closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Results 1 to 35 of 35

Thread: Einstein was right

  1. #1
    Craftsman Franco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    South Yorkshire
    Posts
    969

    Einstein was right

    Last edited by Franco; 10th April 2019 at 17:47.

  2. #2
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    10,905
    Whilst it’s a great achievement, I was left somewhat disappointed by the whole affair.

    Listening to breakfast news this morning, apparently they used eight telescopes to collect data, collated it and created a virtual photo.

    So what they’re really saying is “here’s a sketch of what we think it looks like!”

    Also, if the black hole is surrounded by bright light on the edges of the event horizon, why can we see a black disc in the middle? Surely all we would see is a ball of light similar to a star?

    I’m no physicist and I’d really like anyone who is and can explain it to me in layman’s terms, to do do if they’d be kind enough.

  3. #3
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Fens, UK
    Posts
    1,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Franco View Post
    Einstein decried the existence of black holes, so he was right even if he didn’t want to be.

    Amazing image though.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Whilst it’s a great achievement, I was left somewhat disappointed by the whole affair.

    Listening to breakfast news this morning, apparently they used eight telescopes to collect data, collated it and created a virtual photo.

    So what they’re really saying is “here’s a sketch of what we think it looks like!”

    Also, if the black hole is surrounded by bright light on the edges of the event horizon, why can we see a black disc in the middle? Surely all we would see is a ball of light similar to a star?

    I’m no physicist and I’d really like anyone who is and can explain it to me in layman’s terms, to do do if they’d be kind enough.
    That can actually be explained - the mass (i.e. the light) is swirling around the 'black hole'. Think of it like rings arounds Saturn. I believe matter on the 'ends' get flung out straight.

    Edit - see this Guardian article, a decent graphic - https://www.theguardian.com/science/...e-breakthrough

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Whilst it’s a great achievement, I was left somewhat disappointed by the whole affair.

    Listening to breakfast news this morning, apparently they used eight telescopes to collect data, collated it and created a virtual photo.

    So what they’re really saying is “here’s a sketch of what we think it looks like!”

    Also, if the black hole is surrounded by bright light on the edges of the event horizon, why can we see a black disc in the middle? Surely all we would see is a ball of light similar to a star?

    I’m no physicist and I’d really like anyone who is and can explain it to me in layman’s terms, to do do if they’d be kind enough.
    the way they built the back hole for interstella (from a mathematical viewpoint ) gives a good explaination .
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGfZwQ_qaY

    the image posted by the BBC looks like a low res image due to the constraints of distance and our current technology

  6. #6
    Grand Master GraniteQuarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen, UK
    Posts
    25,047
    Gotta say, I shouted "potato camera" at my screen when I saw the reveal.

  7. #7
    Took this photo of Bigfoot on the way to work this morning, well actually not the real Bigfoot but I reckon this is what he'd look like

  8. #8
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    10,905
    Quote Originally Posted by pugster View Post
    the way they built the back hole for interstella (from a mathematical viewpoint ) gives a good explaination .
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGfZwQ_qaY

    the image posted by the BBC looks like a low res image due to the constraints of distance and our current technology
    Thanks. It’s a little clearer now.

  9. #9
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    NW Leics
    Posts
    5,252
    I found this quite useful as well - has some 3d visualisation of the black hole.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l29wCKkQpMg

  10. #10
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,399
    Quote Originally Posted by crazyp View Post
    That can actually be explained - the mass (i.e. the light) is swirling around the 'black hole'. Think of it like rings arounds Saturn. I believe matter on the 'ends' get flung out straight.

    Edit - see this Guardian article, a decent graphic - https://www.theguardian.com/science/...e-breakthrough
    That article features Katie Bouman as "The student who developed a crucial algorithm".

    Here she is in 2017:


  11. #11
    Grand Master Saint-Just's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ashford, Kent
    Posts
    16,880
    Well, everybody in Casablanca has problems. Yours may work out.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    Whilst it’s a great achievement, I was left somewhat disappointed by the whole affair.

    Listening to breakfast news this morning, apparently they used eight telescopes to collect data, collated it and created a virtual photo.

    So what they’re really saying is “here’s a sketch of what we think it looks like!”
    That's basically how a digital camera works. Say the Event Horizon is an 8 pixel sensor, which moves position every minute of every day it ends up being a maybe 64 pixel sensor, or more much much more. Either way like a digital camera sensor it measures light waves, or radio waves in the Event Horizons case and produces a ton of data, which in turn is processed through an algorithm and a visual representation of the data appears. Adding more telescope around the world and linking them to Event horizon would mean adding more pixels to the sensor, ultimately it would give you a higher resolution image.

    So it's more like 'here's an illustration of what it looks like based on the light measured from it', which can be said of any digital image whether it's from a radio telescope or an iPhone.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisparker View Post
    That's basically how a digital camera works. Say the Event Horizon is an 8 pixel sensor, which moves position every minute of every day it ends up being a maybe 64 pixel sensor, or more much much more. Either way like a digital camera sensor it measures light waves, or radio waves in the Event Horizons case and produces a ton of data, which in turn is processed through an algorithm and a visual representation of the data appears. Adding more telescope around the world and linking them to Event horizon would mean adding more pixels to the sensor, ultimately it would give you a higher resolution image.

    So it's more like 'here's an illustration of what it looks like based on the light measured from it', which can be said of any digital image whether it's from a radio telescope or an iPhone.
    I cant visualise how it can be the same.

    My chocolate Lab is sat on the bottom of the sofa and I'm looking at her. The image I capture on my iPhone is exactly the same image my eyes see.
    What they said here was they correlated the data collected from the cameras and created a visualisation of how they think it is. How can that be the same?

  14. #14
    Master Kirk280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    4,131
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    Took this photo of Bigfoot on the way to work this morning, well actually not the real Bigfoot but I reckon this is what he'd look like
    BigfOOK maybe

  15. #15
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    I cant visualise how it can be the same.

    My chocolate Lab is sat on the bottom of the sofa and I'm looking at her. The image I capture on my iPhone is exactly the same image my eyes see.
    What they said here was they correlated the data collected from the cameras and created a visualisation of how they think it is. How can that be the same?
    Radio waves compares to light waves – data “conversion” from one form into the other.
    Given the vast distance involved, any optical telescope (which doesn’t exist) able to let us see it, would be showing us what it looked like millions and millions of years ago, not what it’s like presently.

  16. #16
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Brussel land.
    Posts
    12,109
    Latest copy of the image in focus..........

    Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    I cant visualise how it can be the same.

    My chocolate Lab is sat on the bottom of the sofa and I'm looking at her. The image I capture on my iPhone is exactly the same image my eyes see.
    What they said here was they correlated the data collected from the cameras and created a visualisation of how they think it is. How can that be the same?
    In a physical sense what you're seeing and what your phone screen displays isn't the same at all. Almost every aspect is different to some degree. What you're seeing is a full size 3 dimensional pair of moving images that absorb and reflect light, made up of billions of colours and textures. Your phone screen shows a 2D representation of that image, that's back-lit in millions of colours that's a fraction of the size, based on the digital data your iPhone camera sensor picked up in the split second the shutter opened. Your brain interprets the two as similar.

    You could have a 8 different digital cameras pointed at your Chocolate Lab and none of the images will be exactly the same, as each lens, sensor and processor will interpret that data slightly differently, but it'll still be a picture of a chocolate lab. And that's the same with the Event Horizon, they could have 8 different radio telescopes, in 8 different locations across the planet and the image will be slightly different, yet still reading the same data it would interpret the result and you'd get a slightly different yet very similar image.

  18. #18
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Peterhead
    Posts
    128
    This is fascinating stuff although I do feel a bit down when I'm struggling with an IKEA flat pack and they're out there detecting black holes! Lol.

    Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    Grand Master Dave+63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    10,905
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    I cant visualise how it can be the same.

    My chocolate Lab is sat on the bottom of the sofa and I'm looking at her. The image I capture on my iPhone is exactly the same image my eyes see.
    What they said here was they correlated the data collected from the cameras and created a visualisation of how they think it is. How can that be the same?
    I actually like that analogy. To me it makes a lot of sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by PJ S View Post
    Radio waves compares to light waves – data “conversion” from one form into the other.
    Given the vast distance involved, any optical telescope (which doesn’t exist) able to let us see it, would be showing us what it looked like millions and millions of years ago, not what it’s like presently.
    We’re still seeing it as it was many millions of years ago. Radio waves don’t travel faster than light.

  20. #20
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Where MPs vote against their constituencies wishes
    Posts
    18,440
    Ah, that’s where Brexit alongside the remnants of common sense and national pride have disappeared.

    "These populist, nationalists, stupid nationalists, they are in love with their own countries” - Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the Tariffs Free Economic Zone aka EU

  21. #21
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    5,839
    In a physical sense what you're seeing and what your phone screen displays isn't the same at all.
    But digital cameras are absolute paragons of accuracy compared to how the human vision system works.

    Both are, to start with, sowing together the images produced by a ridiculously large number of light detecting circuits made of meat or silicon following a simple but repeatedly applied strategy which was first described by David Marr as a 'Mexican Hat'.

    I could blather on for a thousand words, as is my habit, but instead I'll describe three experiments you can do at home which most will find a tad surprising.

    First, get two toilet rolls and two small objects of different shapes and colours, say two dinky cars or a polo and a grape. Holding each toilet roll much as you would a pair of binoculars, arrange the two things in front of you so that you can only see one through each roll. Then focus your eyes as you would for a 'magic eye' picture so that you fuse the two images into one. Once you have done that just watch the fused image. Try merely saying words that describe the two objects and watch what happens.

    The phenomena is called 'binocular rivalry' and most people finds the way that their clearly experienced conscious experience changes wildly at the drop of a hat slightly disconcerting.

    Next, get a mirror (or an accomplice) and a pack of playing cards. Shuffle the cards and place them to one side of you. Look directly into the mirror and, through force of will, make sure your eyes stay locked on the eyes in the mirror. if your eyes move at all (they tend to make little jumps called 'saccades') If they do, stop and try again.

    Next, while your eyes are locked in place, pick up a card, hold it at arms length as far to one side of you as you can (but at the same height as your eye) and turn it so that the card is facing your unmoving eye. Keeping the front facing your eyeball, very, very slowly move the card round the arc of your outstretched arm towards the front where your eye will eventually (without moving) be looking directly at it.

    As you very slowly move the card towards this point, describe the card, its colour, number, whether it is royal and so on.

    if you do this properly, you will be surprised to discover that the eye only has an area of vision good enough to make out colour, or any but the vaguest of details, that is about the size of your thumbnail held out in front of you and the rest of your putative visual field is infinitely less detailed than you ever expected it to be.

    Finally, disco light rope, you know the stuff that seems to have light moving through it when it is clearly made of fixed lights. This is the phi phenomena and it is delightfully odd. Unlike the others there's plenty of quality writing on it, so read away.

    The bottom line is that our visual apparatus is a huge pile of bodges from start to finish and pretty well everything everyone thinks about it is wrong. A bit like consciousness in general really.

    So I rather suspect that this cool algorithm that sows disparate information together to find pattern in noise is almost certainly more accurate, veridical and reliable than the ones used by the eye and brain in delivering the user illusion we think we share and are all so fond of.
    Last edited by M4tt; 11th April 2019 at 08:32.

  22. #22
    Master Chinnock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    7,406
    Quote Originally Posted by oldoakknives View Post
    Latest copy of the image in focus..........

    I was hoping it might have been a bit more spectacular, like a Krispy Kreme.

  23. #23
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave+63 View Post
    We’re still seeing it as it was many millions of years ago. Radio waves don’t travel faster than light.
    Indeed, but the time discrepancy mentioned wasn’t meant to be considered exclusive to optical telescopes, just trying to explain the difference of a phone camera image via reflected photon of light and that interpolated from radio waves.

  24. #24
    Journeyman Ozyjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Aust.
    Posts
    180
    Brilliant stuff!

    Black holes and warped space always bring to my mind Homer Simpson...

  25. #25
    Grand Master Glamdring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Doncaster, UK
    Posts
    16,577
    I've rarely read such waffle on TZUK. This is a picture of a black hole taken as accurately as we can from a zillion kilometres away. The largest in the known universe. End of. Unless you guys are claiming these highly qualified and brilliant astrophysicists woke up one day, got out their Etch-a-Sketch and thought they'd lie to us for a laugh.

  26. #26
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,578
    A picture of a black hole is something I never thought I’d see as a Physics student in the ‘80s, so I think it’s brilliant.

    Einstein didn’t dream up black holes entirely on his own.

    Radio waves tell you what an object looks like, but we can’t see them with the naked eye, so they have to be translated back into something we can see, which is visible light. It’s still a picture of a black hole just like an electron microscope picture or a low-light camera image.

    The pictures are sewn together, (or stitched), not sown.

    The ‘back hole for interstella’ sounds like a prop from a porn film.

  27. #27
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Cheshire, UK
    Posts
    4,260
    Quote Originally Posted by alfat33 View Post
    A picture of a black hole is something I never thought I’d see as a Physics student in the ‘80s, so I think it’s brilliant.

    Einstein didn’t dream up black holes entirely on his own.

    Radio waves tell you what an object looks like, but we can’t see them with the naked eye, so they have to be translated back into something we can see, which is visible light. It’s still a picture of a black hole just like an electron microscope picture or a low-light camera image.

    The pictures are sewn together, (or stitched), not sown.

    .
    Only if the randomising algorithms are incorrectly "seeded"

    :-)

    B

  28. #28
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian View Post
    Only if the randomising algorithms are incorrectly "seeded"

    :-)

    B
    True, that can crop up. :)

    I reckon the human visual system is pretty good. Better than a typical digital camera for most human needs e.g. binocular, motion sensing, colour resolution, range of sensitivity to light (optimised to certain wavelengths/colours).

    Not good for looking at a black hole though.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Glamdring View Post
    I've rarely read such waffle on TZUK. This is a picture of a black hole taken as accurately as we can from a zillion kilometres away. The largest in the known universe. End of. Unless you guys are claiming these highly qualified and brilliant astrophysicists woke up one day, got out their Etch-a-Sketch and thought they'd lie to us for a laugh.
    Isn't that essentially what is is then- a visual representation using the data they’ve obtained. How can anyone claim that to be a true photo of a black hole gazillions of miles away. Sorry but it’s total bo**ock*.

  30. #30
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,578
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    Isn't that essentially what is is then- a visual representation using the data they’ve obtained. How can anyone claim that to be a true photo of a black hole gazillions of miles away. Sorry but it’s total bo**ock*.
    You could say the same about this though, which was constructed from sensors picking up electrons bouncing off the subject. No light is involved.

    https://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia...p_1592358i.jpg

    I’d say most of us would call this a picture of a wasp.

  31. #31
    Grand Master PickleB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    M25 J6 UK
    Posts
    13,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky Four Fingers View Post
    Isn't that essentially what is is then- a visual representation using the data they’ve obtained. How can anyone claim that to be a true photo of a black hole gazillions of miles away. Sorry but it’s total bo**ock*.
    Is this a 'true photo':




    ..., please?

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    Is this a 'true photo':



    ..., please?
    No idea- assuming its the photo that was taken at Lacock Abbey?

  33. #33
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    London
    Posts
    250
    BBC4 Program on the complexities on iPlayer

  34. #34
    Grand Master Andyg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    21,457
    It's not a black hole - it's a super massive black hole. Also technically it's not a photo, its actually a rendering of a black hole, from data acquired from 8 different telescopes.

    Also given that light cannot escape a black hole, what we are actually seeing is the super hot materiel on the black hole's event horizon - just before its gobbled up by the hole itself.

    Pretty cool all the same, given its a picture of something which is 50 million light years away and therefore an image of something 50m years old (which might not actually now exist). Looking back into time.

    Fair play to Einstein for guessing right.

    Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
    Friedrich Nietzsche


  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by PickleB View Post
    Is this a 'true photo':




    ..., please?
    Think this is the window, went there today and took a picture of it...... or did I


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •