First ever image of a black hole!

[Feek]

Is Maximilian hiding inside?

He’s got V.I.N CENT with him.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

VR/360 video orbiting a black hole

 

[SexyGreyFox]

My god, its full of stars.

No it isn't, it's full of my plectrums

 

[CaptainRAVE]

It hurts my brain trying to process these numbers. Crazy stats.

 

[easyrider]

 

[G-MAN2004]

One thing I always ask when I see images like this is: does it really look like that? And in this case, apparently not...

However, the colors of the bright ring in the image aren't the actual hues of the gas; rather, they represent a color map chosen by EHT researchers to depict the brightness of the emissions

Why not just show us the true colour of it?

 

[Hagar]

One thing I always ask when I see images like this is: does it really look like that? And in this case, apparently not...



Why not just show us the true colour of it?

Probably because the data is from 'radio telescopes' operating in frequencies unable to be seen by the human eye. Therefore a colour spectrum needs to be allocated to differentiate the variables.

I may just be talking a load of balls though.

 

[DampDog]

Why not just show us the true colour of it?

As I understand it and may well be wrong, but the emissions we able to see are way outside the visible spectrum. All the measurement have been done with radio telescopes and as such we simply can't see any visible light being emitted. They shift the frequencies into the visible so can see them. (I would imagine there may be a little bit or artistic license to make them pretty, it would be dul lif they chose shades of grey)

 

[G-MAN2004]

Probably because the data is from 'radio telescopes' operating in frequencies unable to be seen by the human eye. Therefore a colour spectrum needs to be allocated to differentiate the variables.

I may just be talking a load of balls though.

As I understand it and may well be wrong, but the emissions we able to see are way outside the visible spectrum. All the measurement have been done with radio telescopes and as such we simply can't see any visible light being emitted. They shift the frequencies into the visible so can see them. (I would imagine there may be a little bit or artistic license to make them pretty, it would be dul lif they chose shades of grey)

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks. I do think I'd prefer the grey one though!

 

[Delvis]

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks. I do think I'd prefer the grey one though!

You need to watch the documentary on it, it gets explained a bit more

We don't have single telescopes capable of imaging it, so they combined 8 on earth, each looking at the same point at the same time, recorded the data then compiled it to create the image.

Is it CGI? Technically I guess, but it's CGI created from billions amounts of data.

It does make me want to watch interstellar again though

 

[BananaDunka]

It does make me want to watch interstellar again though

They used an actual simulation based on the then-current understanding of how a black hole would look and behave if they were to get that close to one and observe it. I thought that was an interesting factoid from the movie. Great movie too, just not so sure about the last 15mins.

https://www.kickassfacts.com/25-kickass-and-interesting-facts-about-interstellar/

 

[Minusorange]

Why not just show us the true colour of it?

It's probably too bright because of the accretion disc to actually see, it would be like looking into the sun I imagine

You know that all pictures of space are fakes ?

There are no "natural color" cameras aboard the Hubble and never have been. The optical cameras on board have all been digital CCD cameras, which take images as grayscale pixels.

Sometimes the color is as natural as possible. However, the color given to the images is not just "artistic embellishment." The images are, indeed, downloaded as black and white, and color is added for a number of different reasons – for example, to show the dispersion detail of chemical elements and highlight features so subdued that the human eye cannot see them.

http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=93&cat=topten

 

[vanpeebles]

He’s got V.I.N CENT with him.

Hehehehe

 

[lunar]

An

As I understand it and may well be wrong, but the emissions we able to see are way outside the visible spectrum. All the measurement have been done with radio telescopes and as such we simply can't see any visible light being emitted. They shift the frequencies into the visible so can see them. (I would imagine there may be a little bit or artistic license to make them pretty, it would be dul lif they chose shades of grey)

And because of the higher energies involved the EM waves are likely to be x-rays

 

[lunar]

An

As I understand it and may well be wrong, but the emissions we able to see are way outside the visible spectrum. All the measurement have been done with radio telescopes and as such we simply can't see any visible light being emitted. They shift the frequencies into the visible so can see them. (I would imagine there may be a little bit or artistic license to make them pretty, it would be dul lif they chose shades of grey)

And because of the higher energies involved the EM waves are likely to be x-rays

 

[Freddie1980]

Kurzgesagt done a good follow up video to that called Black hole bomb which was basically a way of stealing energy from a black hole by building a mirror round it and bouncing lasers around to take advantage of it's rotational energy.

If our sun were a black hole is would have a diameter of around the size of greater London at the other end of the scale TON 618 if placed in our solar system would stretch from the sun all the way out Pluto

Spoiler

33 times

. That's just crazy and mindboggling, I find it very hard to wrap my head around just how vast and crazy interstellar objects can be.

 

[DampDog]

One thing that was said, is that this is a "monster" Black hole and possibly one of the largest in the universe.

"It has a mass 6.5 billion times that of the Sun. And it is one of the heaviest black holes that we think exists. It is an absolute monster, the heavyweight champion of black holes in the Universe."

Just how can they know that it may be one of the "Heaviest!" In the scheme of things this one is on the cosmic doorstep at only 26,000 light years away. I think I read that the thinking is that blackholes are the seeds at the centre of most galaxy's. I think the best guess for the number of galaxies is up to around 200 billion so I imagine we've only looked at a tiny fraction of 1% and yet it's already tagged as one of the heaviest. I don't think our own galaxy is particularly large so would put money on there being some whoppers out there.

It wasn't so long back that they were setting limits on how massive the largest star could be until they found one that was way, way bigger than the predictions so had to start again. All this stuff is great and blows the imagination away. But it does feel like they are making more and more "predictions" that we simply don't have the technology to test and prove.

 

[Delvis]

One thing that was said, is that this is a "monster" Black hole and possibly one of the largest in the universe.

"It has a mass 6.5 billion times that of the Sun. And it is one of the heaviest black holes that we think exists. It is an absolute monster, the heavyweight champion of black holes in the Universe."

Just how can they know that it may be one of the "Heaviest!" In the scheme of things this one is on the cosmic doorstep at only 26,000 light years away. I think I read that the thinking is that blackholes are the seeds at the centre of most galaxy's. I think the best guess for the number of galaxies is up to around 200 billion so I imagine we've only looked at a tiny fraction of 1% and yet it's already tagged as one of the heaviest. I don't think our own galaxy is particularly large so would put money on there being some whoppers out there.

It wasn't so long back that they were setting limits on how massive the largest star could be until they found one that was way, way bigger than the predictions so had to start again. All this stuff is great and blows the imagination away. But it does feel like they are making more and more "predictions" that we simply don't have the technology to test and prove.

That's science, it's based on theories and predictions until someone can come along and prove that wrong

 

[DampDog]

That's science, it's based on theories and predictions until someone can come along and prove that wrong

That's all well and good but much of the cutting edge stuff, especially the quantum stuff is all theoretical, it may be outside our ability to test it. It could be it will take us decades or much more before we are up to it.

 

[Delvis]

That's all well and good but much of the cutting edge stuff, especially the quantum stuff is all theoretical, it may be outside our ability to test it. It could be it will take us decades or much more before we are up to it.

Ummm, you realise Einstein's theories where a while ago, right? And they've only just discovered how to take 'pictures' of them