Talk:MACS J0025.4-1222

Comments
Do we actually need two pictures that are essentially the same? One with caption and one without? I think it's overkill, the un-captioned pic should go.

Journal citation added
Suggest the web citations should be either removed or replaced with more appropriate ones for Wikipedia, like the journal citation I added. Puzl bustr (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Wording confusing - seems wrong
It says "The visible light images from Hubble allowed astronomers to infer the distribution of total mass (both dark matter and normal matter). With gravitational lensing Hubble was then able to map the dark matter (colored in blue)." but surely gravitational lensing (GL) shows the total mass and some calculations are done to infer where the dark mattter is ? The image as shown doesnt seem to show much evidence of GL but presumably they are seen in the visible and IR images ? Should we say "the GL shown in the visible images allows the total mass distribution (blue) to be inferred, and the X-ray images (pink) show the distribution of the colliding intergalactic gas (which is the bulk of the normal matter) which allows the dark matter to be mapped" ? Can we clarify that the two colliding galaxy clusters are the galaxies shown in the blue regions ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The source cited (just a pre-publication ("Bradac, M. et al, 2008, ApJ, Accepted") image description) actually says "Using optical images from Hubble, the team was able to infer the distribution of the total mass (colored in blue) -- dark and ordinary matter -- using a technique known as gravitational lensing." and "Color Code : X-ray (Purple); Lensing (Blue); Optical (Yellow & Cyan)" which seems to conflict with the in-image label implying that blue represents dark matter ! (not sure who did the in-image labeling). Tried to fix wording as per Hubble site source. - Rod57 (talk) 13:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)