/sci/ - Science & Math

OH NO NO NO NO BBRRRHAHAHAHAHAH

>>10539426
Wow it’s literally just a hole that’s black. Fucking lame

Ezekiel 1 outlines an awe-inspiring image of God’s chariot. The wheels pulled by the cherubim are described as “a wheel within a wheel” and the “spirit of the living creature was in the wheel”.

I don't remember where I stole that from but that thing is something.

>>10539519
>monkey sniffs a book, not impressed
wanna bananna?

>>10539513
>>10539519
>>10539534
what did u guys expect

>>10539519
what did you expect?

>>10539828
a pair of non-homo white hands praying

>>10539426
Did they release a raw file? I wanna look at that bad boy.

>>10539843
Well, you got a big fucking counterweight and plasma spinning around it.

>>10539426
Looks a bit out of focus, they should adjust their camera settings

why isnt it perfectly round? i get that it spins, but the event horizon is just a product of a singularity's gravity well. and a singularity has no volume to speak of, so how can it bulge? how is a mass uneven across an infinitesimal point?

>>10539865
>not using auto-focus and auto-flash

>>10539879
The glow is caused by mass flowing in. There's probably a random big chunk of crap pouring in on one side.

>>10539879
Why is nothing in this universe spinning in perfect 360 degree orbits?
Because there are outside forces at work.

People still believing this lie, how many time i see claim to found black hole

>>10539426
Ignorant fuck here, how are they able to get a pic when black holes can't emit light?

>>10539426
Here's the official better res image

>>10539963
OwO

>>10539951
Shadows and radio waves

it just rock in front giant star, people get exited over nothing again

>>10539963

>>10539951
That's the shadow of a black hole and the glowy shit is matter in a plasma state, the accretion "disk".

>>10539963
What is this?

>>10539956
Oh wow that's much better, thanks.

>>10539963
oh no.... WHAT HAVE YOU DONE

>>10539963
>>10539988

>>10539426
neat

>>10539963
shitpósting with actual black holes, aint it magical

Here's the compressed image from the 184MB tiff file

>no creatura edit yet

>>10540043
>Racism

>>10540039
why isn't it completely dark in the middle?

>>10539879

https://youtu.be/zUyH3XhpLTo

>>10540059
I'm not an expert but what is photographed here is the light lensing around the black hole, not the black hole itself. anything past the event horizon wouldn't appear in a photo, not even as a black dot.

>>10540039
its the gravity bleeding in

>>10540059

Spacetime is extremly curved. Light is curved as it passes near the black hole. It's so curved that you can see what's behind the black hole and it looks bigger than it actually is. You can see the entire event horizont from any angle.

>>10540069
Why isnt there a disk going through the middle like in this video?

>>10539426

So if you looked at a black hole with your naked eye, would it just look like a regular star?

We must feed it and allow it to grow larger.

>>10540059
There's stuff in the space between the event horizon and the telescopes. Gas, mostly.

>>10539426
>finally take a picture of a black hole
>use your dad's motorola razr

How can white dwarfs possibly compete?

>>10540150
It would look like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mbBbFH9fAg

>>10539426
but thats just close up picture of a asshole

>>10540247
White dwarfs are filling the complete void of the enormous black's holes.

>>10539856
183MB raw .tiff - https://www.eso.org/public/archives/images/original/eso1907a.tif

>>10540247

If the protons don't decay, they will become black holes at the end of time, long after today's black holes have evaporated.

>>10540324
Why would that happen?

>>10539426
>black hole sun
>wont you come
>and was away the raaiiiiin

I know the radio telescope images are given artificial colors to make them look cooler, but going with "superunknown orange" was a good choice.

>>10539879
You're actually looking at the stuff spinning around the hole at all angles simultaneously because light bends around the hole. Some escapes, some doesnt, and it gives it a weird but not full donut shape, especially if you arent looking at the orbiting ring top down.
>>10539951
We aren't actually looking at a black hole, we are looking at the stuff in oribit and getting sucked in by the black hole.

How did Einstein predict this?

>>10540089
>black dot
aka "not appearing in the photo"

>>10540345
>How did Einstein predict this?
He didn't - not really. The theory of relativity is a set of rules that describe the behavior of space and time and gravity, but the exact solutions for cases like a black hole were analyzed and described by other physicists making use of Einstein's theory of relativity.

>>10539426
LOOKS LIKE ABSOLUTE SHIT

>>10540345
He didn't, but his equations and assumptions led to predictions made by other people that predicted this

>>10540332

Incredibly slowly (If the proton doesn't decay), even compared to black holes timelines, particles slowly transmutate into iron and releasing a little energy when they do this via quantum tunnelling. Iron is the last stopover point for matter. Heavier metals eventually decays into it and lighter matter fuses up into it.

And we are not done yet. Once this white dwarf turned black dwarf slowly becomes an iron star, it still will not have reached its lowest energy level. That iron star will eventually collapse into a neutron star, at an estimated timeline of 10^10^76 years, coincidentally almost the same as the 10^10^77 possible unique states for the universe, or total alternate Universes. Alternatively, Iron Stars might turn into black holes even sooner, a "mere" 10^10^26 years.

>>10540355
>aka "not appearing in the photo"
...no, that would be appearing in the photo as a black dot. you cannot see a black hole in that manner. there isn't a black basketball thing to snap a picture of, it doesn't exist in space to photographed. you can only see the distortion its presence causes.

>>10540402
As the stars cool, the likelihood of their constituent parts fusing into Iron decreases faster than time progresses.

>>10539963
Best but also worst timeline.

>>10540143
Because the real life black hole is most likely spinning, which the guy in the video specifically didn´t take into account

>>10539426
Man, I'm happy. This shit is seriously cool as fuck.

>>10539826
this was good lol

Very cool. I find black holes incredibly fascinating, but why have they focused their effort on taking a picture of a black hole thats so far away?
Is it simply a matter of size and that M87 was the easiest to picture, or is there another reason? Surely we've got plenty of local black holes but they're probably not massive enough to be pictured, I'd imagine. I'm guessing Sag A would be hard to picture with the entire Milky Way blocking the view.
Does this confirm that every galaxy has a supermassive black hole as its center?

>>10539426
NO
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO JUST BE A THEORY AND NOT REAL
AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>10540743
It was explained in the conference. Give it a watch if you're indeed interested

>>10540367
so like a mirror huh

>>10540039
Looks like a fucking donut

>>10540311
omg it says "made in china"
huawei is everywhere

Do Black Holes really have no end?
Is that really possible?

>>10539897
>Because there are outside forces at work.
God?

HONK!

>>10540764
Astute observation, Eagle eye!

>>10540790
At last I see.

>>10540758
I'll have a look later, thanks anon.

Ahhhh

>>10540792
Thanks. Was quite hard to make out with how blurry it is

>>10540764
>a fucking donut
Is that like an onahole? I've only heard of regular donuts

I still dont understand WHAT data let to this "image". Which different layers of data did they use to create this? I understand they didnt just "snap" in the night sky.

>>10540822
Radio waves

Yes, indeed . . .

>>10540089
Retard

>>10540782
where? I found only this

>>10539963
Now he shows his true face...

>>10539426
yeah... for sure
and they also landed on the moon

>>10540743
> but I'm guessing Sag A would be hard to picture with the entire Milky Way blocking the view.
No, no, no, you misunderstand. This picture confirmed that light bends around the black hole and causes a weird effect where we can see the backside of an object in the accretion disk while simultaneously viewing that object from the front. It might mean that its impossible for us to view the entirety of the milky way based on EM and that stars we think we are viewing when looking in the direction of the center of the galaxy are actually funhouse mirror lighting effects. The milky way and many other galaxies could actually be much smaller or much bigger than we think they are. If they are much bigger, and huge wells of light on the backside of galaxies are getting bent by supermassive blackholes, then that probably explains 'dark matter', though.

>>10540839
on the equator, upside down

>>10539826
Lmao

>>10540853
oh shit you're right

Are the scientist in those laboratories be able to watch it Live from their cameras???

>>10539426
That's not KINO at all.

>>10539426
BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP.

>>10539963
The final boss of the universe

>>10540847
holy shit the universe is a giant living organism and the black hole is it's heart

>>10540857

Yeah, sadly the cameras could never focus on your mum XD

>>10540863
the final redpill

>>10540831
And thus the embers of the universe die out eventually

>>10540863
>heart

lmao I could take a better picture with my phone

>>10540879

Fractals

>>10540893
We're waiting

>>10540039
>>10539963
>>10540095
E L V E S
L
V
E
S

what the fuck happened to taking a pic of Sag A*?

>>10539828
A Black Hole :^)

>>10540907
It's not ready yet, they'll release it later

>>10540911
>It's not ready yet, they'll digitally paint it later
Ftfy, fuck off Wacom shills

>>10539799
Cherubim means "foundation" or "support structure" as well. Black holes are necessary for the formation of galaxies. Really gets the noggin joggin.

>>10539426

>>10540928
Except the Cherubim aren't the wheels. The wheels are the Ophanim. Cherubim are similar to Seraphim, except instead of six wings they have four, and in addition to their normal human face, they also have the face of a bull, a lion, and an eagle, and their wings are covered in eyes. The Ophanim, however, are simply eye-covered flaming wheels within wheels surrounding.

>>10539426
so they just draw a red circle on ps and blurred it to hell
fucking lol

>>10539426
>looks like an eye
>the black hole is pointed right at us
Cursed image

Looks like Sauron's eye

>>10540852
Huh, I thought we already knew gravitational lensing worked like that, but I guess theres a difference between knowing and actually seeing something.

Can someone explain this to me? Based on brightness, the accretion disc should be this way. Why can't we see the part of the disc in front of the event horizon? Is it just too thin?

>>10540017
DRRR DRRRRR DRRRRR

sticky?
mods?

why ain't this a sticky
man, I fucking love science

>>10540967
Seconded this. Is it because the black hole is spinning?

>>10540967
Too dim and thin. There's a lot more photons arriving in our telescopes from the top and bottom faces of the part of the disk behind the black hole (this is the part that forms the bright ring you see) than there are from the small amount of light that comes from the edge of the disk in front of the black hole.

>>10539426
>first

>>10540967
We're looking at it from a top down perspective

>>10540979
You're late

>>10540986
>The simulated image looks like the actual image
Wow it's as if scientists aren't just bullshitting us about black holes

>>10540988
No, if it were, the accretion disc would be uniformly bright throughout.

>>10539426
Seen a presentation a few days ago, and what you're seeing is not an accretion disk at all.
Something something about photons orbiting the black hole up to 5 time the event horizon is what they said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-OyMPAq2PU
32 minutes in.

>>10540983
>>10540967
It's explained near the end of the conference that we're seeing it from either above or below

>>10540992
More like they sold a simulated to the public and kept the real one for themselves. What are they hiding?

I see goatse.

>>10540994
This is explained in the conference that it may be due to the angle of the jet

>>10540985
I wonder if it's possible to see that portion through some digital fuckery.

>>10541005
No, wrong angle

>>10540995
>>10541002
>>10541010
Well that sucks.

>>10540992
where does it say it's a simulated image?

>>10540059
Distance from the object as well as the warping of light and space around the Black Hole causes the light to "bleed" into the path of the telescope.

We're seeing light bending around the event horizon, so some of it escapes.

If we were much closer, the blackness of the inside of the black hole would be more pronounced.

They're real. Black holes are actually real. I'm realizing now I never fully bought that giant cosmic worldeaters that break the laws of physics are things that exist somewhere in the same world as me. But they're real.
I hope aliens sacrifice us all to a black hole

>>10541010
Just move the camera so it's at the correct angle

>>10539426
i thought the pic was from our galaxy. now i read its from messier 87?? guess i was drunk

>>10540996
Wait, no, more like 26 minutes in.

>>10541017
That would take 75 million years.

>>10539519
You do realize that everything about black holes until now was only soft proven by theories and indirect effects observed? Even though everyone was agreeing that they are real and should look like >>10539426 there was no visual proof like this. It's like the first picture of a giant squid after you heard all the tales and found carcasses on the beach torn up by whales.

?

>>10541019
a lot of media got it wrong

>>10539879
The stuff around it is what is visible, not the hole event horizon itself.
I think part of the reason why the accretion disk isn't circular is because it would take time for an object torn apart by the black hole to evenly distribute around the orbit, as well as the fact that the part of the accretion disc that is rotating away from us will appear darker, while the part rotating towards us will appear brighter, and thus more of it shows up on the image.

>>10539426
What a fucking let down. This is why normal non-autistic people look at "scientists" like this and wonder, "What the fuck are we paying you for? This?"

>>10541051
Normies need to gtfo

Brainlet here, black holes are giant gravitational forces because they are extremely dense right? Do they just continue to suck things up forever or do they eventually pop and create things?

>>10541012
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2019/04/03/event-horizon-telescope-black-hole-picture-real/
These simulations have been floating around for months

>>10541051
the project wasn't expensive really, i think around 50 million dollars. People spend ten times as much making capeshit movies

>>10541061
They piss out particles (Hawking radiation) very slowly and eventually dissipate.

>>10541034
LIGO 2015

>>10539826
kekd and based

>>10541061
As far as I've understood, even black holes lose mass over a ridiculous amount of time. I can't remember what happens, when their mass runs out eventually. Please correct me.

>>10540986
This. Even the guy himself says it was taken back in 2017 already lmao

https://twitter.com/coreyspowell/status/1115978413251137541
https://archive.fo/EntMY

>actually a black hole
I thought the light trapped there would orbit around the black hole and it would look like a bright star.

>>10541085

They explode.

>>10540897
so what? another proof!

>>10541012

hell the one in the OP is technically simulated image too if I'm not wrong. The event horizon telescope isn't an optical one

>>10540988
black hole is spherical as sun/star/planet, no matter what side from we looking at it, black hole and it's accretion disk will look the same to us

is this legit or just another way of the astro nuts to justify the tax payer money was well spent and they need more?

>>10541099

Yes, I agree. Just giving the proper term to the phenomenon

>>10541096
the light orbits in an accretion disk

>>10540879
Your microcasm of a penis will never macrorgasm into a vagina

>>10539963
R34 BLACKHOLE NOW

>>10541102
just because it doesn't detect visible light doesn't mean it's simulated
it detects the actual radio waves from the black hole, which are then adapted into a visible image

>>10541051
They evaporate after a billion trilling million something years.

>>10540847
It looks nothing like it.

>>10539426
BEHOLD YOUR GOD OF DEATH AND DESTRUCTION! HERE IS YOUR GOD!

A shame it wasn't /ourblackhole/ Sgr A*, but this is still pretty nice

>M87
Oh so it's that galactic core with a massive space fart coming out of it in some images?

>>10541015
>yfw Space Pirates do battle with Space Navy while cycling around black holes
Just like pirates battling around giant whirlpools caused by the Kraken

>>10541124
yes

You're welcome, NASA

>>10541015
>break the laws of physics
which ones?
>exist somewhere in the same world as me
threesomes, pure love, cocaine parties also do exist not fat than few hundret miles from you

>>10541104
>and it's accretion disk
its photon sphere, yes, but not its accretion disk
it's called a disk for a reason

>>10541130
>nasa

>>10539426
Wow, a low res blur. So it was fucking nothing all along.

>>10541130
>NASA

>>10541136
>it's called a disk for a reason
because it's seen as a dick for us, from any POV

Brainlet here. If something is 53 million light years away, does it make any sense to ask what's happening there "now"?

>>10541139
Brainlet

>>10541139
its a paint by an artist based on physical calculations

>>10541147
Sure, just wait 53 million years to find out.

>>10541015
Are we supposed to fix these things or to go in there?

>>10541147
no sense, its like different dimension for us now, but we can use it as a tool for research

Why do normalfags care so much about this shitty photo?
Is there some mandate that you have to ejaculate over stupid space shit?

>>10541163
>SCIENCE IS COOL
>WOW I AM NOT INTO RAP I AM INTO SCIENCE ALSO
>#BlackQuotasForSTEMMAtters
>#SmashWhiteMen

>>10541163
It's an historical event and great human accomplishment, anon. Why do haters pop up every time someone succeeds at something?

>>10541114
so it's pretty much this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_JAvVjKeWI but in image form

>>10541175
Haters just resent that other people can feel things other than resentment

>>10539826
I am stealing this one.

>>10540986
>>10541094

???
yeah the data was collected in 2017, petabytes of it. you think these pictures get taken and developed instantaneously?
no, they gotta put it through the intergalactic fucking walgreens to get them developed, which takes, I dunno, about two years

>>10541175
>It's an historical event and great human accomplishment, anon
Nobody is going to care in a week, like the thing that took a picture of a comet or whatever.

More people talked about the dude's naked lady shirt lmao.
Space fags need to stop larping as if they're still in apollo era, nothing you losers do is even close to as impressive these days.
>l-look we spent all your money and took 3x long but we got some shitty cellphone pic of a some shit nobody cares about!
Go play with your shitty robot.

>>10539963

>>10539426
HAHAHAHAHAHA, imagine spending trillions on this, science is truly a meme

>>10539895
It's actually one side moving towards you and therefore being brighter. I know because I watched the vsauce

>>10541196
The point is that today there would be this "BIG REVEAL" while this guy literally just tweeted it in 2017

What a joke

>>10541205
50 million spread across several countries*

>>10541200
Plenty people care, but if you don't then that's cool too. You're free to go whenever you're done crying.

James Cameron did it better.

>>10540059
it has garbage on front, space pollution is a big issue

>>10541207
Except we're not viewing it from a side angle

>>10540345
Schwarzschild did, not Einstein. Though he did use Einsteins theory of relativity to do so.

>>10541163
Why are you on reddit, anon?

>>10541127
Somewhere, in deep space, this is happening.
And we are stuck on this fucking rock.

>>10539826
Fucking kek’d

>>10540095
>>10540906
B A S E D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NVsyMalJXo

>>10541163
Gotta farm those internet digits, anon! First poster gets the credit for posting first, it's a great accomplishment. Fuck the picture though, nobody cares as long as they can post it as fast as possible.

>>10541210
Don't blame the astronomers, blame their PR team. It's important to only publicly release results when they're fully ready, and this is still very valuable scientific information.

>>10541217
>Interstellar budget 165 million uSD
>EHT budget 50 million USD

They spent more money on this movie than the actual black hole.

>>10541124
Shouldn't be easier to get a better image from Sgr A* than this turd? Or is there too much interstellar trash obstructing the view?

>>10541200
>Nobody is going to care in a week
I know you have autism and have trouble understanding, but people can find things mildly interesting for a relatively short period of time without becoming obsessed or wildly passionate about it for ever.

>>10541241
Too much movement for its size

>>10539988
>>10540017
KEK

Wait, in the conference they said we're looking at the accretion disk face on, not edge on, so how could there be doppler shifting?

>>10539426
so the black holes are real after all

>>10541241
Less dust to look through. Given M87's black hole's much bigger mass, the two black holes have pretty comparable apparent sizes in the sky.

>>10541200
Some people spend their entire lives being passionate about something bigger than themselves. What are you passionate about, YouTube ecelebs?

>>10541262
Monstrous entities that devour entire planets and suns.

>>10541238
>a still image of a shitty red halo - 165 million USD
>169 minutes of moving images - 50 million USD
kek, science BTFOd again

>>10541241
iirc they said it's because Sgr A* is moving too fast
If the problem were just the dust it'd be even harder to spot M87*

>>10539426

As long as it does not blink I am OK with the all watching eye.

>>10541258
If you listened more closely, it was mentioned that it could be an effect of the jet

>>10541258
maybe it's tilted away from us slightly instead of pointed straight at us?

>>10541269
The costs are the other way around, tard. Also, the cheaper one is the real deal.

>>10540879
Dude free association LMAO
>>10540906
MFW had to sit around watching elves/interdimensional spiders fuck with my shit for 6 hours.

>>10541265
>>10541242
>I-I'm part of something bigger!
lmao coping sciencelets.
It's incredible how deluded you become that you actually believe you're doing something important and not just wasting other people's money in the bureaucratic hell known as academia.

>>10539426
I knew it wasn't gonna be impressive

>>10541286
it's not real, it's still just pixels on a screen, just somehow correlated with something far away

>>10541273
But they said explicitly that the bright spot on the bottom is due to Doppler shifting of material rotating clockwise in the image. How does that make any sense?

>>10541269
no it was the other way around, the red halo cost 50 million USD
It's beyond me why everyone is shitting the bed over "muh taxpayer money" when 50 million is a drop in the ocean, and spread over numerous countries.
Someone spends 150million making a capeshit film no one cares, but a third of that on a significant scientific break through and all the tards go crazy because the image isn't as flashy as their CGI shitfest films.

>look at space image
>looks pretty cool
>see small text
>"false color" "artist impression" "simulation"
>mfw

>>10541293
so is every damn photo you've ever looked at retard

>>10541298
the capeshit makes retards happy, this image just makes people angry

>>10541298
A capeshit movie isn't funded by taxes...

>>10539880
>auto-flash
That would take 110 million years, though.

>>10541235
how's a fucking picture of a fucking hole valuable information?

>>10540879
so are you saying planets are bagina eggs?

>>10541303
except ghost images which are real

>>10539895
>There's probably a random big chunk of crap pouring in on one side.

Or intervening matter partially dims one side.

>>10539426
Just think about that that captured light happened in the past. How many alien anons died there since then?

>>10541306
The entire 50 million wasn't all public funding either
Besides, even 50 million is a tiny cost compared to the amount the US govt wastes on welfare and sends to isreal

>>10541294
They basically admitted that they aren't entirely sure what we're looking at

>>10541268
idiot...

>>10541298
And the scifi film uses a lot of taxpayer money in the form of tax credits.

Captain marvel got $20 million from the state of california just to film "aliens on the beach" and the strip mall scene, while the rest was filmed in Atlanta becuae georgia offers far far more (like half a films production budget in some cases).

Admittedly it is state taxpayers and not federal that pays for all the film production, but it's still a lot of money.

>>10541293
>it's still just pixels on a screen, just somehow correlated
If you take the time to look up how VLBI actually works instead of jerking off onto your keyboard, you'll find it accurately constructs a true radio image of the object.

>B-but radio waves aren't visible light
It's still light that carries valuable information about what's going on. "True color" is an impossible meme anyways, since human sight is incredibly complicated. Look it up

>>10541319
aliens don't exist

>>10540805
Dude I’m eating

>>10541330
>accurately constructs a true radio image of the object
i doubt that, pretty sure it's just tweaking with random parameters until they get a shitty halo that still looks like something enough that it can be sent to the press

>>10541326
>Captain marvel got $20 million from the state of california
I'm pretty sure EHT only used 28 million dollars public funding, so they spent nearly as much tax on captain marvel as they did on EHT.

>>10539963

>>10540847
Why do you have this saved?

>>10541309
This "fucking hole" is based in the same theory that allowed us to accurately calibrate the GPS system, and which will inevitably play a role in many future technologies.
By comparing our theoretical expectations with the real data, we can better figure out what's right and what's wrong with the theory. Even a purely confirmational result is of crucial importance for our ability to trust a theory.

>>10541341
looks honkpilled

>>10539426
complete brainlet here, why is that an achievement and why didn't we do that before? I understand we cannot receive light from a black hole because it sucks everything it, but what is the "black hole" in the picture even supposed to be?

>>10540159
It's feeding itself.

wow, it's literally fucking nothing

>>10541319
>yfw we never discover living alien species
>we just find warped EM images of them dying in the accretion disks of black holes
>we actually end up finding this in literally every black hole we encounter forever, just like the ash after images of people who died in Hiroshima

Ruh roh

I'm fuckin' done. Why did all the normies gravitate to sci today?

Now they claim the hole has spin and the boring math is justified again.

>>10539988
>>10540017
lol

This one is way better

>>10539826
hey this is pretty good. not cringe at all.

>>10541339
Instead of proudly pronouncing your own ignorance, how about actually learning something?
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264370712001159

>>10541354
some threads on /x/ and /pol/ saying the pic is cursed or some shit

Reminder that you are seeing the shadow of the event horizon from all sides at once multiple times
Same with the accretion disk. And the shadow that you see is actually bigger than the Black hole

So when are we getting that warp drive? This will eventually get us that warp drive, right?

>>10541365
Thanks, random YouTuber.

Are people really excited about this shit?
I fail to see why.
It's literally what was predicted.
So it doesn't help us to understand cosmology better.

>>10541331
Please cite data.

>>10541339
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Astrometry%20and%20geodesy%20with%20radio%20interferometry%3A%20experiments%2C%20models%2C%20results&publication_year=1998&author=O.J.%20Sovers&author=J.L.%20Fanselow&author=C.S.%20Jacobs

>>10541373
Im veritasium btw

>>10541352
Hiroshima shadows were not ash shadows, that was vintage hippy anti-nuke nonsense.

Hiroshima shadows were just a result of the IR flash of the nuke. Paint is discolored or cooked off when directly exposed, while paint protected by shadows had no direct line of sight to the flash. There were tree shadows, truck shadows and yes some human shaped shadows. Most buildings were lost to conventional fired caused by knocked over oil lanterns (in an old style Japanese wood and paper city) so few surfaces with shadows survived the war.

>>10541345
thanks for explaining, I get you. I wish I could be excited for all these discoveries but I can't. A few months ago they took a picture beyond pluto of some kind of fused asteroid and I was like wtf is that going to accomplish?

>>10541375
>I fail to see why
At least you're aware of your own shortcomings

Hey let's colonize it

>>10539963

>>10541306
0.71 CENTS PER HUMAN ON EARTH FOR THIS

NOT EVEN A PENNY

>>10541331
explain that CIA video from last year then

>>10541375
If you don't see how novel confirmational results improve our understanding of nature, I don't think I can help you

>>10540847
Shit, don't you love confirmation bias?

>>10541354
Because this is big news.

>>10541375
The whole point is that it was as was predicted you utter retard, it confirms that how we've thought of em until now is correct
It's the difference between theorizing what dinosaurs looked like and what they actually looked like. If you looked at a live dinosaur right now would you go "well that looks exactly the way as predicted, how lame"

>>10541393
inter-dimensional child molesters

>>10541130
>NASA

>>10541401
>it was as was predicted
>it's a round colorful thing in space
wew, that's really a surprising prediction, nobody has ever seen a round thing in space before

>>10541401
Living dinosaurs would be the biggest disappointment in genetic research
They obviously are going to look like how the research says theyll look
I don't see why you make an analogy this, brainlet

>>10541332
So is that black hole.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkKVixISUgI

>>10541375
Because now retard, Einsteins Theory has more weight to it because it's less of a theory now and more of a fact.

Which we can now expand upon

>>10541372
Yeah. We can use solar panels on ships in space to pick up "future" photons coming out of the event horizon that have been accelerated past the base speed of light in our universe. By simply angling the solar panel on your ship towards your local event horizon you can collect that accelerated light energy and use it to accelerate faster than standard light, thus warping you to wherever you want to go in the universe faster than any other means would (or just being a good energy source for power or weapons if you want to know what humans are realistically going to do with it). Then you stick your thumb in your butt.

>>10541401
Does this have implications on quantum mechanics? The big issue was that relativity and quantum mechanics didn't work, but now we have verified that relativity works does that mean we'll need to look for ways of altering quantum stuff to fit it? I'm only a brainlet who's background isn't physics so keep it light.

Hey folks, if i could get an answer about the perspective.

What is the correct one? is all the light here being distorted or the below part is in front of it? im saying this because it looks like the black hole is missing a tiny inferior part, instead of being perfectly round

>>10541422
>>10541401
>>10541386
And now we're back to having no clue about 95% of the Universe. Please applause. Nobel price now.

>>10541390
0.71 cents * 9 billion
How many dead niggers does this equal to?

>>10541339
Fucking idiot

>>10541427
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUyH3XhpLTo

>>10541413
I'm not gonna waste your time or mine trying to convince you to appreciate what happened. Whatever you're passionate about, I would suggest you go pursue that instead if moping around here like a confused child.

>>10541431
not enough

>>10541413
Cretin. It also confirms the way they behave. It’s not just a pretty thing to look at.

>>10541436
but i enjoy being here seeing people cope with that bunch of shitty pixels

>>10541431
The program doesn't accept food stamps

>>10541430
If we were wrong about 95 % of the universe then it's massive step forward to realise it, not a step backward

>>10541413
You need to try harder than that. Well not really, you caught 2 retards with that bait

>>10541444
It looks as though you have nothing that brings excitement to your life, so you try to piss on anyone who can experience a feeling that you can't. Truly sad.

>>10539963
OwO what's this?

>>10541051
This project cost basically nothing and was footed by multiple nations. It's basically just a collab of the best telescopes in the world, teaming up to photograph a black hole. Those telescopes are still constantly running as we speak, and will keep running for another decade. Not using them would be the real waste of money.

Well, that was disappointing.

>>10541444
How are people coping anon? They're just enjoying a new discovery that proved a prediction correct
I think you need some vitamin D and a friend to talk with dude :(

>>10541424
> Does this have implications on quantum mechanics?
Probably not. However one of the reasons we do observations and experiments on extreme situations is to see if our current theories still work to explain what happens there. If we observe long enough and get enough data maybe we'll find somewhere we can't explain and that leads to new science.

I saw it blink

>>10541456
it's all just meaningless particles bouncing around

>>10539826
Holy shit, kek

>>10541467
Ultimately, I have to agree. But it's what we have to work with

>>10541393
link pls

>>10541448
To be honest, this image changes nothing.
The accepted theory still can't explain gravity at large scale the same way it didn't before the picture.
The idea was that black holes test the limits of gravity, and we may see unexpected behavior near them that help us understand it better.
But nope.

>>10541473
The image isn't all they have. There's other data that was collected that they're studying.

>>10539828

>>10541465
ok thanks anon

>>10540996
Good video. Thank you.

>>10541485
Baby steps, anon.

>>10541485
>one day you will see this with your own waking eyes
imagine

is a black hole an sphere? like what happend if u go from the back or the sides it looks 2D in that pic

>>10541481
Yeah, I don't know that it will help at such a shitty resolution. Maybe looking at how it evolves through time will be more helpful.

>>10541502
a black hole it's rendered in 3d

>>10539426
So I read that quasars are some of the most powerful and bright objects in the universe and have been imaged. Wouldn't focusing on one give you the same result as this, since they're all made around black holes?

>>10541490
Yeah, I wish everyone here watched it before assposting about accretion disks.
God, I hate Interstellar now, because everyone assumes that's what the picture is about.

>>10541525
Quasars are also extremely far away.
It's simply not possible to see things that are so small from here.
And even if they were closer like M87, a Quasar by definition would outshine it's home galaxy and then some, making seeing in it very dodgy.

>>10541525
m87 is a quasar iirc, that's what you're looking at in the OP

>>10539963
OwO

>>10541311
>When you go swimming on earth you are literally swimming in pussy

Well at least now we have the technology to simulate an Earth sized radio dish.
Might as well use it for something useful.

>>10540897
Lol, was gonna post the exact same thing.

>>10541163
>People who feel inspired and amazed towards groundbreaking scientific human achievement are very dumb haha.. I'm cool because nothing impresses me.

>>10539826
got dam

>>10540039
>184MB tiff
what the fuck

>>10539426
This is beautiful and the fact that we can see a black home with this clarity is amazing.

>>10541559
It's no scientific breakthrough, because we learned nothing.
The technical part, though, is impressive and might prove useful in the future.

I don't understand why faggots are upset about this? Just because there are no practical applications of it yet, doesn't mean that it's not useful.

>>10541173
I cannot imagine being as mentally ill as you. Waking up must be a struggle.

>>10541594
it makes me angry that it looks so shitty

>>10541331
Proof?

>>10541570
We did learn something: we now know that General Relativity more closely corresponds to reality than we knew before. We strongly suspected the image would look like this, but "strongly suspect" and "know" are two very different things. The more novel and different ways we confirm a theory, the better we can trust that we can apply the theory in other areas (eg. using GR in cosmology to infer the existence of dark matter and dark energy)

>>10541173
People don't talk about science, for the most part.
Because it's 'lame'.
Doesn't mean they're not interested.
Just pick a random victim and you'll be surprised.

>>10541533
The presentation doesn't even mention why we might not see the accretion disc.

>>10541351
It's a picture from a black hole, like it was announced. It is literally fucking the opposite of nothing.

>>10541051
God I hate retards like you who don't see the value in understanding the world around us. Fucking faggot.

>>10541599
Sci-fi was a mistake

>>10541535
You're saying the biggest black holes are further away from Earth?

>outshine it's home galaxy and then some, making seeing in it very dodgy
Kinda like an overexposed image? Wouldn't that be better than one with less radio waves reaching the telescope?

>>10541536
But the Sag A black hole isn't at the center of a quasar?

So what defines the quasar? The size of the black hole and/or the amount of stuff around it that it has available to suck into it?

>>10541620
They never talk about it.
Because there is none.
26 minutes.

>>10541630
If they didn't find an accretion disc then why isn't that the big question being raised because that contradicts theory.

>>10541644
That picture is radio waves.
It's not matter around the black hole.
It's photons getting warped around the black hole and red-shifted as fuck.

>>10541500
>not in my lifetime

>>10541655
Radio waves emitted by matter in the accretion disc.

>tfw Hawking died before he could see this black hole

>>10541644
Some black holes have accretion disks, but even when they do, it's only temporary.
In most cases, an accretion disk is just a dual star that was too close.

>>10541655
>its radio waves
Goddamn thank you for finally making it clear. I wish they'd made it more clear in the reveal.

>>10541664
Fucking hell, no, it's not.

>>10541500
>muffled "I'm white" in the distance

>>10541679
Read their papers, son. It's an accretion disc. That's what the radio waves come from, and the X Rays that can be seen with other telescopes.

>>10541691
Radio waves. Not Xray.

>>10541704
I'm saying the accretion disc also produces X rays, which can be seen with X ray telescopes. The EHT only observes around 1 mm radio.

Is there anything new we can learn about space and physics from having a real image of a black hole now, or is this more people being excited for having a look at a real one for the first time?

What is the actual breakthrough?

>>10541711
Look, there might be an accretion disk around Sagittarius but that's not what this picture is showing.

>>10541628
>You're saying the biggest black holes are further away from Earth?
Generally. We still have some thicc lads near us, and the "image" that was released today was from the black hole of M87 which is at around 7 billion solar masses.

>Kinda like an overexposed image? Wouldn't that be better than one with less radio waves reaching the telescope?
Depends. Not all quasars are "radio loud".

>>10541536
M87 is not a quasar, but it does have an active core. There is a difference.

>>10541725
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0f43/meta
You were saying?

>>10539426
So is this much ado about nothing or actually cool shit? Cause I want it to be the latter but its seeming more like the former since everything is exactly within expectations

>>10541401
>it confirms that how we've thought of em until now is correct
No, it is merely empirical evidence that does not disprove the current theories

>>10541719
The breakthrough is that scientists can now confirm the equations they've worked on about black holes are true.

This might be off topic but if a civilization is able to harness the power of a black hole, where does it fit on the kardashev scale also what might be the next logical step for someone who's attained Godliness? Does scientific development have an endpoint?

>>10541726
>M87 is not a quasar, but it does have an active core. There is a difference.
Could you do a brainlet a favour and enlighten me? I know m87 has those huge relativistic jets stretching out way beyond the galaxy, so what's the difference between that and a quasar? Is a quasar just an active galactic nucleus that surpasses a certain luminosity?

>>10541713
Observation of M87 and Sag A* doesn't end here. More observation will reveal evolution of the accretion disc over time, providing incredibly valuable information for the field of magnetohydrodynamics (how plasmas are affected by magnetic fields).

>>10539978
Cant wait for the muse song with this title

>>10541738
That's not what they said they were doing.
They were supposed to study Sagittarius but did M87 for some reason.
Guess they trolled everyone.
What a bunch of cunts.
Still the only confirmation of accretion disk is through X-ray broad measurement.
More interesting, though is that it's a spinning black hole.
And it looks exactly as we thought it would.
Can't wait to build a microwave time machine in my attic.

>>10541758
How exactly does this low resolution picture allow that?

>>10541726
So going back to my question to the other anon in >>10541628, a black hole may be thicc, but if it doesn't have a lot of stuff around it to suck in, it wont form a quasar?

>Not all quasars are "radio loud"
Ok, but even if we found one that was, would it help if it was super bright in terms of radio waves? Would an overexposed image be of use?

>>10541768
They studied both and even more.

>>10539426
>The first I hear of this is on /v/
>The first time I ever saw a real life black hole was in a fucking wojak edit and it will stay with me for the rest of my life
I hate this place.

>>10541763
It ate up a star and is spilling it all over the Universe in jets.
Therefore it looks like Interstellar, and nigger scientist think that's what's being pictured.
But I'm impressed. That 'Earth-wide' radio telescope is even better than we thought possible.

>>10541768
They were always going to observe both Sag A* and M87's central black hole. M87 just turned out to be easier to do first.
They didn't "troll" anyone, you just didn't bother to read up about their project to see what their project goals were.
The radio image is undoubtedly confirmation of accretion discs, I don't get why you're denying that. Read the paper I posted.

>>10541769
Mostly by seeing the shape of the black hole scientists can now confirm their theories are correct. Scientists had only theorized the ahpe and what a black hole might look like, but to have it finally confirmed is a huge leap. It's gone from "We believe it's like this..." to "We know it's like this..."

>>10541791
Well, my understanding is, that picture fits what Einstein predicted about light being warped around black holes, as orbital velocity is light-speed.
And it was never about accretion disks.

>>10540852
Whoa okay that sounds really badass

>>10541784
In case you didn't know:

>>10541763
A quasar is an active galactic nucleus that outshines it's home galaxy. It's just one of several types of active galactic nuclei. The M87 is a Seyfert i believe. Active galactic nucleus, but not too bright. You can still see the rest of the gigantic galaxy.

>>10541770
>but if it doesn't have a lot of stuff around it to suck in, it wont form a quasar?
To be exact, it won't be part of an active galactic nucleus. Quasars are a sub category of those.
Think of Sag A*, the black hole in the center of our galaxy. It is big, but it doesn't feed on a whole lot. It is inactive, comparatively.

>Ok, but even if we found one that was, would it help if it was super bright in terms of radio waves?
Beyond a certain point, no. Most of them would still be too radio loud to make up exactly what is going on in the core.

>>10541811
> shape of the black hole

>>10541791
Reading through it, accretion disk is always hypothesized so they can adjust the model.
They never say that's what they see.
To be honest it would be weird if M87 didn't have one, so I guess they factored in an accretion disk at every possible angle.

>>10541784
Talk as much shit on reddit as you want but at least the posts from this morning led me to links and pics that alllowed me to see this stuff unmolested

>>10541822
It does show the bending of light, but that light has to come from somewhere. It matches what we'd expect an accretion disc to look like very closely.
We've been able to detect strong radio emissions from these black holes for a long time, we just haven't had the angular resolution to form a picture other than a point source. We've been able to see how these radio emissions vary in strength over time, on time scales consistent with infalling masses of gas.

>>10541857
>not knowing weeks before of the livestream reveal
Normies, get out now.

>>10541862
Dude, the whole Universe around the black hole is emitting light.
It's just that it bunches up around the black hole like a lense, and get red-shifted into radio.

>>10541867
No i want to learn

really cool but I'm going to say that it's boring and lame purely because of the number of weepy-eyed redditors acting like this is a pivotal moment for humanity

>>10540805
Finally, someone made the connection.

>>10541365
So wait the actual black hole is in a different place somewhere completely outside the bounds of thr picture?

>>10540852
This is wrong, you just pulled it from your ass. Black holes only bend light that pass extremely close to them. Only with the EHT do we have the angular resolution to actually see this bent light around the black hole. We can see the rest of the galaxy perfectly fine (minus the usual dust absorbing light). The stuff about galaxies appearing different sizes and "this explains dark matter" are total false horseshit.

>>10540966
>>10541824

>>10541829
>>10541763
Excuse my stupidity, M87 is a Radio Galaxy and not a Seyfert. Seyferts don't have jets.

>>10541877
You wouldn't be far off.
What I take from it is, we now have radio telescope power that far exceed predictions. And that should eventually be a good thing.

>>10541877
>t it's boring and lame purely because of the number of weepy-eyed redditors acting like this is a pivotal moment for humanity
How do you know it is not a pivotal moment when it only got released today? Only time can tell

:^)

>>10541895
Because everyone thinks the picture is what it's not?

>>10541893
that's something to justifiably be excited about, most of the space-fetishizing normies are just jacking themselves off over the picture though (I wager most of them don't even realize it's not an optical photograph either)

>>10541887
>Excuse my stupidity
No, what's inexcusable is your laziness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_87

>>10541931
>Detection of such motion is used to support the theory that quasars, BL Lacertae objects and radio galaxies may all be the same phenomenon, known as active galaxies, viewed from different perspectives.[97][98] It is proposed that M87 is a BL Lacertae object (with a low-luminosity nucleus compared with the brightness of its host galaxy) seen from a relatively large angle. Flux variations, characteristic of the BL Lacertae objects, have been observed in M87.[99][100]

Almost there. I would like to thank the Dunning-Kruger effect.

>>10541869
It's a good point to consider, but we know this is wrong for several reasons.
1. First, the redshifting. Black holes only redshift light when it's emitted near the black hole, and travels out from the black hole This is because there is a net loss in energy of the light due to having to climb out of the potential well. When ambient light lenses around a black hole, it first falls into then climbs out of the potential well. No net energy is gained or lost.
2. Using other radio telescopes, we can measure the spectrum of radio emissions from the accretion disc. This spectrum is markedly different from other sources, and is characteristic of what we would expect for friction from plasma rotating at extremely high speeds.
3. Read https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0f43/meta for more details on the characteristics of accretion discs and how the radio image seen is known to be from accretion.

You'll notice that the image has a bright half, and a dim half. This is due to relativistic Doppler brightening from the drastic difference in velocity between one side of the rotating disc and the other side.

>>10541967
>Dunning-Kruger effect.
That being said, I don't really care, because nothing new came out of this study.
Maybe they should study other stuff with their radio wave super-telescope.
You'd think if Einstein predicted it when we had no clue about accretion disk, maybe that's just what it is.

>>10541842
>We compare the observed visibilities with this library and confirm that the asymmetric ring is consistent with earlier predictions of strong gravitational lensing of synchrotron emission from a hot plasma orbiting near the black hole event horizon.

>In addition, EHT observations can constrain the key physical parameters of the system, including the black hole mass and spin, accretion rate, and magnetic flux trapped by accreting plasma in the black hole.

Because they're good scientists, they always talk in terms of models and hypotheses. They even say
>In this Letter we adopt the working hypothesis that the central object is a black hole described by the Kerr metric
and
>we test whether or not the results of the 2017 EHT observing campaign (hereafter EHT2017) are consistent with the black hole hypothesis.

They never explicitly say "it's a black hole" or "it's an accretion disc," but through good scientific practice, they demonstrate that a black hole with an accretion disc is the best model for what they observe.

>>10541967
Whatever, dude.
I'm waiting on Sagittarius pictures. And they'll just look the same.
And this shit has no accretion disk.

>>10541430
>hurhuehue one step forward is useless we should be able to climb the entire stair at once

>>10542012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnsZj9RvhFU

>>10542019
Look, science is useful to some degree.
But you have to admit, cosmology is going nowhere.
I'm starting to make my own theories, which is not a good sign.
The more we know, the more puzzling it is.

so no FTL travel then besides a one way ticket crossing the event horizon of a black hole

fuck you Einstein

amazing photo

>>10541761
If you're harnessing the power of a black hole and you can effectively control it, you're at godlike status and you can basically get "perpetual energy" (not really perpetual, but basically perpetual since its not like you're the one thats throwing mass into the black hole and black holes live for a really long ass time anyway). You set up a couple mirrors and some solar panels around that bad boy and you can collect massive amount of energy from the accelerated photons orbiting the event horizon. Fire a laser into there at the right angle, have it split on the mirrors and warp around in a perpetual orbit/fall that you calculate to last until at least the end of the black hole's lifespan and you've really got something special.

>>10542022
So, yeah, the exact same thing.

>>10539826
holy fucking kek how can he even recover

>>10541886
>This is wrong, you just pulled it from your ass. Black holes only bend light that pass extremely close to them
What part of
>that stars we think we are viewing when looking in the direction of the center of the galaxy
Did you not understand?

>>10541761
there is a bunch of stuff on this when the universe starts heading to heat death stage any intelligent life would be harnessing black holes to exist until they (black-holes) evaporate

>>10542031
cosmology is cool and I want people to keep studying it I just wish people didn't treat it as something that it's not. for fucks sake I looked at some threads over on lebbit and there are people saying how they're crying and can't focus at work because they're so moved by the photo (it's not even really a photo).

>>10541886
>Black holes only bend light that pass extremely close to them.
Up to around 5 times the radius of the event horizon.
When you look between the event horizon, and 5 times that, you're literally looking at all the light in the observable universe.

>>10542081
Well, from my perspective cosmology is cool but irrelevant.
What puzzles me more is why there's something instead of nothing.
I literally drink myself to sleep over it.

>>10542067
You claim that
>It might mean that its impossible for us to view the entirety of the milky way based on EM and that stars we think we are viewing when looking in the direction of the center of the galaxy are actually funhouse mirror lighting effects.

and

>The milky way and many other galaxies could actually be much smaller or much bigger than we think they are. If they are much bigger, and huge wells of light on the backside of galaxies are getting bent by supermassive blackholes

This is wrong. The bent light from the black hole only comes from a region a few micro-arcseconds across. For any other telescope, this just looks like a point source of light. The gravitational bending of light drops off rapidly with distance from the black hole, so it makes about as close to 0 difference for the other stars in the galaxy as you can imagine.
It's the same story for other galaxies, you have to focus in extremely close into a tiny, tiny point at the center of galaxies to see this light bending from the black hole.

>>10542087
Read the above part. Also, "all the light in the observable Universe" is very dim and spread out once it reaches the black hole, and the tiny part of it that happens to get bent around toward us is even dimmer.

>>10542139
It would 'bunch up', fucking Einstein predicted it.

>>10542145
Notice how the lensing is almost unobservable for light that passes past a few times the radius of the event horizon. When viewed from Earth, the bent light forms an extremely tiny point.

>>10542101
>>10542081
Considering this two statements: It is worth it, even if it is scary as fuck. Cut to interstellar: First minority peasants couldn't swim while boarding a ship. We're explorers.

>>10542163
Yeah, it gets dimmer.
Just fucking measure 5 times the radius on your picture, and you'll find out it fits.

>>10542081
>for fucks sake I looked at some threads over on lebbit and there are people saying how they're crying and can't focus at work because they're so moved by the photo
This is why you don't look at that website tb perfectly h with you.

>>10542163
Also obvious cg, so whatever.

>>10542101
read philosophy then

>>10542175
Exactly. The light bending is only observable within about 5 Schwarzschild radii. That's true. 5 Schwarzschild radii forms a tiny tiny point when viewed from 20,000 light years away, so it doesn't affect our viewing of other stars and galaxies.

>>10542187
Yeah, whatever.
I can clearly see this will never be solved.
Makes it all pointless, desu.

>>10542183
>It would 'bunch up', fucking Einstein predicted it.
>Also obvious cg, so whatever.
It's CG based on Einstein's predictions, which you're trying to use to prove me wrong, but which ended up proving you wrong.

>>10541570
We did learn something. This is further evidence of general relativity. We may take the standard model for granted, but for all we know it might be disproven tomorrow. Every confirmation helps.

>>10542192
>We believe in nothing
We all have been at that point, you'll find out your way eventually.

>>10542199
cg is just that.
I can make you a picture of anything.

>>10542202
Well I don't know what to think.
One way I'm satisfied bacause this didn't change shit, the other wxay I'm pissed because it could have.
Meanwhile, I don't really care, because I'm this anon>>10542101 and we could literally predict everything that it would be the same.

>>10542139
...I don't think you fully understand what you're talking about
>>10542163
...
>>10542190
Whichever Wikipedia articles you're reading, you should probably read them to the end and then actually start doing the math. Sit in on some lectures at your local university after that.