-like galaxies. Thus, our results are consistent with both the DNS merger rate inferred from GW170817 and the one inferred from Galactic DNSs.
from astro-ph.HE updates on arXiv.org http://bit.ly/2HmjHPA
0 notes
cosmicfocus · 2 years ago
Text
47 Tucanae
Globular Cluster 47-Tucanae. #astronomy
Globular Cluster NGC 104 Image exposure: 75 minutesImage size: 1.99º x 1.3ºImage date: 2022-09-18 One of the two most conspicuous globular clusters in our sky, 47 Tucanae is also catalogued as NGC 104 and Caldwell 106. With millions of stars, it is an amazing object both through eyepiece and camera, even at a distance of 15,000 light years. It is located 18º from the South Celestial Pole and…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
0 notes
arxt1 · 6 years ago
Text
Host galaxies of merging compact objects: mass, star formation rate, metallicity and colours. (arXiv:1903.00083v1 [astro-ph.GA])
Characterizing the properties of the host galaxies of merging compact objects provides essential clues to interpret current and future gravitational-wave detections. Here, we investigate the stellar mass, star formation rate (SFR), metallicity and colours of the host galaxies of merging compact objects in the local Universe, by combining the results of MOBSE population-synthesis models together with galaxy catalogs from the EAGLE simulation. We predict that the stellar mass of the host galaxy is an excellent tracer of the merger rate per galaxy ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ of double neutron stars (DNSs), double black holes (DBHs) and black hole-neutron star binaries (BHNSs). We find a significant correlation also between ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ and SFR. As a consequence, ${\rm n}_{\rm GW}$ correlates also with the $r-$band luminosity and with the $g-r$ colour of the host galaxies. Interestingly, $\gtrsim{}60$ %, $\gtrsim{}64$ % and $\gtrsim{}73$ % of all the DNSs, BHNSs and DBHs merging in the local Universe lie in early-type galaxies, such as NGC 4993. We predict a local DNS merger rate density of $\sim{}238~{\rm Gpc}^{-3}~{\rm yr}~^{-1}$ and a DNS merger rate $\sim{}16-121$ Myr$^{-1}$ for Milky Way-like galaxies. Thus, our results are consistent with both the DNS merger rate inferred from GW170817 and the one inferred from Galactic DNSs.
from astro-ph.HE updates on arXiv.org https://ift.tt/2IZ36UW
0 notes
arxt1 · 6 years ago
Text
Optical and X-ray Observational Search for the Possible Supernova Remnant Candidates in the Nearby Galaxy NGC 1569. (arXiv:1809.02034v1 [astro-ph.HE])
We report the results of our investigation on the possible existence of supernova remnants (SNRs) in the nearby galaxy, NGC 1569, using the CCD imaging and spectroscopic observations from the RTT150 telescope of TUG-TUBITAK in Antalya, Turkey for two different observing periods. Using [S\,{\sc ii}]/H$\alpha$ $\geq$ 0.4 standard criteria, the identification of 13 new SNR candidates for this galaxy is proposed for two different epochs. We found the [S\,{\sc ii}]/H$\alpha$ ratios ranging from 0.46--0.84 and H$\alpha$ intensities ranging from (2.2--32) $\times$ 10$^{-15}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$. [S\,{\sc ii}]$\lambda\lambda$6716/6731 average flux ratio is calculated from the optical spectra for only one possible SNR candidate. By using this ratio the electron density, $N_{\rm e}$, is estimated to be 121 $\pm$ 17 cm$^{-3}$ and by using the [O\,{\sc iii}]$\lambda$5007/H$\beta$ ratio of the same spectrum, the shock wave velocity, $V_{\rm s}$, is estimated to be between 100 < Vs < 150 km s$^{-1}$. Using {\it Chandra} data, we find that out of 13 SNR candidates only 10 of them have yielded a spectrum with good statistics, confirming the existence of 10 SNR candidates with matched positions in X-ray region as well. We measure the 0.5--2 keV band flux down to 0.58 $\times$ 10$^{-15}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ for 10 X-ray sources. Our spectral analysis revealed that spectra of the SNR candidates are best modelled with the Collisional Ionisation Equilibrium plasma with a temperature range of 0.84 keV < \textit{kT$_{e}$} < 1.36 keV.
from astro-ph.HE updates on arXiv.org https://ift.tt/2oLYqo9
0 notes