A picture was published a few days ago. It shows ostensible a "Black Hole" within the galaxy M87. Looks like an explosion of a nova or an explosion of a whole cluster of this galaxy.
The interpretation of this stitched picture is strictly according to the theory. The astronomers have to justify the enormous costs of their monitoring stations etc. There is no idea about other causes.
We have to take note of the fact, that the universe exist within eternal cycles of matter. The material matter densify more and more in the centre of any galaxy. It happens from time to time a gigantic explosion in or close by the centre. Material matter annihilates to radiation (=energetical matter). The radiation condensed to material matter peripheral. The cycle starts again. Remains to mention that annihilation and pair production
γ ↔ e+ + e−
are the most fundamental processes in particle physics and in the whole universe.
Thesis The Deceleration of moved Energy emitting Objects by the Dop...
(Bild: ESO)
I have to admit, it is easy to be cynical about this image - and I am completely at odds with it.
On the one hand the image fits well with some preconceptions about black holes, the bending of light, central dark disk and red/blue shift.
On the other hand I feel manipulated. There has been a background of articles in the pop-science press for over a year that in retrospect were purely about preparing or collective minds to accept the image. The accretion disk seems relatively small for such a massive structure, the details of the research project are somewhat flimsy and finally a relatively junior project manager was thrust into the limelight ahead of some very senior authorities, presumably to 'spice up' the press corps.
Edit
To answer the second part of your question - if this were an explosion then I would expect to see a more three dimensional array of matter around the disk. And I certainly would not expect to see dark / light variations so consistent with spin.
The image is of course a false-color image since it was collected by radio telescopes, but the data collected along with the image itself confirm the predictions of the nature of the black hole based on Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. It should be noted that the black hole itself is of course not visible, nor should it be, by definition. All that is visible is the inner edge of the accretion disk, and even that is obscured by a shadow effect caused by the time dilation that occurs as material nears the event horizon, so that the dark region, which is both the black hole and its 'shadow', is 2.5 times the size of the event horizon.
The paper associated with the image will soon be published, and should include all the details of how the image was obtained, what other data were acquired, how the telescopes were linked, and all the other details required by those who would like to try to replicate the study. And given the reputation of the institutions and previously known individuals involved, I feel certain that it is as good a representation of the situation as possible without an even larger interferometric array. It is very unfortunate that because one of the more important members of the team was an attraction young woman, instead of an ugly old fart, that internet trolls are doing their best to destroy her life and deny the study the appreciation it deserves. It is true that it doesn't "tell" us a lot that we didn't already know, but it did confirm a number of things that we already suspected, and it is the first image of a black hole that is not merely an artist's impression, so it is quite an achievement, and while not 'earth-shaking' news, does deserve to be appreciated..
@ Ian: You should view on a picture of a nova in a later stage or a wheel galaxy as an explodet galaxy in a late sage. After the explosion matter and radiation leave the centre and form a halo.
If we examine all visible galaxies we will find many others with such anomalies and in different stages. To say: This is a 'black hole' is simply wrong. Galaxies are the centres of material-energetical conversion within the universe and we can observe many different sages within their eternal cycles. Hubble was the first one who tried to classify galaxies but his conclusions are not final.
“…A picture was published a few days ago. …. The astronomers have to justify the enormous costs of their monitoring stations etc. There is no idea about other causes. ….”
See the SS post [3 days ago now] in https://www.researchgate.net/post/Will_the_new_discovery_of_Black_Hole_by_the_Harvard_Scientists_change_the_famous_THEORY_OF_GRAVITY_by_Einstein#view=5cb37823979fdc86984d0656
Cheers
The image was taken by eight giant telescope of M 87 which is 53 and half millions light year away from the earth and the pic data is in millions of GB which is compressed to give an epic idea of Black hole . This is a picture of event horizon of M 87. There is a doubt that if the Sagittarius A is near by our solar system although it is smaller then M 87 then why scientist don't scrutinize it?
Dear Sumsam Ali,
I respect the effort of the astronomers resp. technicians. But I can't agree with the conclusion: This is a picture of a 'black hole'. There are some more possibilities to declare the image. In exact science we have to take into account all possibilities. Otherwise our world view is nothing than wishful thinking.
My Regards! Hans
To claim this picture shows a 'black hole' is a slap in the face of all serious science.
Newspapers claim it shows a black hole.
The scientists might say it is an image of the photon sphere around the black hole produced by the lensing of the accretion disc. The text even notes that the ring is 2.5 times larger than the event horizon.
- Badges
- Science topic