Sagittarius A* - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 07:51:13 pm
content: This is not totally off-topic, since there is some interesting microwave stuff in the paper, especially in section 3.I post this link, to a very well-written paper (without YouTube handwaving or animations) about the recent announcement of imaging a super-massive black hole that appears to be the center of our galaxy.https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6674#artAbstThose only interested in the history should peruse the nice introduction section that discusses theoretical and experimental discoveries along the way.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 08:04:48 pm
content: Veritasium posted video few hours ago:https://youtu.be/Q1bSDnuIPbo

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 08:43:08 pm
content: It's a huge collaborative project, with a list of participants and funding acknowledgements to match.Note that Xilenx got a specific acknowledgement for donating FPGAs.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 09:45:49 pm
content: I suspect that the image is more a circular argument (ie based on dogma) rather than a true image.If it is a true-ish image, then i suspect that that kind of image can be made by a black-ish hole rather than the silly Einsteinian mafia singularity.Me myself i dont believe in singularity blackholes.My version of aether theory says that blackholes are impossible, but that black-ish say brown holes exist.My brown hole (not meant to be funny) might show as an image with a black center koz the central part would be very dim rather than black.And of course in creating their blackhole image they would always make the center black, even if it aint, koz we all know that it must be so.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:01:19 pm
content: I subscribe to the Sky Scholar youtube. Pierre Marie Robitaille is my hero. So is Stephen Crothers.Here are some of their youtubes.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:10:03 pm
content: I did not think you would see anything in which you don't believe.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:14:40 pm
content: In any case, thanks for not posting a link to a YT video. Ain't nobody got time to watch YT all day!

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:23:02 pm
content: The paper was peer-reviewed.If anyone have just cause or impediment to this paper, let him cite on which page the error lies.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:42:40 pm
content: The image is the work of many instruments scattered around the globe and the way in which they are combined is amazing. The amount of data and the amount of data processing is at another level.Why am I not surprised aetherist is a "Sky Scholar" fanboy.Brian

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:53:14 pm
content: https://www.space.com/webb-flaring-milky-way-black-holeJamesWebb probly wont be able to make a good image. But at least its image will be a true image, not a math rorscharch wankfest.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_testre-creation.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 10:57:56 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 12, 2022, 10:53:14 pmHave you ever worked in or used modern imaging methods, such as x-ray computed axial tomography or magnetic resonance imaging?All that work, all those personnel, all that money, and no one in a position to know blew the whistle on a fraudulent icky result, despite the risk of personal insults.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2022, 11:31:14 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 12, 2022, 10:57:56 pmWatch the Robitaille youtubes, he is an expert on imaging.

author: dietert1
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 12:38:51 am
content: Maybe somebody should explain how astronomers identified this object as the center of our galaxy. I just saw a zoom video that starts with a view of the milky way and ends up with that image of the black hole (similar to ESO/​Gravity Consortium/​L. Calçada/​N. Risingerhttps://www.eso.org/public/videos/eso1835c/). Amazing!Regards, Dieter

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 02:15:32 am
content: The paper discusses the options between this object and M87* (an even more massive black hole) in detail.

author: eugene
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 03:37:03 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 12, 2022, 10:53:14 pmYou can define "true image" any way that pleases you. Just be aware that other people might disagree. Do that often enough and others will stop paying attention to you.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 04:18:03 pm
content: I posted this article reference as a good example of a serious paper describing an interesting result from a huge experimental effort.I appreciate that IOP has put the Astrophysical Journal into the open (no paywall), so these papers are readily accessible.This is an astrophysical paper: it contains physics (specifically, results of General Relativity) and astronomy (specific description of an astronomical object).Unfortunately for me, the results are quoted in terms of astronomical measurement units (not SI), so I need to look into them before I can better understand the results.I remember a lecture (ca. 1976) by Edward Purcell, after he started work on interstellar dust: he said that his first task was to calculate the conversion factor between magnitudes/parsec and dB/light-year.If you look at the full list of acknowledgements, you will see a very large worldwide group of institutions and funding sources, including countries such as China and Taiwan that differ politically.Section 1 has a good background for the theoretical and experimental results that preceded the group effort (six locations from the South Pole to Spain and Arizona at the north, total of eight machines).Section 2.1 discusses the properties of "Sgr A*" itself.Section 3 discusses the observation systems, basically long-baseline interferometry at two bands around 227 and 229 GHz, and the data processing.Essentially, a metric shitload (modern technical term) of data was loaded onto hard drives, which were then transported to a central location for image reconstruction.Modern imaging systems, such as CT and MRI, also "reconstruct" the image from multiple measurements (e.g., "projections" for CT), and this is another mature field of mathematical physics or engineering.In Section 7, the implications of these results for General Relativity and related theories are discussed.Note that the "Kerr metric" is the GR description for a black hole with angular momentum, which has interesting differences from the "Schwarzschild metric" fir a non-rotating object.Simply put, a rotating black hole has two event horizons.An earlier paper, cited in this one, describes the equipment in detail, in conjunction with the earlier measurements on M87*.https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c96/pdf

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 04:21:12 pm
content: "not a math rorscharch wankfest" is a puerile insult, not lessened by your idiosyncratic spelling of "Rorschach".

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 04:55:01 pm
content: Please everybody don't feed the trolls, there is a forum feature in each one's own profile, to avoid anoyances:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/profile/?area=lists;sa=ignore

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 08:46:10 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 12, 2022, 10:23:02 pmHere are the lies in the earlier BH image.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 09:11:35 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 13, 2022, 04:21:12 pmRorscharch is where the subject is shown an inkblot & her brain converts the blot into an image.The amazing image(s) of the blackhole(s) were created from blots that were no larger than say 5 pixels.A homicidal rapist paedophile might create an image from 5 pixels, & a Nobel Prize winning Einsteinian might too.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 09:20:40 pm
content: No, that is "Rorschach". I also know what "wank" means.I'm not surprised to see a forged image on YouTube.See section 5 of the paper I cited which discusses the reconstructed images.By the way, you seem to agree with Einstein, who in 1939 also found black hole solutions to his GR equations disturbing, dare I say "icky"?https://www.jstor.org/stable/1968902?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 09:24:45 pm
content: Quote from: eugene on May 13, 2022, 03:37:03 pmCosmologists & JamesWebb & Co use artificial colour etc, that’s ok.Creating a 100,000 pixel image from say 5 pixel info is i think a long ways away from being a true image, but others might disagree.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 09:28:55 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 13, 2022, 09:24:45 pmRead section 3 to see how the authors crunched the data. There is a lot of discussion of statistical methods to generate a best estimate, using different approaches to compare results. This is not hand-waving. Have you ever done maximum-likelihood data processing? Are you familiar with the concepts of resolution and pixel? A pixel is the quantization of the display, and very often is finer than the actual resolution. In general, it wastes whatever resolution you have to display it with coarser pixels. I often digitize my (non-periodic) 4x5 inch film images at 2400 dots/inch, to not lose resolution in that process, which takes forever.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 09:57:01 pm
content: Every consumer digital camera in use today makes use of math to reconstruct the image. When taking still images the data is expressed in a Bayer pattern and demosaicing, a mathematical process, must be done to reconstruct the image. An even more complex process is involved with video as the enormous data rate is way too high for consumer cameras to handle uncompressed. Math is required for everyday images and video and anyone that uses digital cameras knows that the end result is an accurate representation of what the photographer was shooting, given limitations of exposure and technique.A more direct comparison to the methods used to capture the BH image is the interferometric approach needed to combine the images captured by telescope using multiple imagers or when multiple telescopes are combined. The VLT is a four telescope installation that can use each telescope independently or they can be combined using interferometry.The techniques used to capture an image of Sag A* is simply an extension of techniques already in use everyday. I'm disturbed that we have a member that has his head up his, well, black hole, and fawns over a YT charlatan!Brian

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:01:08 pm
content: Yes, long before current interferometry with Earth-dimension long baselines, "regular" interferometers were used (in 1920) to measure the disc diameter of distant stars, which could not be resolved directly with telescope optics.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson_stellar_interferometer

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:06:11 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 13, 2022, 09:20:40 pmI don’t understand Einstein's paper. And i don’t understand section 5 of that M87 image paper.What i do understand is that my aether theory says that blackholes are impossible.Its like this. An object cannot achieve a speed of c/1 through the aether.Hence, aether cannot achieve a speed of c/1 when the aether flows into an object (eg the surface of a star)(or supermassive body).If light propagates at c/1 through the aether, & if the aether flows into a body at less than c/1, then light can escape, albeit slowly.https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c96/pdfhttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-reluctant-father-of-black-holes-2007-04/http://old.phys.huji.ac.il/~barak_kol/Courses/Black-holes/reading-papers/Einstein1939.pdfhttp://www.ptep-online.com/2011/PP-24-15.PDFFive Fallacies Used to Link Black Holes to Einstein’s Relativistic Space-TimeDouglas L. WellerE-mail: physics@dougweller.comFor a particle falling radially toward a compact mass, the Schwarzschild metric mapslocal time to coordinate time based on radial locations reached by the particle. Themapping shows the particle will not cross a critical radius regardless of the coordinateused to measure time. Herein are discussed five fallacies that have been used to make itappear the particle can cross the critical radius.

author: thinkfat
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:08:42 pm
content: There's a nice Veritasium video about the image and how the data to create it was generated. Might be easier to swallow than the actual physics paper.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:10:34 pm
content: To Aetherist: Your theory states that black holes are impossible.A very large-scale experiment shows that Sag A* has all the features expected of a "supermassive" black hole.Perhaps your aetherial theory does not agree with experiment in gravitational systems.(I was referring to sections 3 and 5 of the Sag A* paper, but there is similar material in the earlier M87* paper.)

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:24:00 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 13, 2022, 10:10:34 pmI am ok with supermassive bodies.These do not have to be very massive to semi-trap light.I agree with Einstein that light slows near mass. Hence the escape velocity of a body duznt need to be c/1 if light is to be trapped, the escape velocity needs to be c'/1, where c' is slower than c. Hence as i said bodies do not have to be very massive to semi-trap light.Previously i said that the aether inflow to a body can't attain c/1, i should have said c'/1.Hence even tho the speed of light is slowed near the body, the speed of aether inflow is also slowed, hence i can still say that a blackhole is impossible.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:28:27 pm
content: Or, as Galileo might have said, "yet, they exist".(Yes, I know that the original quotation is apocryphal.)Of course, this is how theories are tested in real physics.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 10:37:23 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 13, 2022, 10:28:27 pmJohn Michell predicted large dark stars (& possibly large dark bodies) in 1783. Pierre-Simon Laplace predicted large invisible stars (& large invisible bodies)in 1793. Both used Newtonian gravity to calculate the escape velocity, which needs to be greater than the speed of light. They used simple ballistics, they didnt need relativity nor any singularity nor super-dense matter.https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/9892/https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/9892/1/Microsoft_Word_-_Paper__Black_Hole_Concept_Final_.pdfMichell said that the Sun would be a dark star if 497 times larger (ie 122,763,473 solar masses).Using modern numbers this 497 becomes 485.3.And we would have a dark star if the same size as Earth & 2156 solar masses.This 2156 reduces to 1079 solar masses if we use Einstein's idea that light slows near mass (c reduces to c').Here we insert the escape velocity into the equation for gamma to get the kmps of the slowed light near such a Michellian dark star.This 1079 reduces to 780 solar masses if we assume that the dark star has an atmosphere with n=1.33 (ie like water), ie slowing the escaping light in that proportion (c' reduces to c").Michellian Dark Stars surely exist, & they are a kind of blackhole.I wonder whether the events horizon team can tell the difference tween their singularity kind of impossible blackhole & a Michellian Dark Star (& Laplacian invisible bodies)?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 13, 2022, 11:56:38 pm
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on May 12, 2022, 10:42:40 pmYesirreee – at another level.Look at 7:00 on the youtube.Their blackhole image is 7416 by 4320 pixels, ie 31,037,120 pixels.Which is 0.2 micro arcsec per pixel. [according to Robitaille].They have used data processing to improve their telescope resolutions by a factor of 1250 or more. [according to Robitaille]That means that their telescopes would provide 20.5 pixels each which is processed to give over 31 million pixels. [according to me]If this technique were used for hospital MRIs then the MRIs would be able to see down to less than a single human cell. [according to me]Sky Scholar 38K subscribers Comments 814The Black Hole Image - Data Fabrication Masterclass! 25,405 views Jan 7, 2020 The Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results.Link to Professor Robitaille’s papers on Vixra:http://vixra.org/author/pierre-marie_...

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 12:09:33 am
content: Quote from: eugene on May 12, 2022, 10:14:40 pmHere are some more links to Pierre Marie Robitaille youtubes.Sky Scholar: Lectures, Interviews, and Podcasts by Pierre-marie Robitaille

author: dietert1
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 12:19:22 am
content: The massive object has an event horizon. The physics inside the event horizon is unknown and it will remain unknown. Everybody can use their own fantasy. For a scientist a singularity is enough of a model.Of course the new images don't show the black hole but its cosmic ambient outside of its event horizon. As far as i understand gravitational red shift makes hard x-ray radiation observable as mm waves here on earth.Regards, Dieter

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 12:23:49 am
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 13, 2022, 11:56:38 pmMRI's have gotten a lot better over time. Today, they can resolve objects that are 100 um across.(https://kottke.org/19/07/the-highest-resolution-mri-scan-of-a-human-brain#:~:text=A%20team%20of%20researchers%20at,small%20as%200.1%20millimeters%20across.)RBC's are about 8 um. WBC's are larger. Megakaryocytes and many tissue cells approach that size.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 01:16:52 am
content: Aetherist: I think you still don’t understand the difference between pixels and resolution.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 01:48:57 am
content: Quote from: jpanhalt on May 14, 2022, 12:23:49 amRobitaille was the pioneer.http://www.ptep-online.com/2011/PP-26-L1.PDF

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 01:51:43 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 14, 2022, 01:16:52 amI suppose that pixels cant remedy a lack of resolution, but pixels can make resolution look worse.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 01:57:06 am
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 14, 2022, 01:51:43 amWhen I had to demonstrate the spatial resolution of my company’s imaging systems to our customers, I always displayed finer pixel spacing then the physical resolution. Otherwise, you couldn’t see it. This is elementary.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 03:09:32 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 14, 2022, 01:57:06 amYes, naturally.But, u didn’t fake the image & its resolution.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 03:16:23 am
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 14, 2022, 03:09:32 amOf course not. Nor did they. The relatively low resolution in the 2D images is obvious. If you look at the paper, there are more quantitative displays of the reconstructed data. Please be more careful about accusing scientists of fraud.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 04:46:51 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 14, 2022, 03:16:23 amAccording to Pierre Marie Robitaille they claim that a team of dishes can see 1250 times as well as an individual dish, hence an 80 mm doughnut on the moon would have the same resolution as a 100 m doughnut.Here i was making a comparison in the context of their cosmic measurement – taking an individual dish microwave image of a doughnut on the speedy moon & taking a team image would i suppose present additional difficulties.Another way of looking at it, 0.2 micro-arcsec at 384,400,000,000 mm (the ave dist to the moon) is 0.373 mm.80 mm (the size of the doughnut) divided by 0.373 mm is 214.214 times 214 is 46,000 pixels of resolution.32,000,000 pixels (the pixels in their blackhole image) divided by 46,000 is 700.Hence the resolution of their blackhole image is 700 times the resolution of their array.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 10:08:45 am
content: QuoteI think you are conflating capture resolution with display resolution.QuoteMaybe you should treat what he says more critically.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 02:38:52 pm
content: "A gentle introduction to interferometry", in cartoons:https://www.eso.org/sci/meetings/2015/eris2015/L1_Jackson_Interferometry.pdf

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 03:35:55 pm
content: Um, isn't c/1 ... c?

author: dietert1
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 04:43:54 pm
content: They explain in all detail how they arrived at three plausible images and they chose the threefold one as an interpretation of the measurements. There is no error that anyone here could possibly discover.One question that occured to me: If the accretion disk is visible as a ring from earth, it seems to be near orthogonal to the plane of our galaxis. Strange, maybe i have to read the paper.Regards, Dieter

author: jpanhalt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 05:23:48 pm
content: Unless it's spherical and one is simply seeing a cross section.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 05:37:26 pm
content: Veritasium may address that here:https://youtu.be/Q1bSDnuIPbo?t=989

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 05:37:36 pm
content: QuoteThe initial video fromVeritasiumexplains that the accretion disk would appear to be orthogonal regardless of it's actual attitude (jump to around 19:45).

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 05:41:30 pm
content: Here is a muckraking discussion of Dr Robitaille's "pseudoscientific" ideas apart from his training as a radiologist and inventor in the development of MRI, especially ultra-high magnetic field systems:https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pierre-Marie_RobitailleI post this only to allow others to decide about his reliability on black-hole imaging.Note that Dr Robitaille's discussion of "Kirchhoff's Law" is not about the "KVL" in circuit theory, but a totally different law about black-body radiation (not to be confused with black-hole radiation).

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 06:34:12 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 14, 2022, 05:37:36 pmMy understanding is that the reconstruction from interferometric data, being two dimensional with multiple baselines, produces a map in a plane orthogonal to the vector from the terrestial locations of the observatories to the object being imaged, which vector would be in (very close to) the galactic plane for an object near the center of the galaxy.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 09:18:15 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 14, 2022, 10:08:45 amYes capture resolution is 1/700 times the display resolution.Have u seen/heard what Robitaille says?His ground breaking MRI development probly was not based on array interference, but his analysis of the horizon array interference method looks good to me (if i could understand it).

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 09:34:51 pm
content: QuotePrecis the relevant part. I'm not going to sit through 3 hours of random videos trying to figure out which bit you think will make your point. If you understand it you can say it yourself.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 09:39:28 pm
content: Quote from: dietert1 on May 14, 2022, 12:19:22 amI am thinking that xrays created near a blackhole would be created by atomic processes that are slower due to slower ticking of atomic processes due to the slowing of light & em radiation near a blackhole.If so then the supposed xrays created near a blackhole would have a slower frequency (instead of having an xray frequency), ie they would have the same frequency as say ultraviolet radiation (depending on how far they were created from the blackhole).Then when the ultraviolet frequency radiation reaches Earth it would be still have an ultraviolet frequency.But u might be correct, it might have been a microwave all along (if it was created very close to the blackhole).Anyhow i would not call that a redshift.And of course i don’t believe in blackholes, but i do believe in supermassive bodies (brown holes).

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 09:58:38 pm
content: An interesting thing in the real physics of black holes in General Relativity is the case where the body is axially-symmetric (around a rotation axis) with angular momentum. This is the "Kerr metric".(The earlier Schwarzschild metric is for a spherically-symmetric case, where the body is not rotating.) The math is very complicated, and I won't quote any of it here, but it is covered in the real textbooks, and even in Wikipedia.It was published in 1963, followed by the "Kerr-Newman" metric for a rotating charged object.A collapsed object that obeys this metric, as Sag A* is described to be, hastwoevent horizons, instead of the single one in the Schwarzschild metric.It leads to the "Penrose process" (q.v.), which can lead to loss of energy from the hole due to weird stuff happening between the two horizons.This stuff was still new (1971) when I started grad school, and there was much discussion about the implications (which interested me, but I studied other stuff), since Chicago had a strong Astrophysics department.Perhaps the best summary is in Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (1999)Mathematical Theory of Black HolesOxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-850370-9.The late Prof. Chandrasekhar, whose name lives on in the modern x-ray observatory satellite, was the wisest man I ever had the fortune to meet (although I doubt he remembered me).

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 10:13:34 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 14, 2022, 09:34:51 pmThis Robitaille youtube might be the best of his i think 4. It is only 10 minutes 27 seconds long. I mention it in my reply#31. The bits at 7:00 & at 7:59 are gooder.Sky Scholar 38K subscribers Comments 814 length is 10:27.The Black Hole Image - Data Fabrication Masterclass! 25,405 views Jan 7, 2020 The Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration, First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results.Link to Professor Robitaille’s papers on Vixra: Pierre Marie Robitaille's….https://vixra.org/author/pierre-marie_robitailleIn my reply#4 i mention another of his anti-blackhole youtubes which is 13:28 long.Plus in #4 i mention some of his other youtubes that relate to blackholes – the durations are 11:49 & 6:41 & 14:42 & 7:59.Plus in #4 i mention 2 youtubes by Stephen Crothers that relate to the silliness of Einsteinian blackholes – 6:42 & 5:24 duration.These 8 youtubes add to 78 minutes.A list of some of Pierre Marie Robitaille's papers. But none appear to specifically target blackholes.https://vixra.org/author/pierre-marie_robitaille

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 11:28:01 pm
content: QuoteI don't care if they are 10 minutes. That's still 9:30 longer than it takes to read.QuoteThank you.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 11:49:00 pm
content: QuoteI am not sure how they work this stuff out, but I note that the data was acquired over 5 nights, and presumably the final is a composite of 5 sets of data. There will be subtle differences between each set and that could be used to enhance the resolution. Think of using a single sensor to scan along a line - the result is not one pixel wide. Although the result might have distinct steps (which would be your resolution), if you repeat the scan the steps would be in a slightly different place. Put them together and you have a higher resolution scan.Further, my understanding is that each data point is not like a screen pixel, either on or off. As the sensor tracks across the target the signal will increase in magnitude and then fall off again as the signal received at each array machine goes in and out of phase with the other. So the pixels yon Pierre shows are probably incorrect as I think the real thing would not have sharp edges. Perhaps he was just demonstrating a grid, but then why fill them in?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:06:00 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 14, 2022, 11:49:00 pmI am really impressed & pleased at modern technology. But at the limit i think that we naturally tend to push & fudge & cherrypick a little.It reminds me of the beautiful LIGO ring down signal version of the quadrupolar gravitational waves emitted by 2 colliding blackholes, which as admitted later was merely an artist's masterpiece made for public consumption by their public relations team.Meanwhile back at the ranch we need to ask how we could say see say a doughnut on the moon, if Earth's atmosphere causes so much twinkling, while at the same time there is say a bit of say haze & fog.Robitaille says that the horizon team claim (explicitly or praps implicitly) a resolution 1250 times better than the resolution of a single dish (or praps he meant the resolution at a small array, if a small array) based on the problem of diffraction at a dish.Just realized. I think that the horizon team invoke planar waves.Why should the light etc from the BH be in the form of planar waves?Why & how did the photons gladly form formations of waves?I know that photons are sticky, & readily form waves (eg lasers), if given a good chance. So, duz propagating for thousands of years give photons enuff time to form formations?Can photons form formations at 2 certain frequencies, while these photons are in the middle of lots of other photons having lots of other frequencies.Do photons having the same frequency find each other, & then form formations (planar waves)?And then retain these formations whilst surrounded by formations having other frequencies.And then retain these formations whilst some parts of that wavefront is slowed by going throo or near to mass (eg stars, dust, air).Nah, it smells fishy.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:50:33 am
content: Do you know the meaning of "plane wave" in classical electrodynamics and electromagnetic waves?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 04:08:17 am
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 15, 2022, 02:50:33 am1. Yes, a (cosmic) plane wave is an impossibility, as i explained above in my previous reply.2. And a (cosmic) non-plane wave is an impossibility.3. And a (cosmic) wave is an impossibility.4. However, i am ok with there being a cosmic forced radio wave of sorts, with a forced wave shape, & a forced wavefront of sorts.5. But the wave in 4 can't be planar, no such thing, natural or forced.6. But, there can be versions that are nearly planar etc.7. 1 & 2 & 3 are supposed to be a natural wave, ie waves of the standard rolling E to H to E etc supposed em radiation or somesuch associated with supposed photons. Nope, impossible.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_wave#:~:text=In%20physics%2C%20a%20plane%20wave,a%20fixed%20direction%20in%20space.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 09:40:08 am
content: QuoteWell, let's not try and conflate things too much. First, when the talk is about seeing a doughnut on the moon, that isn't saying wecando that (successfully, anyway). It was said as being the equivalent of what they're doing with the black hole. That is, the angular resolution is equivalent. Doesn't matter if there was a brick wall in the way, the equivalence would be the same.Next, you showed a photo of a doughnut and simulated what it might look like (I think - couldn't quite work out what that was about). When they say you could see a doughnut on the moon I take that NOT to mean you can see the sprinkles and all that stuff. I would seriously expect that they mean it would resolve to a single pixel. If you could see detail like pixels they'd say, instead, you could see a rice grain on the moon. See?Moving on, with optical telescopes the distortion caused by the atmosphere is countered somewhat by using lasers to probe the local distortions and then compensate the capture appropriately. Don't know if the same thing, or similar, can be used for interferometry, but I reckon they would have taken that into account in some way. [Edit: something nags me that this technique isn't used to combat twinkling but something else. Naturally, IANAA.]As to the image we are shown, I would assume that the bright spots we see are probably discrete pixels, and the whole is smoothed for public consumption. Imagine a 3x3 grid where our doughnut lights up the 2,4,6,8 pixels. On the nightly news that's going to look a bit shit, but feed it through a filter and there is your round hole, etc. No idea if that's what's done, but it is hardly cheating if they did.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 10:19:06 am
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 15, 2022, 09:40:08 amYes i think i am ok with all of that.Yes the references to a doughnut on the moon is always simply to give an idea of a comparison of the angles of the dangles.A doughnut would show that the usofa had been on the moon. A rice grain would show that the Chinese had been there.My fuzzy pix of doughnuts were a failure. I wanted to show various levels of pixilation, but i don’t know of a program that duz that, so, i tried levels of fuzziness, but i couldn’t even do that properly.I suppose that if one had 100 pix, each with say only 9 large pixels, then praps they could be combined to give a pseudo pix with 900 faux small pixels, & then a NASA computer could create some pseudo edges & pseudo outlines that might or might not be quasi accurate.But my main problem with interferometry is that they assume a perfectly plane wavefront.I have already said that there is no such thing as a wave, photons can't make such a wave (excluding small local manmade effects), ie 2 separate sets of waves, ie at 2 distinct frequencies, ie in the middle of an infinite number of sets of waves at every frequency.I have not already said that a perfect planar wavefront is impossible, ie even before it gets near Earth, & even before it enters the atmosphere.It appears to me that the horizon team require a perfect planar wavefront, to within one wavelength, or to within a small part of one wavelength, praps 0.001 wavelength.And this perfection has to happen at the detector.No, it has to happen at the counter-recorder, ie where the detector signal is finally recorded.Now, here we have a problem. The signal has to go from the detector to the counter-recorder. Via wires probly.Are the wires insulated? What length of wire is needed? What effect duz temperature (of the Cu)(& of the insulation) have on the speed of electricity on the wire?What is the Velocity Factor for electric energy on the wire (which is an antenna) for each of the 2 GHz? Bearing in mind that the VF varies with GHz.How many individual waves are gained or lost along the wire due to temp etc at different times on different days?Is the electric energy on the wires in the Poynting Vector? Or is it in the electons?Have the horizon team watched the Veritasium youtubes? Have the horizon team been following the EEVblog forum?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 01:42:20 pm
content: QuoteIsn't that why you calibrate stuff? So you can determine that kind of offset and allow for it?

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:14:23 pm
content: Another lecture from a meeting in 2015:https://www.eso.org/sci/meetings/2015/eris2015/L6_Heald_calibration.pdfThose seriously concerned with this interesting engineering problem should consult the references contained therein.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:25:49 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 15, 2022, 01:42:20 pmYes i suppose that u can calibrate for lots of factors.But consider a large array of dishes. If each dish is identical to the others, & if each one has its own counter-recorder then u don’t have to worry about the length of wires (eg wires going to a central control room with the counter-recorder). But u still have the problem of the temp being different in different dishes. And, u also have the problem of having to synchronise the clock in each dish.Or, if all of the dishes in the array are wired to a central counter-recorder (with a central clock) then u don’t have to worry about synchronising lots of clocks, but u do have to worry about different lengths of very long wires (which can be calibrated ok), but that calibration will not be able to handle any temp differences of the wires (temp affects the speed of electricity on the wires).So, even if waves & wavefronts existed (which they don’t), & even of plane wavefronts existed (which they don’t), & even if the nearness of the mass of the Earth did not affect the plane of the wavefront (which it duz), & even if the atmosphere did not affect the plane wavefront (which it duz), then the problem of the varying speed of the signal along wires to the counter-recorder (due to temp diff) would be an impossible problem.Bearing in mind that they are looking at 1.3 mm long waves (i think), hence a difference of 1.3 mm in the speed of electricity in the wire (due to a diff of temp) would represent a full wavelength, & i am guessing that their image (for that array) is messed up if the diff is merely a very small fraction of 1.3 mm.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:55:15 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 15, 2022, 02:14:23 pmIn my previous reply i mentioned the problem of the speed of electricity on a wire due to temperature.In other threads on this forum i have advised that the speed of electricity along a wire will be affected by the aetherwind, which blows south to north through Earth at 500 km/s (which is c/600).The horizontal component of the aetherwind at some locations on Earth can vary from say 140 km/s to 480 km/s during a sidereal day. That’s a difference of 340 km/s (ie c/882). Depending on the alignment of any wiring on a dish that 340 km/s might be a headwind or a tailwind or a crosswind (for the electricity), all of which affect the speed of electricity along the wire.If the length of wire is 1 m then a diff of c/882 will show as in effect a diff of 1/882 in the length of the wire during the course of a day (here i mean that the wire might seem longer or shorter based on the time for electricity to propagate along the wire), & this 1/882 is 1.13 mm, which is almost one full wavelength (1.3 mm).Do the horizon team calibrate for the aetherwind? Nope.However, the aetherwind would not be a big factor if each dish in an array had its own clock-counter-recorder, koz they would all be affected in equal measure.But if there were long wires connecting to a central clock-counter-recorder then the aetherwind would be fatal.More potential problems re the changing aetherwind during each 24 hrs, & during each orbit of the Moon, & during each orbit of the Sun.The lengths of wires contract or dilate, which will change the time taken for electricity to propagate along a wire.And dishes change shape.And atomic clocks change their rate.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 02:55:57 pm
content: QuoteI encourage you to check out the document Tim linked to.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 03:09:25 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 15, 2022, 02:55:57 pmI didnt see any calibration for aetherwind. At least not by name.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 03:20:14 pm
content: One only needs to calibrate for things that exist.

author: dietert1
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 03:27:02 pm
content: Your complaints may just reflect the complexity of the project and you may need to study one of the more technical papers cited in the publication that describe how the interferometry gets done. In youtube videos they show those disk packs and talk about jumbo jets full of them, but that won't answer your questions. Since i don't know a way to digitize a 220 GHz signal, i'd guess they use the hydrogen masers to mix the radio signls down into a 40 GHz or so bandwidth for which continuous digitization and recording exists. Then they probably use some pattern matching to recover phase relation between recordings at different telescopes.I liked this video:Obviously there will be a quest to improve the current measurement.Regards, Dieter

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 09:26:14 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 15, 2022, 03:20:14 pmIn many ways changes in the km/s of the aetherwind cancels itself out of measurements of length contraction & ticking dilation & can be ignored.Also, the aetherwind effect on the ticking of atomic clocks at an array in one location could be kept under control by ensuring that clocks were identical & orientated in the same direction & at the same level.And dishes at an array are we know automatically kept in parallel alignments, nearnuff.I mentioned that the speed of electricity will be faster if a tailwind along the wire. If the aetherwind increases in km/s then the speed of electricity increases by the same proportion. And, the true length of the wire contracts, possibly in accord with the standard equation for gamma (but i don’t think that that equation is good). Anyhow, these 2 effects would tend to negate at any one dish. Anyhow, these effects would tend to be identical at all dishes at that location, & hence would tend to negate overall.But the aetherwind will hurt them every day, & every year, especially if they don’t minimize the hurt, or make allowances for the hurt.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 09:38:16 pm
content: Quote from: dietert1 on May 15, 2022, 03:27:02 pmThe only way out of their silly planar wave etc mess is if they use a fiducial marker of some kind to establish a zero point or a max point or somesuch.This would automatically overcome lots of known shortcomings & praps non-known shortcomings.The fiducial marker could enable simple analysis at any one location. And it might enable simpler analyses tween locations.And then they could continue to crow about their naïve stupid skoolkid planar wavefronts, whilst actually not needing planar wavefronts & not using planar wavefronts.The original Sagnac spinning mirrors X successfully used a fiducial zero marker. It was the midpoint tween max fringe shifts on each exposed half of the photo, one half for each direction of spin.Sagnac used his fiducial marker to help to show that the aetherwind existed.The horizon team could use a fiducial marker for the opposite reason to Sagnac, they could use it to obviate the aetherwind.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiducial_marker

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 10:43:21 pm
content: Well what do u know, a fiducial blackhole.https://www.haystack.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/NEROC2020_Akiyama_slides_web.pdf

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 10:52:16 pm
content: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.04472.pdf.....to simulate its full azimuthal extent; by contrast, we have truncated the polar range near the symmetryaxis to minimize numerical difficulties associated with having the polar axis in the domain. Ourfiducial2D and 3Druns do not have synchrotron cooling. In the following, wedenote by me the mass of the electron.....

author: bsfeechannel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 10:55:26 pm
content: It is sad to see the EEVBlog forum being transformed into a soapbox for anti-scientific ideas.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 11:16:09 pm
content: 4.4. GRMHD Model Theory Metrics We compute the polarimetric observables (|m|net, |v|net, 〈|m|〉, β2) described in Section 2.3 from model images blurred with a circular Gaussian kernel with a FWHM of 20 μas in order to compare them to the ranges measured from EHT and ALMA-only data. Both 〈|m|〉 and β2 depend on the resolution and hence the size of the Gaussian blurring kernel. The value of β2 also depends on the choice of the image center. We do not shift the library images before computing βm coefficients for comparison with the range inferred from the EHT image reconstructions, which have been centered by aligning them to the centered,fiducial total intensity imagesin EHTC IV. As discussed in Palumbo et al. (2020), a centering offset u expressed as a fraction of the diameter of a PWP m = 2 ring causes a quadratic falloff in β2 power as δβ2/|β2| ≈ 4u2 . Effects on the β2 phase enter at similar order. In the case of the EHT image, u is likely less than one-fifth, meaning that centering errors in β2 will be sub-dominant to other uncertainties, such as the choice of the blurring kernel or the variation across methods and days.https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10125786/1/Akiyama_2021_ApJL_910_L13.pdf

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2022, 11:57:01 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 15, 2022, 02:55:15 pmCan this aetherwind be blocked or deflected by a suitably shaped metallic membrane? Perhaps a foil of aluminium in the form of a chapeau?

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 12:46:35 am
content: Quote from: Cerebus on May 15, 2022, 11:57:01 pmIn the oldendays they thort that the stationary aether could be dragged or partially dragged by moving objects.Modern aether theory reckons that a uniform speed differential will not drag aether, but that aether is dragged by non-uniform motion, ie by acceleration.And that the drag duznt depend on the element (eg Al), it just depends on the mass (& praps on the size of the acceleration).And modern aether theory reckons that the background aetherwind blows through Earth approx south to north at 500 km/s.My own version of aether theory says that a spinning body expels aether at the poles (ie at the axis), which creates an axial outflow of aetherwind. Podkletnov found this effect. So too Depalma. I call it the centrifuging of aether, a kind of artificial gravity praps. I don’t know how strong this effect is. But if a spinning disc was suitably placed & suitably aligned then it could partially block or deflect or add to the local aetherwind.I don’t know why anyone would want to do this.A supermassive spinning body would suck aether in at equator, & spit aether out at the 2 poles.This would create or add to jets emitted at the poles.Now where have i seen such jets ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 02:51:42 am
content: Quote from: Cerebus on May 15, 2022, 11:57:01 pmI think the approach France took during the Revolution was more effective than an aluminum foil chapeau, the Guillotine proved 100% effective!

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 08:03:28 pm
content: Here is a copy of a comment made on the Thunderbolts forum, re the EHT, re papers explaining how the EHT paint pretty pictures of blackholes, or u might call it the assembling of a pretty puzzle, or the processing of pretty patchworks.https://www.digitaltrends.com/news/black-holes-scale/Black holes all look like donuts, regardless of their size……..………. The black hole, called Sagittarius A*, is a type called a supermassive black hole, which is found at the center of almost all galaxies. Ours is on the smaller end for such giants: At 4.3 million times the mass of the sun, it’s much smaller than other monsters like the one is Messier 87 which was imaged in 2019 and which is 6.5 billion times the mass of the sun ………….……….. However, images of these two black holes look notably similar, both showing a distinctive donut shape. And that agrees precisely with physicists’ predictions, which said that black holes would appear the same no matter what size they are …………..https://www.csail.mit.edu/news/method-image-black-holes……………. A method to image black holes ……………. Researchers from MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and Harvard University have developed a new algorithm that could help astronomers produce the first image of a black hole ……………………. Even with atmospheric noise filtered out, the measurements from just a handful of telescopes scattered around the globe are pretty sparse; any number of possible images could fit the data equally well. So the next step is to assemble an image that both fits the data and meets certain expectations about what images look like…………….https://arxiv.org/pdf/1512.01413.pdf…………….. Reconstructing an image using bispectrum measurements is an ill-posed problem, and as such there are an infinite number of possible images that explain the data. The challenge is to find an explanation that respects our prior assumptions about the “visual” universe while still satisfying the observed data …………. We generate data using a collection of black hole, celestial, and natural images ……………… Flexibility of the patch prior frameworkallows us to easily incorporate a variety of different “visual” assumptions in our reconstructed image. For instance, in the case of the EHT, simulations of a black hole for different inclinations and spins can be used to train a patch model that can be subsequently used for reconstruction ……..https://educationalblogspotforyou.wordpress.com/2019/04/13/https-theamazingscienceofhumanbrain-blogspot-com-2019-04-how-to-take-picture-of-black-hole-html/……………. Algorithms developed to take the picture of the black hole………….. Since there are number of infinite images that perfectly explain our telescope measurements, we have to chose between them in some way. We do this by ranking the images based upon how likely they are to be the black hole image, and then choosing the one that’s most likely……………. But when it comes to the images from black hole, we’re posed with a real conundrum; we’ve not seen any black hole images before…………….. In that case what is likely a black hole image, and what should we assume about the structure of black hole? ………………. If all images produce a very similar – looking image, then we can start to become more confident…………….. One way we can try to impose different image features is by using pieces of existing images. So, we take a large collection of images, and we break them down into their little patches. We then can treat each image like a puzzle pieces. And we used the commonly seen puzzle pieces to piece together in an image that also fits our telescopic measurements. Different types of pieces has distinctive set of puzzle pieces……….

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 08:20:53 pm
content: QuoteYou seem to be thinking that the image is being used as proof that black holes exist. It isn't - without the image the things would still exist according to the appropriate theories. So it follows that something that fits the data and looks like what it is expected to look like serves the purpose (that is, of being able to 'see' a black hole, just like you could see that single-pixel image of a doughnut on the moon).

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 08:26:39 pm
content: The authors of this paper show lots of calculations to see what possible models fit the observed data, and the reconstructed image is just a side-show. Of course, the media showed it because it's a cute picture.

author: dietert1
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 08:53:17 pm
content: Evaluation of models and comparing their predictions with measured data is the standard procedure in experimental physics. The models chosen to be tested are not based on personal preference, nor on religious imagination nor on computer game fantasy, but on mathematics. One criterion is a model to test be "simple" or "minimal". In the case of Sagittarius A* they have a conclusion on the mass, but not yet on the spin. They need more measurements to do that.The idea of aether as a substance to carry electromagnetic fields and propagate light waves was proven superfluous long ago and isn't part of physics anymore (since about 150 years). It fell victim to scientific progress, similar to "phlogiston".Regards, Dieter

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 08:57:18 pm
content: By the way, my original intent in citing the paper was to show a good example of a well-done peer-reviewed scientific paper, with references, on a very complex topic that is available to the general public (not behind a paywall), thanks to the openness of IOP, the publisher ofAstrophysical JournalandAstrophysical Journal Letters.(Although I'm not surprised by some of the replies.)

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 09:30:53 pm
content: Quote from: dunkemhigh on May 16, 2022, 08:20:53 pmYes, but, getting back to a say 9 pixel image of what we reckon is a doughnut on the Moon.1. Lets show that 9 pixel image to Isaac Newton to see what he sees.2. We tell Isaac that there is a theory that there is a substance called dough.3. And if u have a certain quantity of dough, & if the dough forms a certain shape (due to natural processes), &4. if the temperature accords within certain limits (not too cold, not too hot, due to natural processes), &5. if the doughnut is then covered with a layer of coloured sugary substance, & if6. the doughnut is then sprinkled with some small coloured sugary objects, &7. Isaac is told that all of the processes etc from (2) to (7) have been seen in nature or in the lab, mostly individually, but8. there is a theory that if they all happen at one location at one time then they can form a new object called a doughnut,9. which has never been observed, but10. the 9 pixel image on the Moon has been predicted to be in the correct place & time & conditions to make the never before seen doughnut, &11. we hand Isaac a pretty painting of just such a doughnut, &12. we ask Isaac if the painting accords with the 9 pixel image, &13. he says not really, so14. we show him a folder of different coloured etc possible doughnuts, &15. he finds one that accords best with the 9 pixels, but not very well, so16. we advise Isaac that we went through this exercise already once before about 3 yrs ago, & that at that time a guy called Albert also picked a painting from the folder which almost matched thems 9 pixels, &17. therefore we ejaculate that we now have a 2nd confirmation of doughnuts, &18. we publish & we get a Nobel Prize for Science, no, wait,19. a Nobel Prize for Art.20. We tell Isaac that since doughnuts have now been proven to exist,21. there is now a new theory that doughnuts are edible, & delicious.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 09:36:36 pm
content: Quote from: TimFox on May 16, 2022, 08:57:18 pmWas the peer review carried out by cooks from Dunkin Donuts.The doughnut found 3 yrs ago was a million times the mass of the latest doughnut.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 09:37:59 pm
content: I admit this was entertaining.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 09:47:21 pm
content: Quote from: dietert1 on May 16, 2022, 08:53:17 pmIf u had a 9 pixel image (i mean measured data), & u compared that image with every painting in the art world (i mean every possible model), then i expect that many of thems paintings (i mean models) would fit perfectly.And, many more would fit ok if we sort of squint a bit.And, i bet that we could find at least one donut scientist who saw a doughnut every time.Re aether & the aetherwind, if u do a google search for "Demjanov"& "aether" u will find his papers.Here is oneovem.https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0103103.pdf

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 09:52:33 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 16, 2022, 09:37:59 pmIsaac was of course in charge of all of the manufacture of dough for the whole of England later in life.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 16, 2022, 10:02:40 pm
content: Quote from: aetherist on May 16, 2022, 09:36:36 pmAs written in the paper, the authors acknowledge the contributions of anonymous peer reviewers. "We thank the anonymous referees for helpful comments that improved the paper." in section 8.You really should look at the important content of the paper, not the images (which are interesting, but not the crux of the matter).Complaining that this object was not resolved (in the technical sense of the word) as thoroughly as in, say, my 4x5 inch film image of the Railway Exchange building in Chicago, is puerile.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 02:27:24 am
content: Latest update on the black heart of the galaxy.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 09:04:08 am
content: Quote from: bsfeechannel on May 15, 2022, 10:55:26 pmYou are all the ones that fed and keep feeding aetherist.

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 10:10:17 pm
content: The Electric Universe mob reckon that blackholes are in fact actual doughnuts, consisting of an electric-magnetic toroidal Plasmoid.https://thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=736Wal Thornhill: On the Black Hole's Non-existence 5,735 views Apr 20, 2019Here is PART TWO of the interview with physicist Wal Thornhill…3.1KThunderboltsProject 199K subscribers Comments 677Wal Thornhill: Black Hole or Plasmoid? Space News 105,526 views Apr 17, 2019 In this interview recorded on April 8, 2019, physicist Wal Thornhill discusses why the recent so-called "first picture of a black hole" actually affirms the plasmoid… 4.4K ThunderboltsProject 199K subscribers Comments "The whole idea of consensus science is nonsense anyway because the truth is not found by a vote" Thornhill. 1,128 Comments

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 10:43:35 pm
content: "Donuts... is there anything they can't do?"

author: aetherist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 11:33:45 pm
content: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.04623.pdfThe jet and resolved features of the central supermassive black hole of M 87 observed with EHTMakoto Miyoshi, 1 Yoshiaki Kato2 And Junichiro Makino36. CONCLUSIONUsing the public data released by the EHTC, we obtained images of the central region of M 87 using the improved calibration obtained using the standard hybrid mapping method. As a result, we found the following.1.The core of M 87 is resolved into a core-knot structure, instead of a ring.Three features C, K and W are seen. While feature C is definitely a core and feature K is a knot, feature W is not so easy to explain. Feature W may be a lensing image due to the strong gravity of SMBH. Another possibility is that there are two SMBH system and that feature W is another SMBH in the core of M 87. Assuming that W is another knot, the three features could beinitial jet structureswith an opening angle of ∼ 70◦ at a distance of about 10 Rs from the core.2. The 230 GHz image has a jet structure consistent with the previous lower-frequency observations. It has brightened edges from the core to at a few mas points. The intensity is decreased along the jet axis much rapidly as compared with lower observations.3.The ∼ 40 µas ring that the EHTC reported is an artifact due to the effect of data sampling bias and the very narrow FOV setting that enhances the bias effect.The u-v coverage of the EHT for M 87 observations lacks the ∼ 40 µas spatial Fourier components that produce artifact structures of ∼ 40 µas size.