Getting a bit of pushback from some quarters about why I think it's important that professional astronomers know a bit about the night sky. So, a quick story. (1/n) A few months ago, my dad asked me about my research with @NASAHubble . Our latest project involves getting a TRGB distance to a galaxy in the Virgo Cluster --i.e., is it really in the cluster, or just along the line of sight? (2/n)

OK, so here's a thread about astronomy, constellations, magnitudes, parsecs, Pop I and II stars, and all these crazy units and lingo we use as astronomers. Because I am *constantly* reading threads bitching about these things, and I'm here to push back a bit. First, to be honest, MOST of the time I encounter that view, its from physicists buffaloing into the astronomical literature and deciding to explain to astronomers how we should be doing science. "Why can't you use proper units? What is this magnitude nonsense and parsec stuff?"

I have heard a growing number of astronomers saying that undergrads need to have a published paper to be seriously considered for graduate school. If true, I find this pathetic, elitist, and prejudicial. 1/n First, not every undergrad has access to research opportunities, particularly in astronomy. We're a small field, and so requiring that grad applicants be coming from an institution with an astronomy research presence is extraordinarily limiting. 2/n

Time for a little research update, highlighting our recent discovery of a really diffuse object/galaxy/ubersmudge in the Leo I galaxy group.

The full story can be found in our paper, posted last week on ArXiv: arxiv.org/abs/1807.11544 First, thanks to collaborators @therealCCarr, Aaron Watkins,
@Valeandromeo and Paul Harding. Aaron took the optical imaging, Chris discovered the object and worked on photometry, Tom provided the HI data, and Paul made the Burrell Schmidt the amazing LSB imager it is today.