Anyone else disappointed with the black hole image? wtf was this trash...

>fucking brainlet not understanding the implications of the image are more important than the quality
lmao kys yourself.

Attached: 1428783359208.jpg (515x434, 42K)

its obviously fake and gay

Well, you yourself can go visit out now confirmed black hole in the center of the galaxy. Surely would work out great and you would surely return. But in the end if you return that image would look the same. Literally the definition for black holes is to suck in all light beyond the event horizon and every light outside the event horizon is so full of energy that it would kill you in an instant

Lets see your squad of morons take a photograph of something 55 million light years away.

They used to same photographer that keeps taking pictures of Big Foot. You get what you pay for.

>whole
proves how stupid black hole posters are

give me fucking several billion dollars and I can guarantee better results.

>some science blabber to hide the fact that they cant take a good image
just literally send a camera and bring it back

>every light outside the event horizon is so full of energy that it would kill you in an instant
Except in the movie Interstellar.

beat me to it

ThE iMpLiCaTiOnS

What are the implications? Reaffirming things that have been reaffirmed hundreds of thousands of times over? Fuck off you stupid pseudo-intellectual nigger.

That camera needs to have more velocity than we are currently capable of. We currently can only speed up to 20% of light, that camera would not be able to return

>Except in the movie Interstellar.
Yeah, interstellar is almost on the same level of gravity with their scientific accuracy

Physicist here.
Laws have a range of applicability. Limitations. For example chemistry is basically based on the law of conservation of mass, but on a fundamental level this law is not true. It cant be. The energy binding the molecules together is subtracted from their masses.
Same applies for most laws.
Newton's laws are dogshit when large speeds are considered.
Conservation of energy must be extended to accommodate relativity and so on.
The black hole creates such an extreme curvature of spacetime, that most fundamental laws - those that apply everywhere else - lose their meaning.
If anybody wants to know something from physics - I'll be here for about 20 mins - feel free to ask.

it's all a lie, there is no space as presented in media/by NASA/other space agencies they all in it together
the picture you're looking at is paint level random crap that is mocking you

>What are the implications?
It means a scientific theory finally being proven. Imagine it to god being shown real.
And all its consequences. With black holes existing we have the possibility to harness energy for almost eternity

>Reaffirming things that have been reaffirmed hundreds of thousands of times over
Actually, this is the first time ever that we've been able to confirm that what general relativity predicts about black holes is accurate. All available information about black holes before this point has been conjecture: paper and pen simulations using how we think the universe works.

This is the first confirmation humanity has gotten that we got it right.

we've known black holes existed for ages

it changed nothing

Seeing as how the accretion disk doesn't run 90 degrees perpendicular to the hole it adds fuel to the idea that Black Holes are a 3D object that functions in 2D. It takes up a X,Y,Z coordinate in the universe but the event horizon works on a 2D plane.

They were a theory. Now they are evidence. People keep forgetting that science differenciates between shown right on paper and shown right in real life.

you wouldn't know reality if it hit you in the face

Same as the idea on fission and fusion didn't change anything when being theory or first shown right. Now it is the most common source of energy

>harness energy for almost eternity
wtf thats the dumbest post ive seen today
go with a straw and suck energy from a black hole

youtube.com/watch?v=ulCdoCfw-bY
Ouh, yeah, science is crazy

God damn you're dense.

I liked your input. Thank you for sharing

that's Lindsay Lohan's butthole.

He means the Hawking radiation from the event horizon n00b

I am not disappointed at all. This was the first pic. They now have the groundwork to start taking way better ones. We may actually see something like the expectation pic in the near future.

Attached: 1531502972157.jpg (719x475, 33K)

This is the first photograph ever taken.

Attached: pri_47292953.jpg (1200x630, 191K)

No, he means using frame-dragging in the ergosphere of a Kerr black hole. You can't really harness Hawking radiation.

I heard the sound of super radiant scattering in a game when a game ender was dropped. Anyone can remember?

If a black holes are spheres shouldnt we see full circle of light without black center?

Attached: black hole.jpg (1600x900, 68K)

Yes it is a nice blurry out of focus picture of what they say is a black hole. Could be anything though, the picture is so shitty.

We can learn a lot from it though.

>every light outside the event horizon
you mean every light ever?

youre retarded

The bastard is 5,000 light years away. Imaging it at all is pretty impressive.

But if you think you know of a way to get a sharper image, feel free to share it.

it not even any photo just some graphic made by kids

its*

How can something be a law in the US if it is not also a law in Canada????

>you mean every light ever?
No, because sometimes black holes emit light from its absorbing plasma or electomagnetic waves due to just rotation. It is then simillar to neutron stars, that other thing, that defies school taught physics

>Shows image that looks like it was generated by a 10 year old kid and 1,000 parsecs in MSPaint.

But hey, at least YOU'RE not fake.

Attached: 1555002103412.jpg (478x523, 105K)

blame msm and their shitty zoomed in picture. here is the full picture of a FUCKING BLACK HOLE. all that orange shit? it's stars and matter being eaten by the black hole

Attached: 2008_m87_labeled.jpg (3000x2905, 1.51M)

You can't see a black hole. That is an accretion disk around it, sort of like Saturn's rings but unlike Saturn's rings, you can see both sides of the disk at the same time due to space-time curvature of the black hole

Im gonna steal that

Give them several billion dollars, they can probably refine the image a bit, too.

But I'd be curious as to what you are basing your guarantee on? What techniques would you use to achieve a sharper image?

The orange shit is the galaxy orbiting this black hole

If you could invent a way to accelerate the camera to near light speed, we could send it out (and back, using some sort of gravity whip around the black hole maybe) then in 100,000 years we could get back a picture, using your plan.

how about you read up on how those pictures are taken and why they look the way they do rather than be an embarrassing dumbass?

That actually looks much more beautifull. Would like to see that fucker from up close

Please be a troll, I hate to think anybody in real life is this stupid.

and yet it is all being drawn towards the black hole. slowly but surely it will all be consumed.

the black hole isnt sucking anything, things just get caught in its event horizon and are gone.

Actually, you're underselling the time it would take to get the camera back. It would be around 60 million years, even if we were able to push the camera very close to the speed of light.

Here's the first picture of the far side of the moon, taken by the Soviet Luna 3 probe.

First pics are not usually the best pics.

Your an idiot you know.

Hey retard, the left one is from a fucking movie and isn't real.

please stop arguing semantics. im not explaining gravitational pull and influence on Yea Forums

yeah man this black hole picture really sucks haha
sucks haha get it haha

Attached: 293172.jpg (1029x1131, 112K)

My understanding was that it was 50,000 light years away. A minimum round trip, then, would be on the order of (but greater than) 100,000 years.

Unless my source on the distance is wrong -- it might be, science reporting is usually pretty bad.

That's from interstellar, and the difference is that image is now known to be wrong. It was wrong when the movie was released as well because you'd be able to see the event horizon without matter getting in the way technically from any angle you viewed it and any orientation fo the accretion disk.

Fuckin hell, kids on here are retards.

If you mean that “for ages” is since 2012, before that they were just a theory that may or may not be true

Actually, HERE is the photo.

Attached: 45.jpg (1920x1080, 298K)

it just looks so boring, yeh it's cool but it's super disappointing

How big of a lazer do I need to be able to destroy the entire earth

are you not entertained!?

Attached: 1460792281392.jpg (1280x720, 261K)

Yeah, I'd say we had sufficient evidence of black holes before the image. This does tend to confirm the existence of the big bastards at the center of spiral galaxies, but even there I would say we knew that already.

why is it fucking necessary? How does a visual interpretation of something we already figured out help us with the math? This is a shitty way to sell science to the stupid masses. It's just art.

Attached: NOT ENTERTAINED.jpg (600x600, 161K)

FYI, we already had evidence for their existence. We could observe their effects and the like. This confirmed a lot of other things such as their shape and the like. This is EXTREMELY important, but not in the way you think.

It does not help us with the math, what an odd thing to assume was the purpose.

It does provide "visual" evidence to support a conviction that or math and theories are on the right track.

FYI, that's taken THROUGH the accretion disk. Through the way space warps and time goes wibbly wobbly but light continues to be the same speed regardless of relative frame for the observer, we can see the hole instead of it being covered.

A trip to all stars in our galaxy with nuclear explosion engine takes around takes around 10k years. And with a little bit or rotational energy from the black hole, the 5k years would be faster. Problem is relativity

It's not a lens way, improving on radio waves is currently difficult at this moment.

Attached: soon.jpg (1080x1089, 304K)

>time goes wibbly wobbly

Damn, son, slow down with your scientific jargon there, you're losing your audience!

It shows us whether our maths was correct or not

Glad you haven't seen images from the LHC. There is even less to look at, just a couple of graphs

Actually, it does, the fact we can see the whole of it despite the accretion disk tells us which of the two mathematical models we've been debating between is right.

it wasn't a picture. thanks for playing. try again.

>god is real because the bible says so
show me the proof
>black holes work like this because my paper says so
show me proof
>here you can see a black hole working like my papers tell you in actual real life.

>We could observe their effects and the like.
Not directly, there was still a chance for them being neutron stars, supermassive rotating neutron stars would have had the same effect. The image of the event horizon confirmed them (at least in my book)

There was only a chance if you were completely retarded. We already knew they weren't neutron stars.

We don't know if it is taken through the accretion disk or perpendicular to it. Space-time curvature causes that we see both sides of the disk at once and so it's impossible to tell its orientation. At least until we get better picture where you could actually see what part is the front and what is the back of the accretion disk

Mkay. You see why i ever bother with conversation here? Conflicting statements within minutes.

The data gathered before it was visual interpreted may help us with physics of it. Converting it to something simpletons can understand does not.

>trip to all the stars in our galaxy ... would take 10k years.

Wat? That would give you something on the order of 2 hours to travel between each star.

Or were you trying to say something about the black hole in the center of our own galaxy?
Yeah, that's closer than the one in OP's image, but the black hole we're discussing is not the one in the center of the galaxy.

Is English not your first language?

pretty good image for something billions of light years away

So you are one of those guys that think scientific prediction = scientific theory = scientific evidence

Well, yeah, in that sense. Is does not help in DOING the math, which is what I assumed was talking about.

Sorry, I meant through the galaxy. The problem is slowing down the plane and relativity.

It chaps you that two different posters have different ideas? Really?

But fyi there are paper out there for von neumann and berserker probes and how long they would need to colonize the galaxy or completely whipe it of every livable planet. The 10k years is a prediction of self replicating drones

What is conflicting in those two statements? Both say the same, it won't help you solve the maths, it just shows you whether the maths correctly predicted what is really there

Here's your mug. It may come in handy.

Attached: 81dikwY6bNL._SL1500_.jpg (1500x1500, 193K)

Amongother problems. The fact that there is a lot of crap between here and there that we'd be plowing through at relativistic speeds is also a problem.

Would probably be safer to go up and over the plane of the galaxy, out where the "stuff" is rarer. Or possibly get into a gap between spiral arms and "corkscrew" our way in. Either route would be longer than going straight in, but it might be worth it to decrease the likelihood of ruining your probe through impacting with debris.

>berserker probes
the fuck, scientist really developed plans on killing everything and making the whole galaxy inhospitable. The actuall fuck, is earth not enough to be able to destroy.

Interesting. Not really relevant to the topic under discussion, but still interesting.

The image was made with data gathered by many different satellites, radar's etc a long time ago, the hole is VERY far away and isnt visible, you can only detect it by how it interacts with its surroundings.

i did not expect a good picture, but i have to admit that it still disappointed me a bit.

It was just from those papers I read the number on crossing galaxy with our current tech and I found it interesting.
You are right, would really be. People keep forgetting space is 3d and I actually never thought about it nor read about this idea

I get your point but are you living in the world of Back to the Future? Fission is a secondary source of energy to fossil fuels and renewables and fusion is making energy in the lab only.

>in the world of Back to the Future
fission in wendelstein first produced a net positive result in wendelstein 2 years ago. By now it can be called a possible energy source

I laughed pretty fucking hard

fml fusion

If i wrote a book about a book and used that first book as my source; would that prove the first book was right? The data is what drew that picture. It's just an extension.

An object so heavy, people can almost imagine what it would be to be around your mom.