81–90 of 525 posts
The papers with the scientific details are here (open access): https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/2041-8205/page/Focus_on_E... Article in physics world with comparisons to simulations: https://physicsworld.com/a/first-images-of-a-black-hole-unve... "AskScience" AMA on Reddit about the breakthrough: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/bbknik/askscien...
So is a black hole 3 dimensional? Is it a sphere? Or does it only work in certain directions? Does everything "fall" the same direction? I ask because even in a brief history of time, the diagrams are very "single plane of space-time, pulled infinitely deep by the black hole"
So is a black hole 3 dimensional? Is it a sphere? Or does it only work in certain directions? Does everything "fall" the same direction? I ask because even in a brief history of time, the diagrams are very "single plane of space-time, pulled infinitely deep by the black hole"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Space VLBI is a thing already! Seems to have been around for a while [0][1]. I imagine that the challenge with during EHT-style VLBI in space is downlink bandwidth... there's just no way to get the petabytes of data they talk about down from a satellite. It's already so much data that it's easier to fly hard drives around the world than to send it over the internet, so the transfer would probably take ages over a mic…
> We've maxed out the Earth's baseline, so it seems like orbital radio telescopes are the only way to better resolution. Going to higher frequency gives you higher resolution for a given physical baseline length.
So is a black hole 3 dimensional? Is it a sphere? Or does it only work in certain directions? Does everything "fall" the same direction? I ask because even in a brief history of time, the diagrams are very "single plane of space-time, pulled infinitely deep by the black hole"
Higher resolution official release seems to be: https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/blackholes/download...
it's still too many pixel, it can be a fifth of that while conveying the same amount of information.
I'm puzzled by this, if each of those pixel is actually captured by the lenses, why is it all this much uniform? was it smoothed or does this suggest that it's actually a gigantic uniform cloud of gas?
haven't seen the whole video of the release, I'll have to catch up later in the evening, but this really seems to have captured way too much compared to the actual lens resolution and I wonder what would be the "confidence interval" or astrophysical equivalent on each of those pixels.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is still zero evidence that there exists such a thing as a black hole with all its fantastic properties. We have a picture of a red-yellow accretion disk and that's it. Black holes remain a mathematical artifact of general relativity and there is as much evidence of their existence as of crystal healing and astral travel. There is at best some evidence of very massive objects at certain points.
How do you explain observed gravitational wave observed by LIGO? It is almost the same as the one calculated for coalescence of two black holes in GR.
There are people that can't believe the Earth is round... I can't imagine what "alternative explanation" will be made to explain a black hole...