'Seeing the unseeable': Scientists reveal first photo of black hole

[WeekendRaider]

a picture of a 50 million year old.... whatever. sounds exciting as well as movies that depict we and aliens can travel at huge multiples of the speed of light. but... there are only 4 terrestrial planets.... in the at all ever knowable universe, and only 2 are large cored and have greenhouse atmospheres. with the greenhouse part explaining many things, such as why we left the trees 8 million years ago and where all of our food and air comes from, stuff like that. black holes are not even interesting. and green house gases also explain some other stuff. but a black hole... wow!!! 

[geoffbezoz]

Science is absolutely amassing and even in my lifetime the known boundaries of understanding have expanded exponentially. If they could now discover a method to eradicate Facebook, Instagram etc off the planet, life would be so much better.

[metisdead]

Troll posts have been removed. 

 

Another troll post has now been removed. 

[ballpoint]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooo, if the universe is expanding, it must have originated at a single point. The question then, is what created the big bang, and how was there a load of dark matter in the nothingness.

If it wasn't created, where did it come from?

This is another question on which I fall back to Douglas Adams:  "In the beginning, there was nothing.  Which exploded". 

 

Well, it actually expanded at a very, very fast rate, rather than exploded, but what it looked like originally, and why it chose to do so, are the ultimate questions.  The Big Bang theory perfectly describes everything back to 10^-36 seconds after the beginning of the universe, at which point large scale space time erupted from quantum whatever it was before then.  According to quantum theory, things can, and do, randomly pop into existence for no particular reason.  Quantum field fluctuations come and go in empty space, including that within atoms, and, as this video shows, not only do the fields bubble about, but the actual quarks that make up protons and neutrons 'choose' the best places to be (the redder colours), so they themselves dance about, with the implication being that one is in a certain place and then disappears only to instantaneously reappear elsewhere.  There is some speculation that this sort of process began the universe - leading to the question of why wouldn't it happen again in our own universe?  And the scarier question of what would happen if it chose to do so in the empty space within your own body? 

 

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Another question is, if our universe is like an expanding ball, are there other expanding universes and will our expanding universe collide with other expanding universes? 

There is the multiverse theory, which states that there definitely should be other universes, as if each were a bubble in a sea of foam.  There's even speculation about what would happen when they collide, which seems inevitable if the theory is true.  Some say they'd change shape to fit around each other, others say they'd assimilate into each other - as long as they have the same physical laws.  If they didn't have the same laws, and didn't change shape to fit, then they'd annihilate one another.  Great, another thing to worry about.  As if a new universe potentially bursting out of my chest wasn't enough.  And, let's not forget the possibility of the Higgs field dropping to a lower energy state, thus instantaneously removing all mass from the universe.

 

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It's been calculated that, if the inflation theory is correct, its actual size is 10²³ x that, and growing.

Surely then, some planets must exist at the "edge" of the universe, so if one was on one of those planets, one could look outwards and see no stars at all?

This is something I try to get my head around too.  Surely, if the universe began from a point and expanded, then that original point is now spread around the surface of the 'edge', like the rubber of a small balloon being blown into a large one?  Then it would follow that some things inside the balloon are closer to the edge than others?  I've never seen or read any definite explanation for why this isn't true, and if anyone has then please post a link to it, as I firmly believe that exercising the brain is just as, if not more, important than exercising the body.  The best theory I can piece together is the 'surface of the sphere' one.  Just as there is no centre point, and no edge, on the surface of the Earth, which is a 2D surface on a 3D object, there would be no centre point, or edge, within the 3D "surface" of a 4D sphere - known as a 3 Sphere or glome.  And that's without even thinking about how a universe that expanded from a single point over a finite time could now be an infinite size.  It could be practically infinite, as in my earlier post about it expanding faster than anything could reach the edge, but in my (dazed and confused) mind that's still finite in reality.

[ravip]

Katie Bouman: the 29-year-old whose work led to first black hole photo >>> Article

[pedro01]

2 hours ago, ravip said:

Katie Bouman: the 29-year-old whose work led to first black hole photo >>> Article

 

This is probably because she is NOT single handedly responsible for it - not by a long shot. 

She played a small part on the team.

[ExpatOilWorker]

On 4/11/2019 at 10:16 PM, sandrabbit said:

 

possibly it's like flying in a straight line around the earth, you come back on yourself. it's also proven now that it's an infinite universe expanding and so ultimately there won't be any star trek and being able to travel between galaxies. 

 

but from what can be observed it seems every galaxy is rotating around a supermassive black hole. I think black holes were first identified because they would emit x rays which don't have mass and I think the first one detected was Cygnus X1 ( a Rush song as well).

X-rays do have energy and energy and mass is interchangeable. The ray is not emitted from inside the black hole but jetted out of the vortex generated at the poles when matter is rotated and sucked toward the black hole.

 

Imagine a ballerina pulling her arms in and rotating so fast that her head explode and she pisses herself.

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, pedro01 said:

 

This is probably because she is NOT single handedly responsible for it - not by a long shot. 

She played a small part on the team.

 

Not by a long shot?  Sounds like you've got some inside information.  Care to give us the details?

[dick dasterdly]

On 4/12/2019 at 10:02 AM, dick dasterdly said:

As a child I used to hypnotise myself when going to bed and trying to get my head around the universe/time and the like (i.e. how can there be no beginning and no end).

 

I came to the conclusion that our brains aren't 'wired' to understand these things.

 

Having said this, I can recall reading an excellent book (unfortunately it was many decades ago, so I can't recall the name of the book), and also seeing an excellent TV programme that did make it more 'understandable'.

One of those things that very few will understand, as they were interested in their own 'kids' problems'....

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 11:33 PM, Prissana Pescud said:

I was always told that an infinite number is to think the biggest number you know and add one. lol

Infinite space can not ever be reached. It is expanding so fast and as such has no edge. 

Apparently, it may all just fade away into infinity or collapse back on itself.

No one knows. 

But making statements that are not supported by physics such as "there is no such thing as forever"

marks the finite belief you have and other intellects that are those that got science where it is today.

One book attempts to explain in laymans terms is Bill Bryson  "A short history of nearly everything"

I'm not a physicist, but even I know that everything ends sometime. Even if this universe expanded into ? indefinitely, all the suns will use up all their fuel and stop working, so it would be just a lot of dead galaxies expanding for ever and ever and ever.

Makes more sense to me that everything is swallowed by a black hole and everything starts again in a new big bang.

The real question is- how did all the matter that makes up the universe come into existence? If there was nothing, nothing can be created.

[bamboocore]

On 4/11/2019 at 5:08 AM, leeneeds said:

I will be long dead when they figure out where the inside of the black hole goes, a worm hole to another universe would be incomprehensible to my small mind, 

That's a good question. Who knows?

 

In all reality the spacetime is pretty much as it is and what we see it being. Therefore there are no such things as wormholes, unless our wildest dreams of creating new physics by huge gravity would do so. Unlikely scenario.

 

The mass of blackhole simply concentrates to ever smaller point of spacetime. 

 

I talk of spacetime, which means practically space, but which can be affected by gravity and probably other forces, which can alter it's time of information as we know it. What is time? Time is the ability to transform information from one place to another. Now we understand time as speed of light, that might not be the case in the future. 

 

Anyway, there are no wormholes, unless we go to further than 3-4 dimensional space ideology, which are purely mathematical models. String theory.. is, well having sex with math, nothing more. 

 

 

[bamboocore]

On 4/11/2019 at 5:08 AM, leeneeds said:

I will be long dead when they figure out where the inside of the black hole goes, a worm hole to another universe would be incomprehensible to my small mind, 

still to be alive for the moon landing and hopefully the near future Mars landing,

truly amazing what humans can figure out in the cosmos, 

Thank you science.

It's quite funny how easily people talk about Moon and Mars landings. 

 

Moon landings were technically and physically difficult tasks. Doable, no doubt about it. 

 

But the trip back from Moon to Earth was, way, way, way more difficult task than to simply land to the Moon. I could add couple of way, way, way's more to the complexity. 

 

We often talk about how difficult was it to land to the Moon. It was indeed a great challenge. Still baby steps in the larger picture. 

 

To get the people, who walked on the Moon, back to their Moon orbiting spacecraft was one quite impossible task. Make a one second mistake and you are 10 km away from the orbiting spacecraft. Make a 4 second mistake and you are 40 km away from it. How far do you see a 10 metre object in space?

(Sorry, I didn't do the math of calculating orbital velocity of the said objects in Moon).

 

The way back was multiple times more complex, than the Moon landing. 

 

The modules, which went down to the Moon, to get back to Moon's orbit used fuels, which ignited by mixing elements together. Those fuels could not be stopped or slowed down. Once ignited, they gave full power. No control of the power. Connecting with a rocket, which circles around the Moon constantly. 

 

To meet that one rocket in 3-dimensional space, circling around the Moon is pretty darn incredible task to manage. When all the parts are moving really fast to their own directions. There is only limited amount of fuel on that module, which came back from the Moon.

 

Then there is the journey back to the Earth. 

 

To give this same spacecraft enough speed to overcome Moon's gravity and meanwhile use Moon's gravity pull to head directly towards the Earth, was another, very, very demanding task. 

 

Our scientific youngsters can enjoy to calculate the distance to the Moon by the reflectors left behind the men, who went there by using laser beams feedback.

 

Perhaps some day we'll also respect the people who went to the Moon and never came back. I don't know if that's the truth. It just feels more likely projection given that it was part of the cold war competition. 

 

 

[bamboocore]

On 4/12/2019 at 9:15 PM, ballpoint said:

This is another question on which I fall back to Douglas Adams:  "In the beginning, there was nothing.  Which exploded". 

 

Well, it actually expanded at a very, very fast rate, rather than exploded, but what it looked like originally, and why it chose to do so, are the ultimate questions.  The Big Bang theory perfectly describes everything back to 10^-36 seconds after the beginning of the universe, at which point large scale space time erupted from quantum whatever it was before then.  According to quantum theory, things can, and do, randomly pop into existence for no particular reason.  Quantum field fluctuations come and go in empty space, including that within atoms, and, as this video shows, not only do the fields bubble about, but the actual quarks that make up protons and neutrons 'choose' the best places to be (the redder colours), so they themselves dance about, with the implication being that one is in a certain place and then disappears only to instantaneously reappear elsewhere.  There is some speculation that this sort of process began the universe - leading to the question of why wouldn't it happen again in our own universe?  And the scarier question of what would happen if it chose to do so in the empty space within your own body? 

 

There is the multiverse theory, which states that there definitely should be other universes, as if each were a bubble in a sea of foam.  There's even speculation about what would happen when they collide, which seems inevitable if the theory is true.  Some say they'd change shape to fit around each other, others say they'd assimilate into each other - as long as they have the same physical laws.  If they didn't have the same laws, and didn't change shape to fit, then they'd annihilate one another.  Great, another thing to worry about.  As if a new universe potentially bursting out of my chest wasn't enough.  And, let's not forget the possibility of the Higgs field dropping to a lower energy state, thus instantaneously removing all mass from the universe.

 

This is something I try to get my head around too.  Surely, if the universe began from a point and expanded, then that original point is now spread around the surface of the 'edge', like the rubber of a small balloon being blown into a large one?  Then it would follow that some things inside the balloon are closer to the edge than others?  I've never seen or read any definite explanation for why this isn't true, and if anyone has then please post a link to it, as I firmly believe that exercising the brain is just as, if not more, important than exercising the body.  The best theory I can piece together is the 'surface of the sphere' one.  Just as there is no centre point, and no edge, on the surface of the Earth, which is a 2D surface on a 3D object, there would be no centre point, or edge, within the 3D "surface" of a 4D sphere - known as a 3 Sphere or glome.  And that's without even thinking about how a universe that expanded from a single point over a finite time could now be an infinite size.  It could be practically infinite, as in my earlier post about it expanding faster than anything could reach the edge, but in my (dazed and confused) mind that's still finite in reality.

I can answer some of these questions. 

 

1) the most important one - are we irrelevant. We are not important. Everything we do is going to be erased from the Universe on way or another. 

 

Whether our Universe keeps on expanding, and thus experiencing death by cooldown or our Universe decides to collapse back to it's origin, whatever we do, do not matter. 

Do enjoy your life.

 

2) We can have silly funny quantum fluctuation theories, which can pop-up material from another dimensions to our realm. That's bullshit until proven right. Some physicist are keen to make their own theories, which are simply stupid. 

 

3) Multiverse belong to the previous category. Desperate mathematicians and some stupid physicians fell for the easy trap, as they didn't understand to avoid it. Stupid, almost religious type idea. 

 

4) There was no Big Bang. There was a Big Rip. One spot started the flood of changes, which created the Universe. I think both theories are bullshit. We don't have any idea what really happened, and why.

Obnote: Our little planet of Earth belongs to insignificant star called by us Sun or Aurinko. 

[leeneeds]

30 minutes ago, bamboocore said:

4) There was no Big Bang. There was a Big Rip. One spot started the flood of changes, which created the Universe. I think both theories are bullshit. We don't have any idea what really happened, and why.

I think the evidence is clear from the measurement of light that the Big Bang in its current calculations is correct, until proven other wise,

the trouble I have understanding this , as an explosion that expands from one point , then the expansion rate of the other side of the point that we can not see , due to the speed of that expansion, and with our current technology , If space has a curve we will not see those particles, but I guess they are there,

 I am waiting for the James web telescope to be unfurled in space and this will give us more understanding of the cosmos, being able to see further than anything else we have currently, 

 

 

[impulse]

Imagine if they took all that money and brainpower to figure out something useful.

 

Like how to distribute the world's food so nobody went hungry.  Or the world's medicine, so nobody would die unnecessarily.  Or how to get the plastic bits out of the oceans.

 

Boring stuff, I know.  But at least they'd provide a tangible benefit within the lifetime of the people whose money is funding it.   

 

Cobbled together, computer graphic representation of black holes, trillions of miles from earth?  Interesting, but not very useful.

 

[WeekendRaider]

and in the USA......

 

just as unseeable and 50 million years old.... as opposed to news and conversation about the unseeable and all powerful and omnipresent force that accounts for all the air we breath, all of our food [ animal feeds ] .... and even why we left the trees 8 mya. C. O. 2.

 

yet even a one year old “Black Hole” pales in comparison to what too much GHG imply.... which is exactly why our media can safely cover science stuff like black holes all the live long day.... exciting but not dangerous, but we can pretend that they are “awesome”. whereas the other unseeable that we only have a chemical name for is.... “fake”.

[owl sees all]

On 4/11/2019 at 1:26 PM, GreasyFingers said:

If M87 was 54 million light years from earth, what has been observed was 54 million years ago. Black holes might be like dinosaurs, they existed once upon a time but not now.

It's just too easy for scientists to throw out figures. I have my own as I've spent the last week working out the secrets (details) of the 'universe'.

 

As a side issue, I've calculated out that the human race - if you took away all the empty space - would fit into a thimble. And our solar system could be put into a large weather balloon. Now multiply 8 trillion (number of universes, give or take a dozen or two) by that balloon, and that's roughly the size of the actual matter at the time of the 'Big Bang'. Doesn't seem that much, but the energy involved is immense. And a tea-spoon of the original matter would weigh as much as our moon; which is mostly hollow BTW.

 

Black holes lead to the fifth dimension. Not actually sorted that out completely yet; but soon.

[GreasyFingers]

3 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

It's just too easy for scientists to throw out figures. I have my own as I've spent the last week working out the secrets (details) of the 'universe'.

 

As a side issue, I've calculated out that the human race - if you took away all the empty space - would fit into a thimble. And our solar system could be put into a large weather balloon. Now multiply 8 trillion (number of universes, give or take a dozen or two) by that balloon, and that's roughly the size of the actual matter at the time of the 'Big Bang'. Doesn't seem that much, but the energy involved is immense. And a tea-spoon of the original matter would weigh as much as our moon; which is mostly hollow BTW.

 

Black holes lead to the fifth dimension. Not actually sorted that out completely yet; but soon.

Please let us know when you do.

While you are at it can you also locate the center of the universe. I read that the whole of the universe is expanding at the same rate so it must be possible to locate/calculate the center but cannot find that information from the scientists.

[owl sees all]

52 minutes ago, GreasyFingers said:

Please let us know when you do.

While you are at it can you also locate the center of the universe. I read that the whole of the universe is expanding at the same rate so it must be possible to locate/calculate the center but cannot find that information from the scientists.

Will do GF.

 

The Universe is not, IMO, all expanding at the same rate; in fact, although some of it is not moving away from the centre of the universe at all. In time the outer galaxies turn back on themselves. And the whole thing starts again. Next time we might not be so lucky!

 

Not easy to visualise. But think of a hollow dough-nut being peeled from the inside, an finishing up with a tiny bit of dough. A bit like the vacuum cleaned hovering itself up (as in Yellow Submarine).

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, bamboocore said:

I can answer some of these questions. 

 

1) the most important one - are we irrelevant. We are not important. Everything we do is going to be erased from the Universe on way or another. 

 

Whether our Universe keeps on expanding, and thus experiencing death by cooldown or our Universe decides to collapse back to it's origin, whatever we do, do not matter. 

Do enjoy your life.

 

2) We can have silly funny quantum fluctuation theories, which can pop-up material from another dimensions to our realm. That's bullshit until proven right. Some physicist are keen to make their own theories, which are simply stupid. 

 

3) Multiverse belong to the previous category. Desperate mathematicians and some stupid physicians fell for the easy trap, as they didn't understand to avoid it. Stupid, almost religious type idea. 

 

4) There was no Big Bang. There was a Big Rip. One spot started the flood of changes, which created the Universe. I think both theories are bullshit. We don't have any idea what really happened, and why.

Obnote: Our little planet of Earth belongs to insignificant star called by us Sun or Aurinko. 

I like that.

WE ( humans ) know nothing except what we think we know.

For all anyone knows, we really are in the Matrix.

 

Humans think we are important, but we are just insignificant beings that happened for a brief instant of time on an insignificant planet in an insignificant solar system, in a galaxy that is one of an unknown number.

 

Everything ends though- that is a truth.

 

If I could have a wish come true, it would be to stand on a planet in the centre of the galaxy with the most stars on a clear night. That would be legendary. 

[attrayant]

6 hours ago, impulse said:

Imagine if they took all that money and brainpower to figure out something useful.

 

Like how to distribute the world's food so nobody went hungry.

 

"They" are already working on this, but there is only so much money can do.  You reach a point where throwing more money at a problem give no better results - this is the law of diminishing returns.

 

Food science has offered us preservatives and other safe technologies, which have been used for decades but then some group of privileged yuppies sees an article on facebook about how sodium benzoate is a poizon and starts a grassroots movement based on ignorance and fear to return to some imaginary time of "clean food" and 'all natural farming" or some such nonsense.

 

 

6 hours ago, impulse said:

Or the world's medicine, so nobody would die unnecessarily.

 

Working on that.

 

6 hours ago, impulse said:

Or how to get the plastic bits out of the oceans.

 

That too. 

 

One might argue that more could be spent on these efforts, but that funding is not going to come from NASA because its projects are already some of the cheapest in the world (see below).

 

6 hours ago, impulse said:

Cobbled together, computer graphic representation of black holes, trillions of miles from earth?  Interesting, but not very useful.

 

 

We used to say the same thing about general relativity.  How is the understanding of that useful to the average Joe?  We wouldn't have accurate GPS today without a clear understanding of GR.  Likewise, breakthroughs astrophysics helps improve our understanding in extreme physics and may result in many secondary breakthroughs.

 

Considering how cheap NASA missions and projects are, I think it's money well spent.  The Europa mission, currently expected to launch in 2023, will cost only 81¢ per person (US Citizen) per year.  Shut up and take my money.

[thaibeachlovers]

39 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

"They" are already working on this, but there is only so much money can do.  You reach a point where throwing more money at a problem give no better results - this is the law of diminishing returns.

 

Food science has offered us preservatives and other safe technologies, which have been used for decades but then some group of privileged yuppies sees an article on facebook about how sodium benzoate is a poizon and starts a grassroots movement based on ignorance and fear to return to some imaginary time of "clean food" and 'all natural farming" or some such nonsense.

 

 

 

Working on that.

 

 

That too. 

 

One might argue that more could be spent on these efforts, but that funding is not going to come from NASA because its projects are already some of the cheapest in the world (see below).

 

 

We used to say the same thing about general relativity.  How is the understanding of that useful to the average Joe?  We wouldn't have accurate GPS today without a clear understanding of GR.  Likewise, breakthroughs astrophysics helps improve our understanding in extreme physics and may result in many secondary breakthroughs.

 

Considering how cheap NASA missions and projects are, I think it's money well spent.  The Europa mission, currently expected to launch in 2023, will cost only 81¢ per person (US Citizen) per year.  Shut up and take my money.

Actually, I support science research as helping make the world a better place, except that they haven't make a discovery that would prevent us overpopulating ourselves into extinction. However, that discovery could take place tomorrow, so research on, by all means.

[GreasyFingers]

4 hours ago, owl sees all said:

Will do GF.

 

The Universe is not, IMO, all expanding at the same rate; in fact, although some of it is not moving away from the centre of the universe at all. In time the outer galaxies turn back on themselves. And the whole thing starts again. Next time we might not be so lucky!

 

Not easy to visualise. But think of a hollow dough-nut being peeled from the inside, an finishing up with a tiny bit of dough. A bit like the vacuum cleaned hovering itself up (as in Yellow Submarine).

Love It.

 

But what if Genesis is right and there is water above the sky.

[impulse]

9 hours ago, GreasyFingers said:

Please let us know when you do.

While you are at it can you also locate the center of the universe. I read that the whole of the universe is expanding at the same rate so it must be possible to locate/calculate the center but cannot find that information from the scientists.

 

That's one that I get a kick out of.  Some of the math related to calculating (inferring?) distance by the Doppler shift breaks down unless earth is at the center of the universe. 

 

As if the known universe is the only one.   Ours -the one we can investigate- may be just a tiny corner of the whole universe.

 

I contend it wasn't a big bang at all.  It was a localized little bang, a mere popcorn fart when viewed in the context of infinite universe(s).  Edit:  If the bang happened at all.  

[Damrongsak]

On 4/10/2019 at 9:29 PM, Geoffggi said:

Could be an advert for dunking donuts ....

That was my first thought.  "Try our new "Black Hole" glazed doughnut."

[Elad]

On 4/18/2019 at 5:24 AM, GreasyFingers said:

Please let us know when you do.

While you are at it can you also locate the center of the universe. I read that the whole of the universe is expanding at the same rate so it must be possible to locate/calculate the center but cannot find that information from the scientists.

The big bang wasn't an explosion within space, it was the start of space and time itself and therefore the big bang happened everywhere. There are no specific coordinates for a centre because the centre is everywhere, no matter where you are in the universe you are always at the centre.

 

The speed of the expansion can be determined by using the Hubble constant Ho  which is approximately

70 km/s/Mpc

Where 1 Mpc is a distance of 3 x 10¹⁹ km

So, a galaxy 1 Mpc away will be receding away from us at 70 km/s, a galaxy 2 Mpc away will be receeding at

140 km/s, and so on...

 

Some galaxies at the edge of our observable universe are receding away from us faster than the speed of light, but this is only the apparent speed from our point of view, because from a galaxy 1 Mpc away, then that same galaxy will have a recession speed of 70 km/s. 

 

Wherever you are in the universe you will observe this 'Hubble sphere' thus the centre is everywhere.

     

[Zombieite]

On 4/11/2019 at 5:37 PM, steven100 said:

but ...  there has to be an edge or a wall or something ....

nothing goes forever, there's no such thing as forever .......  it just ain't possible, it's not a true meaning ... forever is like, never stops ..... so it is really hard to think the darkness never ever stops.

Darkness is the absence of light.

 

There was always darkness before the light.

 

When all the stars have gone out there will be nothing but darkness. 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Zombieite said:

Darkness is the absence of light.

 

There was always darkness before the light.

 

When all the stars have gone out there will be nothing but darkness. 

Sooooo, where did the light come from? I refuse to believe that matter came from nothing.

 

PS I know the light comes from stars, but where did the matter that makes stars come from?

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, where did the light come from? I refuse to believe that matter came from nothing.

 

PS I know the light comes from stars, but where did the matter that makes stars come from?

Read Stephen Hawkins brief history of time.