why can't space bros do anything right?https://www.iflscience.com/cosmic-drama-first-picture-of-our-supermassive-black-hole-is-not-accurate-new-study-claims-76552
>>16456714>nips claiming the picture is wrong because the INTERPRETATION (not a concrete takeaway) they had from their own radio image (made with lesser resources) doesn't line up with EHT results Or maybe Takeshi Miyagi Miyazaki just fucked up in their radio analysis / interpretation of it. Also wtf do they mean by saying that the accretion disc is elongated? The EHT picture doesn't show the entire accession disc anyway.
Funny how everyone on /sci/ save for a tiny minority of gullible low IQ retards knew it was fake the day it was announced
>retard students that are not worth even bachelors in europe, just spews shit in their macbooks, uneducated people thing their image represent realityGee
She got the credit Even he fought million lines of codeBUT HIS CODES SUCKEDWHAT NOw INCELS
I don't think they're saying the deconvolution algorithms were wrong (of which Katie Bouman's was one of four iirc.) They're saying the point spread function was wrong. Garbage in garbage out.
>>16456714Bahahahahahahahaha.I'm always arguing with science bros on here about black holes. It's the dumbest science theory that has no value
Nope. There already already multiple independent reanalyses of the EHT data, all of the others found a result consistent with the published image. The most likely explanation is that Miyoshi fucked up his analysis, some of that is described here in that he forces to algorithm to recover structure on scales which aren't sampled. Does he show his result is repeatable with other codes? No. The EHT team did, with 3 different methods and it has been independently reproduced.https://eventhorizontelescope.org/blog/imaging-reanalyses-eht-data>>16457282And here you are, blindly accepting a single paper because it agrees with your prejudice. It is literal confirmation bias, where you ignore all the other papers and pick the one you like. Don't lecture people about being gullible.
>>16456714Someone post that gif of the dancing orbs and their plasma spasms
>>16457408Sounds like the science is settled and any who are not believers should be punished.
>>16457282professor dave missing on this picture
>>16456730you realize black holes can change their shape over time right?
>>16457282>save for a tiny minority of gullible low IQ retardsThose are the same people who thought the sausage pic was real just because some dude on Twitter said "i'm an astronomer and this is a JWST pic lol"
>>16456714>tweak the algo>it outputs a different PNG/sci/ was right again
>>16457426you can shoop him in or just get AI to do it for you
>>16457423this, but unironically
>>16457365Her changes to the font selections were key
>>16457423this, WE NEED SOME MUSCLE OVER HERE!
>>16456714Space bros give the ick
>>16457408Try learning english esl jeetskin
>>16461773that woman is not very smart, giving away her test key like that.
>>16457282>Colorbarred
>>16459346regardless that the soiyim goyims on this board will still keep on thinking that nasa's psychedelic colorful 'space' blob pics are real even though you can't see anything like them if you look through an actual telescope
probably this happened:>attempt to collect some data of a black hole>try putting it through 15 different math formulas and filters>it spits out something resembling a black hole>wow there it is, it's the black hole, publish it PUBLISH IT!>forget to consider whether what you did even makes sense
>>16463096but you can use existing tools to detect and reconstruct those images. unlike the image of the black hole, which is radio noise filtered into a specific shape
I read this article thinking "man that sucks" then I realized it was like 3 japanese retards saying it and no one else.
>>16457383>I'm always arguing with science bros on here about black holes.>doesn't even read the article to see how it's speculation of a couple nobodies saying it's off a little bitYou're literally retarded.
>>16463839>>16463833>heh nicholas copernicus who? just some polish retard
>>16464465>Jap Assistant Professor going to be huge for thisYou're literally retarded.
>>16459346>hey this thing doesn't work right when I intentionally use it wrong!
>>16457383black holes exist, anon. even if they didn't in nature, they could be artificially created.the wacky theories about white holes, worm holes and such don't exist.
>>16465899>Could be artificially createdK. Go create one then. Until then they don't exist. No one has ever seen a black hole and no one has ever made one.
>>16465964>No one has ever seen a black holeWhat the fuck do you think is in the picture of OP? What about the picture I just posted? It's a black hole leaving a trail of young blue stars behind it as it cruises through space. There are tons of images of gravitational lensing by black holes, x-ray ejections from blackholes, and other radiation created by them. You don't see the actual black hole because you literally can't, since the light is trapped but you can see it's effects around it.
you literally can't take pictures like this from so far away. You'd need a lens the size of the solar system. It's clear the entire thing is not real.
>>16465987>can never actually see the thing, only artifacts from the thingi've heard this one before
>>16466140I don't know if you have been paying attention, but all they do is push their theories right into noise territories and then start divining for confirmation.They are planning to do this with proton decay next.
>>16461709
>hay you stupid goys, I have a picture of a black hole>now gibes me another billions of dollars for muh welfare science funding free moneyI thought black holes were so massive that no light can escape, how can they be claiming to have a picture of something that doesn't emit light? Of course its fake
>>16456714>I_fucking_love_science.comKek'd
BASEDENCE SISTERS. HOW COULD THIS BE HAPPENING TO US????
>>16466140We have photos of exoplanets now. What the fuck are you talking about? And there are other types of radiation other than visible light.>>16466168You should have.
>>16467332>We have photos of exoplanets now.>t. I thought the JWST sausage pic was realyou don't have photos of exoplanets.those are just as fake as the fake black hole picture, you're just too ignorant of science and too gullible to figure out when you're being lied to
>>16465987>What the fuck do you think is in the picture of OP?he still has a point. heavily inferred images are not pictures of the thing. unfortunately there is no clear dividing line between artificial and natural images; I, personally, would not even consider the false-color images of nearby objects like Mars as 'images of the thing'. an image is only something that shows what I would see with my own eyes. false-color and statistically constructed "images" are useful, but in this age of total distrust they should be called something else or at least clearly watermarked with "NOT A REAL IMAGE".
>>16468332>you don't have photos of exoplanets.You'd be wrong then.>>16468365>an image is only something that shows what I would see with my own eyes.That is a shitty definition. Your computer screen is showing you an image of this board, a completely artificial construction. It's still an image though.What you propose would be stupid, as the information in the image file is no different if it was taken with a visible light camera or an x-ray detector. Both are stored as 2D image arrays, and can be shown graphically. They are just as real as each other.The term you are looking for is true color.
>>16456714I was skeptical when both black holes were donuts conveniently facing us.
>>16468365So if we had the right type of sensors in our eyes to see radio waves you would be fine with it? Because it's technically possible to do. Mosquitoes see in infrared, will the images be real to them?
>>16468603Ring Galaxies are incredibly rare, let alone one that is facing us in just the right way to form a perfect circle. Not only does this ring galaxy do that, but inside it's ring is ANOTHER ring galaxy ALSO facing us perfectly to make a perfect circle.What are the odds of that happening?
>>16468697the universe is a big thing innit
>>16468713For you
>>16468399you actually think that pic is real lmao
>>16468788That pic is real, and you're a pigshit moron
>>16468788And how have you scientifically determined it's not real?
>>16468788Prove that it's not.
>>16468788They need to presume it's real in order to justify their comic bookish space travel fantasy lives that were implanted in their brains by watching stupid children's cartoons and being unable to differentiate science fiction entertainment from reality. Anyone who has passed undergrad level optics would know its fake, but that is a tiny minority of people, far less than 1% of the population. Everyone else will just 'trust the science' and presume its real just like they did with the black hole pic and the sausage pic and piltdown man and all of the other many hoaxes and lies that scientists are constantly playing on the seething masses of the uneducated general public
>>16469828>Anyone who has passed undergrad level optics would know its fakeThen demonstrate your claim, lay out your calculations and argument. You're telling people to question the science, while you have said nothing of substance.
The Event Horizon Telescope people posted a rebuttal. However, I only found this German news site covering it.https://www.heise.de/en/news/Allegedly-faulty-image-of-Sagittarius-A-EHT-clearly-rejects-criticism-9998061.html
>>16457426KEK i hate that guy
>>16466550https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disk
>>16466550How do you see the color black?
I just put it through Siril and got totally different results. Its fake
>>16469828>Anyone who has passed undergrad level opticsfucking what?>ts real just like they did with the black hole pic Except it is real. Even the people questioning it are saying that it is at worst slightly elongated on one side. And their entire argument is weak as fuck.You are a literal retard.
>>16471572you have never studied physics and you have no idea what you're talking about
>>16471573The image posted of exoplanets is clearly using a coronagraph. You can literally see the star being blotted out so that the gas giants are visible.You are, again, fucking literally retarded.
>>16471340Post your results. Of course software for amateur astronomy pretty pictures doesn't work for either millimeter wave VLBI or mid-infrared adaptive optics coronograpy.Still waiting for your undergrad optics debunking of this exoplanet image. Surely you don't want people to think you're full of shit.
>>16456714Yeah I kinda figured black holes didn't look like Langoliers
>>16471606>amateur astronomy pretty pictures aren't real or something because reasons and stuff>MUH NASA PRETTY PICTURES ARE TOTALLY REAL!!!!
The retards are looking at this picture and thinking "of course there’s ring are you people blind?" They are not intellectually curious enough to find out HOW these images are generated to begin with. They imagine it’s like taking a photo of the night sky, just boost contrast / saturation with time-lapse photography to get nice colors etc. These electro telescope images aren’t "images" at all, they’re electromagnetic frequency data which are color-coded using advanced models to map frequencies to colors to generate the image. To get the OP’s image a tiny sliver of data was tweezered out of a massive jumble of background signal and the model tweaked until the desired ring was generated. Basically the image creators messed with it until the resulting image showed what they wanted it to show. The problem was that not only was signal-to-noise so low as to be no different from noise ("artifact") but also that the image creators had to break established models for color-mapping. It’s super advanced esoteric radio-imaging shit under discussion but I saw a good video on it here: https://youtu.be/ZlrTe1mi5EQ
>>16472263Where did I say something wasn't real? I said it won't work, because the software is written for a totally different task. If you had the first clue what you talking about you would know that. >>16472333You claim to know what you're talking about but haven't even mentioned the word interferometry. You have no understanding.>The problem was that not only was signal-to-noise so low as to be no different from noise ("artifact") Completely false. Pick related shows the visibility amplitudes of the 2016 EHT results from 2016 as reported by Miyoshi et al., on the left is the signal to noise ratios. You can see that the different baselines have SNRs of up to a few hundred, particularly those that include ALMA. So no, it's not low. Robitaille has no idea what he's talking about, he apparently hasn't even read the paper he's citing. He has never looked at the data, or any astronomical data, he has no idea how VLBI really works. And neither do you.>also that the image creators had to break established models for color-mappingFucking lel. You don't like their colormap, stop the presses. This is proof that you are a pedestrian who has never worked in physics. Next you'll be complaining you don't like their fonts.>Anyone who has passed undergrad level optics would know its fakeStill waiting for your big knowledge to debunk the exoplanet image.
>>16468399>The image of this board is entirely artificialDid you really think that was a good argument?
>>16468814You think other solar systems are orange blobs on a blue background?
>>16473721Real=/= true color. Do you even understand what a colormap is? >>16473720Why don't you try making a counter argument?
>>16473735>Real != true colorLol. Move on kid. Reddit will buy what you are selling.
>>16472332Yep. Basically what they are doing is similar to just taking static noise on a television set, saying they expect to find a cat on this channel, and then picking and throwing out pixels until they make something cat shaped.
>>16473736Lel. You started off claiming it was optically impossible, and now you've rowed back to claiming the colormap is misleading. >>16473741>pixelsYou have no idea what you are talking about.
>>16473916Do you need it explained to you that a modern 10 meter telescope is different to the dinky 18 centimeter vidicon camera on Voyager? And I thought you studied optics?>a billion times further away than pluto Nope.
>>16473916Next you're going to say the hubble deep field is faked as well.
'black holes' are the astrophysics equivalent of intellectual drivel like picrel. the people who say black holes are real are the same nincompoops who peer reviewed the bog brother's phd thesis gibberish and found it fascinating, believable and meritorious
I am very pleased to learn that the consensus /sci/ position is that black holes do not exist. As ever, this place has its head on straight.
>>16475738They do absolutely exist. But not yet.
>>16475738We have a loud faction that is highly skeptical of any space shit that's more complicated than a planet or star. Or even stars for a while. But the Katie Bouman fracas made them latch onto black holes super hard.
>>16476627skepticism is the basis of the scientific method, if skepticism rustles your jimmies then you don't belong on this board
>>16461773>Space? I think it's a waste of money babe, we should be like feeding the homeless and shit here first>*unzips dick
>>16478154It's very repetitive skepticism. Much like a permanent protest mob chanting the same slogans. If your endgoal is to make the board less entertaining, congrats.
I think people would be SHOCKED to learn just how few actual “scientists” there are. I mean people who understand their fields from the basic theories on up to the theoretical level. The ACTUAL reason why skepticism is met with dismissal / hate instead of a response is because most people who claim to be scientists are no such thing. They have a certain baseline of knowledge but not a fundamental understanding. For example…Skeptic claim “x”Scientist: x has been proven wrong by experiment y where researchers tested it using the following formulation…and it also violates Whoever’s Law which was proven by z experiment in….Scienceologist: you’re a science-denying crankNotice that with an actual scientist and actual exploration of the issue is possible even if he is completely confident in his belief, and, in extension, is open to having his belief altered in light of new information. The Scientologist is more like a priest repeating canon law and is uninterested in debating it; to him, questioning the dogma is a moral failure.
>>16478381There were multiple attempts to explore this topic in this thread that met with no engagement. And I know they were not from you. Do you work for Reddit or something? Always trying to get people to go there.
>>16478381Look at this shit https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42158130It's just one guy against 500 they don't do any critical thinking Just blindly parrot MOND is false because the universe is relativistic
>>16468697I don't really reply or make threads anymore but Images like these have helped me out with some of the worst points of my life and even get comfortable with the inevitability of my own death. In the end we are products of this reality, I could ramble on about what makes this universe special like how matter won against anti-matter or all the unique properties that keep the universe stable enough to support us and what exactly it took for you to exist but don't forget how insignificant you and I are. Remember to be humble, It is a privilege to be alive, an unbelievable amount take existence for granted, most live day to day just completely unaware of how much they owe to just being alive. if you are feeling hurt about a girl leaving you or someone dying or maybe something made you trip in life like someone abusing you, remember that you are alive, born healthy and were born in the greatest century so far to be alive. Life is fleeting and there is a very good chance consciousness is a temporary state. Whether there is an afterlife or not both are equally terrifying. If you are ever in a rough spot remember to be kind to yourself and to others, most people will not return it but so be it. Expecting a reward through kindness defeats the purpose of kindness. remember that you are a gift not only to yourself but to others.
>>16478765>Remember to be humble, It is a privilege to be alive, an unbelievable amount take existence for granted, most live day to day just completely unaware of how much they owe to just being aliveMoralistic blather.
>>16478659>Just blindly parrot MOND is false because the universe is relativisticlow IQ people will always outnumber high IQ people
>>16478931don't read any posts by anyone who posts anime, you'll save yourself a lot of wasted time.
>>16456714astronomy is a low IQ topic so it attracts low IQ people. thats why its so popular with women
>>16479520thats what i used to not understand about the people who screech "REEEE STOP BEING DUMB!!!" on this board all the time. most people are dumb and you can't screech at them to stop being that any more than tall people can screech at manlets to stop being short. eventually i realized that the "REEEE STOP BEING DUMB!!!" screechers must themselves be very dumb
>>16457282Oh geez, now I'm starting to have doubts about that room temperature superconductor
