Do we know?Edit

How do you want to know it is ORBITING the bigger Galaxy by looking at a still image? And why do you think it is smaller than the big one? Maybe it is in the background? And is it a galaxy, a nebula or a star cluster? Come on say it: We don't know anything about this thing.--TeakHoken91.7.47.136 19:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

No, but it would be unusual for a distant galaxy in the background to be viewed on a map of the Galaxy (and with that hyperspace thing preventing extra-galactic travel it's hardly likely that it's based on a photograph or something similar that someone has taken from several hundred thousand light years away). As for it being a nebulae/star cluster, it looks a bit big for one of those, and similar to the last point it seems unlikely that it would be viewed closer to the screen than the Galaxy, and if it was then it seems that it would be too far away to be part of the Galaxy. ~ Ghelæ 19:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, maybe it is next to the galaxy. And maybe it is too big for a nebulae/star cluster. But this still does not imply that it is orbiting the galaxy. And then there is another question: Which one of the two is it? And which is bigger - the Rishi Maze or the other? Or an even more important question: Is this image not just a screensaver or something? Like you said: if intergalactic travel is impossible - then it surely is not a photograph. Then is it a zoomed-out map? Then why are the stars so dense? I think we know that there are big parts of uncartographed space.--TeakHoken91.7.45.6 19:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

1. It's a screenshot of AoTC, when Obi-Wan Kenobi is looking for Kamino in the Jedi Archives ("just south of the Rishi Maze"). I think he pointed near the upper-left galaxy, meaning that it's the bottom-left-hand one, which appears smaller.
2. Yes, it could be a zoomed-out map, like maps of the solar system aren't photographs.
3. As for the others, such as the stars in the uncartographed areas, I'm not sure, and they're probably unanswerable questions (or at least unanswered). ~ Ghelæ 15:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Got me. I should watch the movies more often.--TeakHoken91.7.8.78 08:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

You know, its actually not hard to tell if something is orbiting something else. Even on Earth, we point lasers at objects (like the Moon) and measure their distance. Speed can also be infered from calculations. Then it is possible to find out if that satellite galaxy is orbiting the galaxy. The only problem, noone in their galaxy did it to our knowledge. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:32, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Then I think the article name is not perfect. What about "second neighbour galaxy"? Although I don't know if "neighbour" is right in the case it IS a satellite galaxy. What about "third galaxy"?--TeakHoken91.7.44.3 13:26, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, we can't actually have a perfect name unless the name of the galaxy is released in an official source or something similar. As for your ideas:

1. "Neighbor" isn't quite right, I think the scientifically correct term (at least in this galaxy) is "companion galaxy".
2. "Third galaxy" makes it seem more like its actual name or a description of something of universal importance, for example the third galaxy to be formed out of the primordial dust, which it could be, although that's very, very, very unlikely to be the case. ~ Ghelæ 19:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

What about "a galaxy, not far away from a galaxy far, far away". ;-).--TeakHoken91.7.50.14 18:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Nagai galaxy?Edit

The New Essential Chronology says that the Nagai come from a dwarf galaxy orbiting THE galaxy. Could that be this second galaxy? Why not? :) --JMM 03:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• The article for Nagi says that it is in a separate star cluster, not a dwarf galaxy per se, but who knows? We don't have enough info on the other satellite galaxy. Ifindyourlackoffaithdisturbing ^{(Go Dodgers! Woooo!)} 03:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Companion BeshEdit

According to The Essential Atlas, this sattelite galaxy is formally known as Companion Besh. Changing title to reflect that. TIEPilot051999 00:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)