THE TOTAL MASS AND SIZE OF OUR GALAXY

ROBERTO BARTALI

ABSTRACT

The knowledge of the size and mass of our Galaxy, called The Milky Way (MW), is
a difficult problem, but it is very important because is our home in the Universe. Measuring
and understanding our Galaxy, can tell us how it formed and it will be easy to do a
generalization for the other millions of galaxies in the Universe. Really, we know much
more of very far galaxies than of the one we live in, this is not a surprise because we are
inside the Milky Way and very close to its equatorial plane, due to this fact, we can only
see stars above and below us, but not those in the other side, so the first problem to be
solved is to find the form and the size of the MW, then, the position of the Sun in it. After
the discovery of the limits of the Galaxy, we can measure the mass, with indirect and
statistical methods, because we can not count all the stars and nebulae it has.
The reader will be find in this work how astronomers try to find the geometry and
dynamics of the MW, I say “try” because there are not a definitive model for that.

INTRODUCTION

The MW (figure 1), as seen by

naked eyes, is a beautiful “long cloud” that
cross all the sky, very impressive in the
southern hemisphere. For that reason,
ancient astronomers called it a river or a
milky flow, the name mean precisely that:
“path of milk”.
The first attempt to explain what was that
cloud, was made by the greek astronomer
Democritus five centuries before Christ, he
Figure 1
The milky Way galaxy, full sky view, and two think it was made by a lot of stars. He was
satellite galaxies, the Magellanic Clouds right, but for more than 21 centuries no one
can demonstrate that.
Galileo Galilei was the first to point a telescope to the MW and he
discovered that there are an enormous quantity of stars, too closer for the
eyes to be resolved. Later, W. Herschel, with much more powerful
telescopes (figure 2), make an entire map of the MW and discover that it is
a squeezed bubble with an height 5 times less than the length (figure 3). He
concluded 3 things: the Sun was in the center of the MW, the Sun is moving
respect to the stars and the density of the stars was always the same
Figure 2
One of the Herschel’s
everywhere.
telescopes No much improvement of the knowledge was made until

1
the XX century, when Schwarzschild, Kapteyn and Seeliger developed statistical methods
to solve the problem, later, Seares, among others, improve and redefined some of their
assumptions.
Observing toward the center of the MW, and generally
through the spiral arms is almost impossible. Just to a distance
of a few thousand parsecs, the absorption, due to the interstellar
gas and dust, may reach many magnitudes (sometimes 1
Figure 3 magnitude every 1000 parsec), so the only way to see the other
Map of the Milky Way
made by Herschel
side of the Galaxy is with a radiotelescope, technology
available only from just some 40 years ago. Observing the 21
cm wavelength emitted by neutral hydrogen (figure 4), we finally confirm that our Galaxy
really is a spiral galaxy of some 100 Kly across, with the Sun in an arm at a distance of 8
Kpc from the center. In the last few years, observatories in
space give a much detailed information about the size and the
mass of the MW, because they observe at many different
wavelength. Most of these observations are impossible from
the Earth surface due to the atmospheric absorption and
refraction. The analysis of the new data and precise
calculation of the movement of the stars in different part of
the MW, instead to give answer, raised more problems
because there are much many matter than that we can see.
Figure 4
In the following sections I will try to give the better
Early radio map of the Milky figure of the mass and size of our Galaxy explaining the
Way spiral arms methods used to obtain it.

MILKY WAY GEOMETRY DETERMINATION

In the first half of the XX

century, many astronomers try to define,
with many methods, the right size and
form of the MW. They really do a great
job because the observational data and
computing power they have was very poor, so it is not a
Figure 5
Kapteyn conception of the MW
surprise if their result diverge substantially from our
actual knowledge.
J.C. Kaptein obtained a model of the MW (3)(10), using statistics, taking into
account only the most luminous stars of less than 12th magnitude in selected areas. In his
model, he considered the Sun in the center of the Galaxy, resulting in 30Kly length and
4Kly height (figure 5), all the stars was distributed in concentric circles, rotating around the
center. This model resemble only partially the real MW, he failed considering the Sun in
the center and also he never take into account the effect of the light absorption by dust.
Later, F.H. Seares, using the same Kapteyn selected areas, but with a limit
magnitude of 18, discovered that the Galaxy is bigger. Measuring the different stellar
density in different galactic longitudes, he also find that the center of the MW is not
coincident with the Sun, but it is in the direction of the Sagittarius constellation, where is
also the center of the globular cluster system. Seares also do a better analysis of the stellar

2
 density, this way he find that the Sun is in a peripheral
position, because the density increase toward the center
and decrease toward the outer side of the MW, the
accuracy of the Sun position respect to the Galaxy center
is, as he said, in strong dependence with the value of the
interstellar absorption. Their results, are more important
in the sense that they contributed to the next studies of the
Galaxy geometry, than for the figures they find.
Around 1960, the stellar density structure of the
MW was well known, brightest and more massive young
stars, in the galactic plane, then, going toward the poles
Figure 6
O, B stars and gas clouds in less massive and late spectral type stars arranged in
galaxy arms (NGC2997) layers until 2Kpc where the density is only 1/100 of the
galactic plane one, in those years, astronomers think
that they reach the border of the galaxy at that distance. This analysis find an asymmetry, so
the Sun is clearly displaced from the galactic equatorial plane to the north some 14 pc (from
10 to 20 pc depending on the author, we do not know the exact value).
Another interesting thing about stellar density
analysis was that it revealed a great increment close to the
center, what we know now as the bulge. Observing in the
Figure 7 direction of the MW
The Milky Way and the center, at infrared and
Globular Cluster radio wavelength, some
distribution (empty circles)
astronomers (1)(6) have
determined that the
central bulge is not flattened spherical, but it is barred, as
G. de Vancouleurs said 30 years before.
When astronomers extended the analysis in all directions, they find that the resulting
density was clearly not uniform, but they do not know the spiral arm structure, so they find
no relationship between spectral class and distance, looking at certain galactic longitudes
they find increment of young stars,
than another increment at a greater
distance; for example, they find
that OB stars (figure 6) are
condensed is groups with dark and
bright clouds between them and
only close to the equatorial plane
until about 10 degree of galactic
latitude (we know that the spiral
arms contains dense areas of OB
star associations and also there are
large and dense clouds). Their conclusion was
Figure 8 that the Galaxy is a very complicate system and
The Milky Way observed in different
wavelength from space and by advanced the analysis bring fidelity only locally, each part
technology telescopes of the MW has to be treated alone.

3
 Stebbins, Whitford and others, tried to solve the problem with the analysis and
observation of Globular Clusters, but Shapley was really who did the best job. Observing a
large quantity (near 93) of Globular Clusters, he find many Cepheid type variable stars, the
strong relationship between the luminosity and the period, permit to him to compute their
distances accurately and to define their relative position respect to the Sun (figure 7)
showing that they form a near spherical halo which diameter is almost as large as the disk
one. But, due to the wrong account for absorption, he estimated wrong distances. Shapley
work is one of the best, because it put, also, the basis of the understanding of other galaxies
and for the dynamic studies, enlarging the MW gravity influence much more over the disk.
He shows that definitively, the center of the MW is in the direction of Sagittarius and the
system of the Globular Clusters orbits the Galaxy around
that same point.
Now, in the Space Era, many technological and
computational improvement, like very large telescopes
and orbiting observatories, have revealed a better view of
the MW, essentially we have a more precise and high
resolution data, but the size and the shape are not changed
considerably, only best figured..
Spiral arms are composed of HII regions,
molecular clouds and OB star associations, older stars,

Figure 9
are observed at higher latitudes above and below the
Grand Design structure galactic plane. The better way to trace the arms is observing
(four spiral arms) at different wavelength, (figure 8), the star forming regions
and going to the limit of sensitivity, is possible to delimitate
each arm, because in the visible band we can only see the young bright stars and the gas
that they excite, but other wavelength shows the inter arm stars and matter. Precise
measurement of the H-alpha line in the spectra of these regions (2) and better accuracy in
the velocity of stars, revealed the real structure and shows that the MW is a Grand Design
Spiral (figure 9 and 17), but, up to time, the discussion is around the number of the spiral
arms, which some authors detect three and others can count four.

MILKY WAY MASS DETERMINATION

The Milky Way is a rotating system,

Figure 10
Milky Way velocity profile
stars, gas and even the central black hole
(13) are moving in different way depending
on the position they are occupying respect to
the galactic center. Basically, the velocity of
each object depends on the total mass of the
galaxy and of the object mass, because the
object feels a gravitational force that is
proportional to the masses involved, but
obviously, astronomers can not measure the mass in direct
form.
The first approach to the determination of the mass, is
to measure the velocity of the stars at different distances from

4
the center of the MW, as far as 1920-1930 Oort shows that the rotation is not a linear
function of the radius, but it is differential (figure 10). Regions close to the bulge rotate as a
solid disk with a constant angular velocity, but at a distance of about 1 Kpc the velocity
profile change, another change occurs at a distance of about 5 Kpc (the Solar System is at 8
Kpc from the center), and until some 10Kpc it follows the Kepler third law (eq. 1), then, at
larger radius, velocity increase with the distance. To explain this fact, we need a lot of mass
to increase the gravitational attraction, but the mass of the disk decrease with distance, the
same is true for the galactic halo.
The implication of this fact is that the most of the mass must be in the halo, but the
density, taking into account stars, globular clusters and gas (comprising almost all of the
visible matter at any wavelength), is very low, much less than the disk one, so something
not visible but, in a very large proportion, must be there. Astronomers calls it “Dark
Matter” and whatever it is, it must be a lot because the ratio of luminous to dark mass is
about 1/10, so 90% of the Galaxy is dark, otherwise there is no logical and physical reason
to explain the velocity curve.
To measure precisely the rotation of the MW is very difficult, because we are inside
it and we are moving also around the center at a considerable speed. The third Kepler law is
useful to calculate a mass, but it need the orbit radius, and this is a quantity not known for
sure. Shapley made a great contribution to find a solution, because he studied the Globular
Cluster system, which members are not orbiting in the plane of the MW, but on planes
randomly distributed, thus their velocity respect to us are very high, therefore easiest to
measure.
The Sun is moving in a near circular orbit around the center of the MW at an
average speed of 220 Km/s but it is not a constant movement, it is accelerating in three
different ways (10..11 Km/s faster toward the galactic center, 5..7 Km/s faster in the
direction of the rotation and 7..8 Km/s toward the north galactic pole), this implies more
corrections to apply when observing other stars and try to measure their absolute velocity,
we need to define a reference coordinate called “Local Standard of Rest” (LSR) that take
into account for that as best as possible. Only after the elimination of the Sun movement
from the stars apparent movements, we find their real motion; now, using the Newton’s
form of Kepler third law:
4(pi squred)(a cubed)
(eq. 1) sqared(p) = --------------------------
G(M1+M2)
Where p is the orbital period, a is the semimajor axis, G is the gravitational constant, M1 is
the Galaxy mass and M2 is the star mass.
But the star mass (M2) is very low compared with the Galaxy mass (M1), so M2 can be
eliminated, if we also suppose that the orbit of the star is nearly circular, then the semimajor
axis is equal to r (circle radius), next we know that
2 (pi) r
(eq. 2) P = --------
v
Where p is the orbital period, r is the orbital radius in parsecs and v is the orbital speed in
Km/s; introducing equation 2 into the equation 1 and reducing we get
r (v squared)
(eq. 3) M1 = -----------------
G

5
this equation shows the mass (in solar masses units) inside an orbit of some radius.
Equation 3 works well only for a small portion of the MW disk, as we see in the
figure 10. At large distances, outside the Sun’s orbit, the calculated galactic mass, in this
simple manner is not realistic, because M1 will be much greater than the calculated to fit
with the observation of the star velocity.
The MW mass determination problem will be solved only taking into account Dark
Matter, but first of all, astronomers have to find it. The first scientist to proof the existence
of the DM in our Galaxy, was D. Schramm.
Many theories are issued to explain what it is, but there are no consensus because
of the lack of observational material, after all we only see the gravitational effect it exert
over the visible matter.
The DM seems to be located only in the galactic halo (1)(2), many astronomers try
to demonstrate the need of its presence in the disk
and the bulge, Oort was one of them, and he found
that about 50% of the disk would be DM, but this
and other results are well explained with or
without the DM (1) depending on the constrains
used for calculations.
DM can be many things, baryonic or
exotic (not baryonic).
Figure 11 If we think about baryonic matter, it could
Microlensing effect by a dark object
be made of planets, low mass and cold stars like
brown dwarfs (figure 12), extremely low luminosity
white dwarfs, dust, molecular gas, atomic or ionized gas, black holes, neutron stars and
normal white dwarfs.
After years of observations, only a few objects (4)(5) have been discovered using
various techniques, including deep field images of the Hubble Space Telescope and very
sensitive and linear CCD detectors on dedicated telescopes, these allows the discovery of
brown dwarfs (figure 12).
A great effort is issued to the MACHO
project (Massive Compact Halo Object). If
something massive, but not visible, pass in front of
a star or another object very far, the light from that
object is bended due to the gravitational lensing
effect (figure 11); the light curve of the observed
object show an increment in a very special manner.
MACHO objects observed in the halo DM (4)(5) are
Figure 12 between 0.1 to 0.9 solar masses.
Brown Dwarf star inside the lines
All observed baryonic DM can be, at best,
only 50% of the DM total mass, the rest must be in the form of exotic particles. We can
exclude, from the DM budget, gasses in any form because they emit radiation at some
wavelength and, until now there is not observational evidence for that. Also dust is not a
realistic form, because we do not see the obscuring effect due to the absorption.
The 50% left, and perhaps much more, must be in the form of Exotic DM that came
in two forms: hot and cold. Hot DM are low mass particles like neutrinos (and there are
many doubt of that, because experiment results are contradictory) traveling very fast, so

6
very difficult to trace, the lack of charge they have, imply that they only respond to gravity,
so even in the extremely large quantity they do not care if they do not have mass.
Cold DM are heavier particles that, of course, travel slowly. The technology to
detect cold DM is not yet developed, because we first understand and then detect a
phenomenon called The Weak Interaction.
The knowledge of the extension of the galactic halo is then very important, because
all the unseen mass is there.
Most investigations are around the study of the tidal effect that the MW exert to a
globular cluster or a small satellite galaxy (figure 1 and 13). Each massive object
gravitational field is limited in extension by the Roche equation, so the masses of the two
objects are related by the Roche criterion as:
(eq. 4) r / R = (m / M)e1/3
Where r is the tidal radius of the satellite, m is the mass of the satellite, R is the distance
from the Galaxy center and M is the MW mass inside the radius R.
Everything that are inside the Roche limit, are gravitationally bounded to the
massive object inside it, so the effect that astronomer study is the deformation or the
stretches of the intrusion object.
In the case of a satellite galaxy, this
effect is shown by the destruction of its original
form, like the Sagittarius Dwarf (figure 14),
stars near the MW galactic center feel a greater
attraction than those in the far side, so we can
observe a very elongated shape. As gravity is
inversely proportional to distance, farter are the
satellite galaxy, lesser the tidal effect it
experiment, but for gravity, the mass of the
involved objects take into account in direct
proportional form, so more massive the object,
more distant go its gravity attraction.
Figure 13 The effect of tidal force in globular
Partially map of the MW satellite galaxies
clusters is more evident, because they are much
less massive than galaxies and they are much
closer to the MW center (with some exceptions). We
can see it in a deformation of the near spherical shape
they have, the orbital velocity increase as they travel
inward the center and when they reach certain
distance limit (depending on the globular cluster total
mass) some stars are separated from the cluster. These
stars follows the original orbit of the cluster, but they
are no longer bounded to it, as time pass, these stars
orbit at longer distance from the parent object, until
they are trapped by the MW.
If the satellite galaxy has globular clusters, in the best
Figure 14
Sagittarius dwarf galaxy case their orbits are greatly perturbed, in the worst case they
can be separated and be lost, these clusters belongs now to the
MW.

7
 This method is reliable but it has some limitations that could introduce very large
errors in the results. It is very difficult to measure the tidal radius, because if the galaxy is
very near to the MW (as Sagittarius dawarf, for example) many stars in the field of view
can belongs to our galaxy and not to the satellite (figure 14), so only a strong extrapolation
of the observed elongation is not realistic; another thing is that we have to known very well
the mass to light ratio for that satellite, but for that, we have to know how much dark matter
are inside the satellite galaxy and, of course, we do not.
The best approach to compute the mass of the MW is to measure the dynamics of
the globular clusters or the satellite galaxies, normally these objects do not have radial
velocity because they orbits in a normal plane respect to the Sun plane orbit. The mass can
be calculated with the virial theorem in its statistical form:
A
(eq. 5) M = ------ sum (i=1 to N) of (v squared) r
GN i i
Where N is the number of objects, v(i) is the radial velocity, r(i) is the distance from the
MW center, A is a constant and G is the gravitational constant.
Other form to solve the problem is observing and measuring the velocity of objects
at larger scale, instead of the close satellite galaxies, the galaxies in the local group. We
know that M31 and the MW are moving and approaching one to the other, if we think that
this phenomenon is due to the gravitational attraction and this force is greater than the force
of the expansion of the Universe, we can find the mass of one galaxy respect to the other.
But this have its own problem, because is necessary to know the age of the Universe in
order to find for how much time that force was applied and how close the galaxy was
before the mutual attraction win over the expansion.
Really the solution is very hard to find, in the conclusion the reader can find a
summary of the obtained results until now.

CONCLUSION

Many astronomers try to define, as we have

seen, the size and the shape of the MW studying star
of different spectral type, planetary nebulae, novae,
emission and molecular clouds, variable stars like
Cepheid and RR Lyr, and globular clusters. Their
results are different, but after 8 decades of intensive
observations, from Earth and Space, and mathematical
models, there are not enough data to define for sure
our Galactic Home. The only thing that nobody
discuss is that the MW is a giant Spiral Galaxy (figure
15) and it is the second in size in the Local Group,
Figure 15 only surpassed by the Andromeda galaxy M31. But,
Spiral arm structure of the Milky Way
some people believe in the flattened spherical bulge
in the center and others in the barred type center of
the Galaxy. Also, the form and size of the Halo is not well accepted, it is suspected a
presence of a Corona, outside the Halo with almost twice its diameter.
The best accepted geometry of the MW (Figure 16) is a Grand Design Spiral Galaxy
(figure 17) as follows:

8
 a) Core: 2 AU diameter, very near the radio emitter Sgr A, possibly containing a
massive black hole of 2.5x10e6 Solar masses (1)(6)(8).
b) Bulge: flattened spherical or barred (1), 20 Kly by 10
Kly, containing very dense neutral hydrogen gas, dust
clouds and old stars.
c) Disk: Three great spiral arms starting on each side of
the bulge, connected by small arms, 100 to 120 Kly by
2 Kly. Contains young stars, open clusters, dense
molecular clouds. Evidence of four arm system (2)(6).
d) Halo: spherical, about 100 Kly diameter, contain
globular clusters, old stars, RR Lyr stars, dark matter,
thin clouds of intergalactic matter
e) Corona: spherical about 200 Kly diameter (7), contain
intergalactic gas, dust at very low density..
From above characteristics, the best accepted
classification of the MW is as a spiral galaxy (face on: figure
Figure 16
17; edge on: figure 1) Sbc type, but there is a discussion about the
Milky Way structure not well developed barred nucleus, so the class can be changed for
(side view) SAB. G. de Vancouleurs classify the MW as a SAB(rs)bcII type
including both spiral arms opening and extension and the semi
barred nucleus.
Most astronomers agree with a mass of the MW around 10e12 solar masses and
with an halo extension, including the DM, of 100 to 200 Kpc of radius.
The evaluation of the MW mass is not an easy task, not only because we are in a
disadvantage position, but because the variables involved are too difficult to measure and
also the error reduction process must take into account for things that are not very well
understand. This is why the values in the following table are so different.

TABLE 1: Estimation of the Milky Way mass

Year Author or book Method Mass (solar masses)

1976 Astophysical quantities - 1.4 10e11
1969 Il Cielo - 1.9 10e12
1973 Introductory. - 1.5 10e11
Astronomy &
Astrophysics
1990 Discovering the - 2 10e11
universe
1983 Innanen et al Tidal effect 8.9 +/-2.6 10e11
1987 Trimble Virial theorem 10e12
1991 Fich, Tremaine Virial Theorem 10e12
1989 Zaritsky et al Virial Theorem 8.1 10e11 to 2.1 10 e12
1993 Kulessa, Linden-Bell Virial theorem 1.3 10e12
1989 Peterson, Latham Virial theorem 5 10e11
1989 Zaritsky Hubble expansion 13 +/-2 10e12

9
Figure 17
Spiral galaxy NGC1232,
one of the most similar to
the Milky Way

REFERENCES

(1): Lopez-Corredoira et al, SEARCHING FOR THE IN-PLANE GALACTIC BAR AND
RING IN DENIS, A&A 0104307, 2001
(2): Russeil D, STAR-FORMING COMPLEXES AND THE SPIRAL STRUCTURE OF
OUR GALAXY, A&A 2000
(3): Cecchini G, IL CIELO, Utet, 1969
(4): Griest K, ALL ABOUT MACHO, 2000
(5): Glimore G., THE DISTRIBUTION OF DARK MATTER IN THE MILKY WAY
GALAXY, A&A 9702081, 1997
(6): Huttemeister S, THE MILKY WAY, STRUCTURE, CONTITUENTS AND
EVOLUTION
(7): Charlton J., STUDYING THE GASEOUS PHASES OF GALAXIES WITH
BACKGROUND QSOs, A&A 0207365, 2002
(8): Backer D, Sramek R., PROPER MOTION OF THE COMPACT, NON THERMAL
RADIO SOURCE IN THE GALACTIC CENTER SAGITTARIUS A*,
(9): Freedman R., Kaufmann W., UNIVERSE, W.H. Freeman, 2002
(10): Karttunen H. et al, FUNDAMENTAL ASTRONOMY, Springer, 2000
(11): Unsold A, Baschek B, THE NEW COSMOS, Springer, 1991
(12): Sparke L, Gallagher J, GALAXIES IN THE UNIVERSE, Cambridge, 2000

10
(13): http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2003/pr-26-03.html
(14): http://www.ucsc.edu/news_events/review/text_only/Winter-94/Something.html
(15): http://www.strw.leidenuniv.nl/annrep02/node28.html
(16): http://itss.raytheon.com/café/qadir/q1925.html
(17): http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Ashman2/Ashman3/html
(18): http://vialattea.net/hubble/1994/9452_galform.htm
(19):http://www.theblueplanet.ch/infocenter/articoli/febbraio2003/so16_buco_nero_230220
03.htm
(20): http://www.cosediscienza.it/astro/05.%20LA%MATERIA%20OSCURA.htm

IMAGE CREDIT
Figure 1: Knut Lundmark (Lund Observatory),
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap980523.html
Figure 2,3,4,5,7: Cecchini G., IL CIELO, Utet, 1969
Figure 6: Anglo Australian Observatory, http://www.aao.gov.au/images.html
Figure 8: NASA, http://adc.gsfc.nasa.gov/mw/mmw_images.html
http://adc.gsfc.nasa.gov/mw/milkyway.html
Figure 9: Russeil D., Observatoire de Marseille
Figure 10: http://blueox.uoregon.edu/~courses/BrauImages/Chap23/FG23_019.jpg
Figure 11: Hubble Space Telescope image of LMC-5
Figure 12: http://skyserver.sdss.org/dr1/en/sdss/discoveries/discoveries.asp
Figure 13: http://www.anzwers.org/free/universe/sattelit.html
Figure 14: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap970329.html
A. Oksanen, 2.6 meter Nordic Optical Telescope
Figure 15: http://www.anzwers.org/free/universe/galaxy.html
Figure 16: http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/123/lecture-2/spiral.html
Figure 17: http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay

11