241–250 of 525 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
perpendicular - we see it almost exactly from the top. Mentioned during the Q&A (41:33 to be exact)
If we see it almost exactly from the top, then why is one half of the ring so much brighter than the other?
Good video that correctly predicted the image and describes why it looks the way it does [1]. TL; DR The dark area is the entire surface of the event horizon, including the side facing away from us, plus some more due to photons missing the event horizon "directly" being drawn in. One side is brighter due to its being Doppler boosted. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyH3XhpLTo
Ok, wait a second. I liked a lot of this video, but there are some aspects which are kind of ridiculous. He says his reason for his confidence in this prediction is "I think it's going to look like a fuzzy coffee mug stain." He doesn't give an actual reason. He does talk a lot about theory, a lot of it interesting and novel to me, but by the end of the video, most of this theory suggests a different-looking image!
He doesn't need to give a reason. The reasons why it would look like a "fuzzy coffee mug stain" are well known since Hawkings...
Good video that correctly predicted the image and describes why it looks the way it does [1]. TL; DR The dark area is the entire surface of the event horizon, including the side facing away from us, plus some more due to photons missing the event horizon "directly" being drawn in. One side is brighter due to its being Doppler boosted. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyH3XhpLTo
Wow, the video you posted is even more informative and clear than the actual press conference, and it was created by someone who hadn't even seen the image yet based purely on the mathematical predictions of what we would see. Kind of sad that after all the amazing effort and resources that have gone into the creating the image that the international team couldn't have featured an explanation as clear as this in thei…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This blog post describes the stuff Interstellar mostly gets right, and the big thing it's lacking (a brightness asymmetry from the rotation of the accretion disk). http://blogs.nature.com/aviewfromthebridge/2017/03/28/imagin...
If I recall this correctly, the movie intentionally simplified the rendering of the black hole (by eliminating the Doppler shift) to make it more visually appealing. Pity, really. Then again, there were other things that made no sense in the movie...
Danny Boyle was confident he had “done SciFi” with Sunshine, perhaps Christopher Nolan just wanted to tick that box too.
Where Kubrick led others followed; Ridley Scott was doing great to Bladerunner...
Good video that correctly predicted the image and describes why it looks the way it does [1]. TL; DR The dark area is the entire surface of the event horizon, including the side facing away from us, plus some more due to photons missing the event horizon "directly" being drawn in. One side is brighter due to its being Doppler boosted. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyH3XhpLTo
Good video that correctly predicted the image and describes why it looks the way it does [1]. TL; DR The dark area is the entire surface of the event horizon, including the side facing away from us, plus some more due to photons missing the event horizon "directly" being drawn in. One side is brighter due to its being Doppler boosted. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyH3XhpLTo
Smart move by Veritasium, making a video commenting the news just before the news actually happens. Time works in weird ways around black holes. Anyways, it is a good one. So is that channel in general. It is also a good video if you just watched Interstellar, because it also explains why the black hole looks the way it does in the movie. Note that the movie black hole rendering is slightly incorrect for artistic rea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we see it almost exactly from the top, then why is one half of the ring so much brighter than the other?
Relativistic beaming! https://youtu.be/zUyH3XhpLTo?t=490
Why does the ESA always couch their discoveries in these stupid press conference panels? Every time I try to watch something of theirs it's a bunch of old people blabbing. Show the pictures and stop talking!
Can someone explain in layman terms: If graviton particles or gravity waves travel at light speed, how does this information escape the event horizon?