ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

I don't want to be pessimistic

But this could be the most catastrophic application of Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome in human history:
Scientists managed to capture the very first direct image of a black hole - and it was all thanks to a graduate at MIT. Three years ago Dr. Katie Bouman, now 29, created an algorithm that collects data from telescopes across the world to stitch together a photograph of the phenomenon which is 55million light years away.

Her work, which essentially turned Earth into a virtual telescope, has been praised across the political spectrum by First Daughter Ivanka Trump, Kamala Harris and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and by A-listers including Sophia Bush and Olivia Munn.

Without her groundbreaking work, the supermassive black hole would be simply impossible to capture because it would need a 10,000-kilometer wide telescope dish to even attempt it. The largest telescope dish in the world currently is just a 1,000ft in diameter.
It's a magnificent scientific achievement, no doubt about it. But it's a first, a very big first, and that's precisely what makes me nervous about the whole thing.

Labels: ,

163 Comments:

Blogger Irish Energy April 17, 2019 8:16 AM  

It wasn't a direct image if it was stitched together .

Blogger Zbignu April 17, 2019 8:23 AM  

Dont know much about algorithms and such but she's kinda cute in a nerdy way

Blogger Steve April 17, 2019 8:26 AM  

I knew they were lying when I saw the black hole photo and realised it wasn't a selfie.

Blogger maniacprovost April 17, 2019 8:27 AM  

I wouldn't worry too much. Although I can't find any reporting about how the project was done or who actually led the team or what the implications of the halo are for physics models, apparently the team of 200 scientists were mostly male and Katie worked on the test code. So unless there's a way for an edge case to consume the Earth, I think we're OK.

Blogger Avalanche April 17, 2019 8:28 AM  

There is also some... sturm-und-drang ... because apparently:

According to data provided publicly by GitHub {https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging/graphs/contributors}, Bouman made 2,410 contributions to the over 900,000 lines of code required to create the first-of-its-kind black hole image, or 0.26 per cent. Bouman’s contributions also occurred toward the end of the work on the code.

In contrast, contributor Andrew Chael wrote over 850,000 lines of code.

...

While the Western media attempted to use her gender to make a point, Asian publications, including Asahi, offered a more nuanced and truthful article, writing that "207 scientists in 17 nations and regions took part in the project," {http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201904110037.html} and refusing to assign the achievement to any one of the scientists.



From:
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/woman-who-media-claims-created-black-hole-image-contributed-0-26-of-code/

Blogger Jack Ward April 17, 2019 8:29 AM  

For amusement, I searched for definition of Hultgreen-Curie and found the entry for same at Didact'sReach site. With credit to it's inventor, one well known Evil Lord of Evil and voracious collector of sjw skulls.
Wonder if the lady will get the Nobel? Did she do all the ground breaking work herself? Has not such uses of ganged together scopes been done for some time and they finally got around to a certain black hole? The Chans may need to look into this.

Blogger SonofLonginus April 17, 2019 8:29 AM  

What they’re not saying is that she was part of a very large team, and one person on that team, a young MAN, wrote something to the tune of 850,000 out of 900,000 lines of code.

When this began gaining circulation, he naturally cucked, as these scientist types are wont to do, but the facts stand.

Blogger Subversive Saint April 17, 2019 8:30 AM  

Death by algorithm...

Wonder what the odd are.

Blogger Azimus April 17, 2019 8:33 AM  

I am dubious of the supposed photo. It shows a black circle, surrounded by a fiery ring, which is the event horizon supposedly. So I asked a simple question, why would the event horizon be a ring? That is what I would expect it to look like - in a 2D universe. Shouldn't the event horizon be a sphere in a 3D universe, and therefore I should not actually be able to see that black "iris"? I could be way off base, no idea, but I couldn't find anything about it in the half-dozen pieces I read. written by journotards who were more interested in it being the discovery of a woman than actually explaining what I was supposed to be looking at.

Blogger The Observer April 17, 2019 8:34 AM  

Wasn't it revealed that the bulk of the actual code and algorithm was done by a nerdy white guy and a Japanese man, and she did things like improve the readability of fonts?

Blogger Daniel April 17, 2019 8:34 AM  

Hopefully, Black Hole culture doesn't view photography as an offensive, soul stealing magic. We just don't know the gravity of the situation.

Blogger Borsabil April 17, 2019 8:39 AM  

She's also apparently one of the tribe. This shit literally writes itself. My take is she made the coffee and kept the snacks cold while the autists where working. She's what passes for a high status female for coders, so they wouldn't mind giving her credit. If she actually did have anything to do with the algo, ooh boy.

Blogger Sweet, Sweet Victory April 17, 2019 8:42 AM  

There was a meme about that the grlll in question wrote 50.000 lines of the code needed for the endeavor to work and another guy a dork, nerd, geek, scrawny guy wrote the other 750.000 lines, I will see if I can find it.

Blogger SweetieSquad37 April 17, 2019 8:42 AM  

I went to highschool with Katie and while I think she’s an incredibly bright and intelligent person, I’m also skeptical of the work she did being incredibly special or entirely hers. With the push to put women in the forefront, I can’t help but think that it’s not something someone else competent in her field could do or that it was a team effort but because we need wahmen in science she’s the one getting most of the credit.

Blogger Johnny April 17, 2019 8:46 AM  

Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome. Amazing really. We are inventing our own history maybe even more that Stalin did in the USSR. A more common problem with this stuff is the common confirmation bias. Only if it confirms does the evidence seem sound. You find what you were looking for aforethought.


My math ability isn't up to offering a challenge, but otherwise I think in general that both nuclear physics and astrophysics are suspect. The theories have too many things in them that seem unsound to me.

Blogger tublecane April 17, 2019 8:49 AM  

Hey look, a bunch of girls like it. And it transcends the political divide. (Was it not supposed to?) Women and children aren't even hardest hit!

Am I the only one who still doubts the existence of black holes? I mean, even with this we can't actually see one. We're just inferring it's existence.

Blogger Cloudbuster April 17, 2019 8:49 AM  

Bouman didn't create the algorithm. She contributed a very minor percentage of the code. She was one small cog in a large team. But she's reasonably cute and female, so they've showered her with undeserved praise.

A Fox news article on how "Internet trolls attempted to discredit Katie Bouman’s work on black hole project" is notable for the fact that it fails to refute any of the "trolls'" claims.


https://www.foxnews.com/science/internet-trolls-discredit-katie-boumans-black-hole-project

Blogger Bellomy April 17, 2019 8:51 AM  

I wouldn't worry too much, since the story is a crock.

Bouman is a smart woman, but on a team of very smart men and women.

What the story conveniently leaves out is this:

*The algorithm ultimately used wasn't hers!*

Blogger Wayne April 17, 2019 8:51 AM  

Bouman's contribution to this project was overblown. It would fit a desired narrative of outstanding women in Stem, but her algorithm was not used in the final implementation. Not that she wasn't a contributor, but it was not a solo project.

Blogger dc.sunsets April 17, 2019 8:55 AM  

Smacks of Hidden Figures-level propaganda.

This is one problem of Affirmative Action; it renders each and every "accomplishment" highly suspect. Whenever I see a non-white or woman as "the key person" in anything I assume it's window-dressing. That may or may not be true, but given the sample biases polluting everything it sure is the way to bet.

Blogger VFM #0168 April 17, 2019 8:56 AM  

Word is that the code she wrote was minimal compared to others on the team. While she may have written an important algorithm, she is getting almost all the credit.

Blogger JG April 17, 2019 8:57 AM  

Can anyone tell me why this technique of combining the signals of multiple radio telescopes is somehow new and innovative? Radio astronomers have been using this technique for decades.

Blogger PM April 17, 2019 8:57 AM  

For whatever it may be worth, an article at Quillette has already shot holes in this narrative:
https://quillette.com/2019/04/15/scientific-progress-and-the-culture-wars/

Blogger Meanoldbasterd April 17, 2019 8:58 AM  

Is it The use of the earth itself as a telescope that bothers you? In what way can this harm the female involved? All females? All people? (You invoked hultgreen curie so I assume there must be a self destructive,element involved)

Blogger JohnofAustria April 17, 2019 8:58 AM  

If it helps she was actually a very minor part of it and there is one guy who actually contributed 95% of the code that made it happen.

Blogger tuberman April 17, 2019 8:58 AM  

Yes, a few lines of code may seal her fate.Better a tranny should have gotten that fake fame.

Blogger Silent Draco April 17, 2019 8:58 AM  

Application of phased array for radio or light reception. 20-25 yo public tech. The hard part is weighting the received phases from individual scopes, but weighting algorithms do much of the work there. Locations known thanks to ground survey, and refraction known thanks to ground and air observations. Large scale parallel processing and large matrix handling, available for 15 years.
Thank you, men, for making this possible.

Blogger JohnofAustria April 17, 2019 8:59 AM  

Although I should assume you are talking about the ridiculous lie of inflating her. In which case I agree that it's bad but I'm not sure why it is worse than all the other times they do it, which is always.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 17, 2019 9:13 AM  

Soundgarden a bunch of dudes discovered this like years ago.

Blogger JovianStorm April 17, 2019 9:14 AM  

We get this all the time in the life sciences. Some 18-year-old picks up a pipette for the first time and if she's black or lesbian or at least cute she gets credit for the entire lab's output.

I cannot wait for SJW to go the way of the dodo. It's gotten to the point where white men are almost better off letting their undergrads write their grants if said kids are in a protected minority

Blogger Borsabil April 17, 2019 9:25 AM  

What's cute about a giant snoz and close set beady eyes? She's in her twenties and she isn't fat, but that's the only positives I can find. But yeah I guess she's sperg cute, i.e. at least she isn't a tranny. She's also a liar, as she apparently has no qualms about going along with a false narrative and claiming credit for her colleagues work, but given her background that should surprise no one.

I get Vox's issue here. If this is just another woke take, Ghosbusters 2016 for science, and the underlying work is sound, then this is no big deal. However if they really are putting women and blacks in charge of big scientific projects then we can only assume that these 'breakthroughs' are likely fabricated.

Blogger InformationMerchant April 17, 2019 9:26 AM  

It is. Let's just smash this right now in one place so it's to find again in future years when this will be brought up by SJWs.

Firstly: https://twitter.com/coreyspowell/status/906989726225313797 Check the date (10 Sep 2017). The entire concept is questionable. If the simulation is a better predictor than a picture taken in reality, we're going to need a better picture. On the other hand, yes, well done, if this was genuine, this is a cool step. The problem is that it's a computer generated picture that looks a lot like a computer generated simulation and the method of taking the picture is important and where the actual progress was made, but the result isn't actually better than we already had.

-----------

Now for the Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome.

I'll try and find sources but it happened so long ago that finding twitter pictures and things will be difficult at this point.

The Github commits show UI changes. There were quite a few screenshots of some of her contributions flying around, but I don't know how much cherry picking went on. Basic UI changes and other completely insignificant or simple changes are easy to do. Vox could probably do some himself on a game he entirely designed without writing any of the core code.

From https://bigleaguepolitics.com/woman-who-media-claims-created-black-hole-image-contributed-0-26-of-code/

"Bouman made 2,410 contributions to the over 900,000 lines of code required to create the first-of-its-kind black hole image, or 0.26 per cent. Bouman’s contributions also occurred toward the end of the work on the code."

There were also over 200 people working on the project.

"In contrast, contributor Andrew Chael wrote over 850,000 lines of code."

This might be technically true, but I think he only wrote around 100k lines of code, the other 750k was other stuff he put in.

There was a meme going around about the guy that wrote the code and another guy who was the idea man, but I can't find it at the moment.

There's another comment about Katie Bouman coming up with an algorithm and/or inspiring something, but some of her work wasn't used.

I think this is her: https://github.com/klbouman?tab=overview&from=2019-01-01&to=2019-01-31

I haven't gone through anything myself yet.

Blogger Amy April 17, 2019 9:27 AM  

The inflation of her importance, despite her minor contribution, means promotion, research money, fame...a castle built upon sand. Even when women show ability and promise as pilots and scientists, their reach is greater than their grasp, and projects are doomed to failure.

Hultgreen-Curie will Dunning-Kruger her into a project worth billions of wasted dollars and man hours. And if that project has significance to national security, well, her bad end could have a bad butterfly effect.

Blogger McChuck April 17, 2019 9:29 AM  

The Very Large Array has been stitching together observations since the 1970's.

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 9:30 AM  

This whole thing is bullshit.

Blogger Alexander April 17, 2019 9:32 AM  

If they're willing to boldface lie and say Ivanka Trump, Kamala Harris, and AOC represent the political spectrum...

Blogger Alexamenos April 17, 2019 9:33 AM  

I wonder what the picture would like if the algorithm had been programmed to capture the image of a cartoon frog rather than a gigantic donut? This looks to me like scientists have discovered that if you write a program to draw a picture of a flaming donut then you'll get a picture of a flaming donut.

Blogger Colin Flaherty's baby mama April 17, 2019 9:34 AM  

I find this take far more credible:

“Look at this thing I did” said Bouman whose name was not first on the paper, and who published the announcement ahead of her team, thus jumping to the front of the line for credit and praise.

Thousands of fawning news articles were published, all showing her picture and naming her as the party responsible for the project, completely missing any mention of the people whose names were ahead of hers on the relevant research.

The idea that a Jewish woman is unaware that her coethnics in the media will plaster her picture everywhere is absurd. Jewish women are explicitly aware of their ability to garner acclaim and have their presence boosted in the media. Though her academic colleagues defend her (they’ll lose their careers if they don’t) that doesn’t vacate her rushing to the stage to claim credit for other people’s work, the intentionality of which is probably lost upon her naive peers. The Internet knew exactly what was going on here, and quickly combed through the papers and Git commits to find out just how little this scheming slut had contributed to the project and also how irrelevant and insignificant her actual contributions were.

But here’s the thing. Black holes are not even real, and this is all a sideshow in an attempt to shoehorn a social justice commentator “theoretical physicist” into public discourse. Black holes are an attempt at coming up with a solution for empty sets by the plagiarist Einstein. There is no legitimate evidence that black holes exist. The more you examine theoretical physics, the more you realize that it is just a big scam that lets endless numbers of hook-nosed academics receive a stipend for doing math fanfiction at taxpayer expense.

The idea that some Jewess has come up with a photograph of something which cannot be seen is facially absurd.

It is obviously just a big fraud to justify the trough of taxpayer dollars these fat parasites have been delivered.

Blogger Shadowfax April 17, 2019 9:36 AM  

Ok, so I found out what Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome is.

Ok, so I found out why this article is an application of it.

What I don't get:

In what way is this the most catastrophic application [...] in human history [...] a first, a very big first?

Do you really mean to say this has never happened before?!


But seriously, this seems like a light case to me. There are many other articles about this project that don't mention her at all, and even one that broaches the issue of the 'accidental' overstatement of her contribution.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/science/katie-bouman-black-hole.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article


And once again Vox made me google for ten minutes just so I could understand what he's even talking about. Infogalactic left me in the lurch concerning HCS, shame on them!

Blogger Colin Flaherty's baby mama April 17, 2019 9:37 AM  

...
"In 1943 Herman Hesse published The Glass Bead game, a critique of a disturbing modern trend in academia. It described a vast academic establishment using the cutting edge of science, mathematics, and dozens of interdisciplinary fields to play a pointless board game at the expense of the public coffers. The decades since Einstein have been near total stagnation in real scientific development. Virtually everything is an incremental improvement based on existing technologies.

Incidentally, the man who discovered the transistor, William Shockley, was a notorious public racist. Now that “science” is full of pajeets and Jewesses instead of racist white males mysteriously new reproducible research that does important things for civilization has ground to a complete halt.

Beyond the billions of dollars filthy, lying Jews have been given in research grants for this continuing fraud, the mafia of theoretical physics serves an even more subversive agenda. It is an attempt to create a fictitious cosmology to capture the sense of atheistic wonder and direct people towards pseudointellectuals who are granted public credibility through their participation in the fraud. People think that theoretical physics must be filled with credible people, like mechanical engineering or organic chemistry. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s a religion, guarded zealously by a wicked priesthood of Jewish academics, in which dissenters doing honest science are punished with expulsion and the permanent destruction of their careers.

Read the well-documented account of Stephen J. Crothers’s expulsion from a PhD program, and the derision he received from men with names like Cohen and Berkenstein– all for refusing to accept the existence of black holes as a dogma. Crothers was viciously expelled far before his paper was even published. The total lack of scrutiny given to people who lie is obvious, while people who are attempting to do honest science in earnest are tossed out of all academic institutions.

They find nothing that they see unfit for defilement, even the once hallowed halls of the sciences."

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 9:39 AM  

You should be much more nervous about the fact that I've observed hundreds of thousands of monstrous black holes all over the universe. They don't know you're there until you look at them...

Blogger John Rockwell April 17, 2019 9:48 AM  

@Stickwick Stapers

''I've observed hundreds of thousands of monstrous black holes all over the universe. They don't know you're there until you look at them''

Are you sure it is not just an optical illusion?

Or perhaps Black holes are alive.

Blogger GreenAcres10996 April 17, 2019 9:48 AM  

Vox - saw this in WSJ the other day; made big news! You have every right to be suspicious of this, as this line says it all: "Three years ago Dr. Katie Bouman, now 29, created an algorithm that collects data from telescopes across the world to stitch together a photograph of the phenomenon which is 55million light years away." So in other words, since they are creating an image from hundreds of other images, it is basically being made up.....it could actually be anything and unless you had access to the algorithm and the process behind the curtain to create the image, it can't be validated.
In other words, we have to "trust" scientists.....which many are beginning that some of them have their own agendas that have nothing to so with advancing science.

Blogger Andrew Brown April 17, 2019 9:53 AM  

It is all bullshit. Predictable, unsurprising bullshit.

Anonymous Anonymous April 17, 2019 10:02 AM  

Don’t worry Vox, she didn’t even do that much.

It’s for (((reasons))) that she’s being pushed as the face of this thing.

Blogger Sweet, Sweet Victory April 17, 2019 10:05 AM  

FOUND IT!

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/416189791789645834/565867225613991936/IMG_20190411_141736.jpg

Blogger TEL April 17, 2019 10:11 AM  

You know what?
I'm more nervous that this is being propagandized as one of the most important scientific achievements of this day and age.

RSS feed a site like ScienceDaily for a few days, and you'll see the miracles researchers of all fields are performing on a daily basis.

Blogger Dave Dave April 17, 2019 10:14 AM  

The possibility of waking a cosmic horror is more terrifying than some dumb broad taking credit for work that wasn't hers. Leave space alone and focus on home. Space is a big time waster.

Blogger Damn Crackers April 17, 2019 10:17 AM  

Stickwick is right. Astronomers have observed and "photographed" black holes in many different wavelengths, such as X-ray, radio, etc. I worked at the Haystack Radio Obs. 25 years ago, and some of the student projects there were specifically observing black holes.

I am sure she contributed something to the coding for the precise interferometry, but to suggest she is responsible or the first is a giant lie!

Blogger Stilicho April 17, 2019 10:22 AM  

I read the other day that she contributed a couple thousand lines of code to the program (out of 900 thousand lines). The man who wrote 850 thousand lines of that program has been ignored. Perhaps her portion was a critical innovation, but that hasn't been reported if so. She's getting credit for others' work. And that is primary goal of feminism.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell April 17, 2019 10:26 AM  

Dr. Bouman herself gave credit to the person who wrote most of the code.

Blogger #7139 April 17, 2019 10:29 AM  

They don't know you're there until you look at them...

This sounds ominous.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 April 17, 2019 10:30 AM  

maniacprovost wrote:I wouldn't worry too much. Although I can't find any reporting about how the project was done or who actually led the team or what the implications of the halo are for physics models, apparently the team of 200 scientists were mostly male and Katie worked on the test code. So unless there's a way for an edge case to consume the Earth, I think we're OK.

Sounds pretty typical of most software development these days. Men do the coding and women do the QA.

Blogger Sun Xhu April 17, 2019 10:35 AM  

Stickwick Stapers wrote:They don't know you're there until you look at them...

You've doomed us all!!!

Blogger Bellomy April 17, 2019 10:36 AM  

Let's not libel Bouman either. She has not taken credit for anyone else's work and has tried to point the credit towards her colleagues. She isn't at fault for the narrative. It's an entirely feminist creation.

Blogger liberranter April 17, 2019 10:39 AM  

What they’re not saying is that she was part of a very large team, and one person on that team, a young MAN, wrote something to the tune of 850,000 out of 900,000 lines of code.

When this began gaining circulation, he naturally cucked, as these scientist types are wont to do, but the facts stand.


Exactly. Black America, for example, is so desperate after centuries of cultural dysfunction and failure to prove itself "equal" that it fabricates stories out of whole cloth about "famous black people" and their supposedly groundbreaking accomplishments in an attempt to rewrite history. Similarly, women are so desperate to prove themselves "equal" to men that in this case they take the actions of a woman whose "accomplishment" was the equivalent of a lone slave who cleaned builders' tools for the White House's construction and claiming that this slave built the White House.

Whenever you hear great roaring about some woman's "groundbreaking accomplishments," you can bet that, AT BEST, the analogy I cited above applies as the reality. More often than not, however, it's probably just a flat-out lie that no one will call out for fear of summary crucifixion by the SJW-owned PTB.

All of above said, I'm not really sure that Hultgreen-Currie applies here, since that condition demands that the woman actually have attempted to repeat something substantive, however clumsily, that a man has already done well and that it blows up in her face with tragic consequences. A minor code scribbling seems unlikely to reach that criterion.

Blogger Ford Prefect April 17, 2019 10:41 AM  

The good thing is that this is astronomy. I love astronomy, but taking a "picture" of a black hole ain't gonna change our lives in any significant way.

The bad thing is that male scientists with a clue will be reluctant to include women on their projects, which will result in them being condemned for discriminating against women or being against diversity. The final result is that men with suitable talents for scientific research will unfortunately devote their energies elsewhere, thus slowing real scientific progress.

Blogger Slagenthor April 17, 2019 10:43 AM  

Angular momentum. Accretion disks are flat because the majority of the in-falling material was already orbiting in a flat plane.

This doesn't prevent material from hitting off-plane...only that the majority of the material that is falling in and being "lampshaded" by the material further in (and made easier to see by us) is from the same orbital plane.

Blogger MidnightSun April 17, 2019 10:44 AM  

Yes, and our Sun is imploding as we speak. Photo captured August 2017.
https://twitter.com/Nan303030/status/899704820461961216

I don't believe it for a second. Especially since the photo was 'captured' by a woman, only 29-years of age in a field dominated by men. It's also interesting to witness how NASA has been totally converged in recent years. Its very disheartening to see a bunch of freaks at the heart of the once great premier space agency. While broadcasting their most recent venture to Never Never Land, I saw a blue hair, a black, a few sodomites, numerous Asians (and not Chinese type), a tranny and gaggle of women who couldn't tell you which way was 'up.' Things are regressing quickly and its due to the dummying down of our educational system in elementary schools and marxist indoctrination at these overpriced universites. I am in close proximity to Boston University and often my business takes me through the sprawling campus. It feels like I'm in a foreign country. In just a few years the dental doctorate program has become infested with mid-east women (I know this because of the number of hijabs I encounter when I'm in the waiting room at said dental school). I'd say a good 80 percent of the student body are foreigners. I am not exaggerating. It is maddening to see very few white (Christian) men and women at these universities. I believe it will take a generation or more to correct and I don't see it happening in my lifetime. So get use to incompetence at every level of society and especially in the sciences. Teach your children a trade and pray to God that America survives this onslaught of diversity from the enemy within.

Blogger D Zniger April 17, 2019 10:49 AM  

Never cared for black hole pictures or women in science, but now I am just pissed. To hell with their agenda, and welcome "Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome" into my knowledge base.

Blogger Meanoldbasterd April 17, 2019 10:51 AM  

I see... It was more of a,societal level hultgreen due to encouraging this kind of nonsense...

Blogger Johnny April 17, 2019 10:57 AM  

These astronomic pictures that they turn out are doctored up a lot. Fake color to make it look more interesting is routine. Dust ends up glowing in the dark and so on. Plus more or less every landscape picture on the internet is color enhanced, and composites are common. Right to the point where what you are looking at is fake. Anyway it is a bright and colorful world I live in here in the matrix.

Blogger Hieronymus Burgmeister April 17, 2019 11:00 AM  

Nate nailed it.

Blogger Silent Draco April 17, 2019 11:03 AM  

Stickwick, please tell us that the black holes don't spell something like "Cthulhu fthaagn" from how we see them.

Blogger InformationMerchant April 17, 2019 11:08 AM  

NYT: http://archive.is/LrNH0

"While she led the development of an algorithm to take a picture of a black hole, an effort that was the subject of a TED Talk she gave in 2016, her colleagues said that technique was not ultimately used to create this particular image."

http://archive.is/QZNLO

Tweet: "There are more of us. Katie's algorithm, despite the media's stance, was not used to produce this image. There were three algorithms used and combined to form the final image, and a team of 40 scientists part of that aspect of the project (including myself and more women)."

Disappointed in myself for not saving more stuff related to this as it happened. I can't find the pictures of the code contributions but in fairness, those were cherry picked. As far as I can tell, the steel man case for her contributing anything more than a TED talk, would be the code from https://github.com/klbouman/hopstools

Even if you have 0 experience programming, you'll be able to read it, if you want. You don't really need to because in her own words: "tools to convert data from the HOPS format"

This is useful. At least she didn't just write a code of conduct and write some comments. On the other hand, converting data from one format to another happens all the time in every industry that uses a computer. Everyone understands how much credit for the overall project that deserves.

------------

There is a comprehensive Reddit post on this: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/bbykvf/katie_bouman_should_not_be_getting_credit_for_the/ekmigyt?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

Pastebin version because it'll probably be deleted soon: https://pastebin.com/js4qt3Fb

The usual archive sites I use don't like long reddit posts.

That reddit post is worth checking out, it at least credits the original guy that did the work, other people on the team, including the guy that did most of the coding.

Blogger Forge the Sky April 17, 2019 11:13 AM  

Azimus wrote:I am dubious of the supposed photo. It shows a black circle, surrounded by a fiery ring, which is the event horizon supposedly. So I asked a simple question, why would the event horizon be a ring? That is what I would expect it to look like - in a 2D universe. Shouldn't the event horizon be a sphere in a 3D universe, and therefore I should not actually be able to see that black "iris"? I could be way off base, no idea, but I couldn't find anything about it in the half-dozen pieces I read. written by journotards who were more interested in it being the discovery of a woman than actually explaining what I was supposed to be looking at.

It's a shame, because the science behind why it looks like that is actually really cool. Gravitational lensing makes it so that a black hole will appear as a bright ring around a dark area, regardless of how the light/matter around the event horizon is shaped or oriented.

Basically, the distortion of space the black hole creates makes it so you see all the light around the black hole, the entire sphere, distorted around it into a circle. You can see videos about it on YouTube; it's difficult to visualize via words alone.

Blogger Alexamenos April 17, 2019 11:27 AM  

Colin's baby mama:

"...the man who discovered the transistor, William Shockley, was a notorious public racist. Now that “science” is full of pajeets and Jewesses instead of racist white males mysteriously new reproducible research that does important things for civilization has ground to a complete halt."


I think competent science and the religion of equalitarianism are mutually exclusive. Any modestly competent empiricist is going to notice certain things -- women and men are different, jews have big noses, etc... and noticing these things will get that person unpersoned in a hurry. Likewise, if the number one quality necessary for advancement in any field is the inability to notice that blacks are not as smart white people, the science is bound to suffer.

Blogger Gregory the Tall April 17, 2019 11:31 AM  

So a woman found a way to take a photo of something that probably does not exist. As my father used to say: we've got a sausage at home that's been all eaten. Truly worthy of this year's Harry Potter Award.

Blogger Noah B. April 17, 2019 11:37 AM  

Katie be like, "I can Github!"

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella April 17, 2019 11:41 AM  

I don't know the math of it, or the physics, but I do know that a straight, white male has not been shamed by illiterate female journalists for his clothing choices. The men actually doing the important work are not being put on show trials, and are not being forced to read self-abasing testimonies. They can continue to work on important things, undisturbed.

Imagine if she had taken credit for landing a satellite on a comet. We could talk about her, and leave the incredible scientist Matt Taylor alone to work in peace.

Blogger Borsabil April 17, 2019 11:46 AM  

@55 you don't seem to get how these woke takes work. MIT outright tweeted that yon vagina no shit led the team that developed the algo that gave us the image of the black hole. Since then there's been plenty of clarifications and corrections, and the usual gas lighting decrying how all those muh soggy knees could possibly have taken the contribution of a female scientist the wrong way. Of course we never meant she was primarily responsibl
e, or was even a leader of the team, although that's exactly what they tweeted into the public consciousness, in the sure and certain knowledge that the blue hairs would pick up the ball and run with it. It's now an established fact for millions of people that this Jewish woman was responsible for us seeing the very first photo of a black hole. Also if you think that she wasn't briefed on her role and happily went along with the deception you're not just a white knight but a blithering idiot. The only question now is whether they'll be brazen enough to award her the Nobel. Lots of (((Laureates))) have been wholly undeserving, but that would be something else for sure.


Blogger stevev April 17, 2019 11:53 AM  

Azimus, I saw a presentation on the photo addressing this very thing. What we're seeing is the gravitation lensing of the event horizon. The angle of incidence of light is key. The black hole "lenses" or warps light around itself in all directions. Light not captured by the black hole is sling-shotted around and the angle of incidence of those photons is such that escapes the gravity well. Photons whose angle of incidence is closer to perpendicular to the black hole's surface are captured, so from any angle of observationan the center of any image of a black hole will be lightless. What looks like a ring to us is actually the light radiation escaping the event horizon behind the black hole, warped/lensed around it, but the central region will always be obscured.
I realize this is not an astrophysicist-worthy description, perhaps, but it made sense to me. Also, the presentation said the density of gases around a black hole is not uniform, which is why the "ring" in the photo is distorted on the lower right of the image.

Blogger stevev April 17, 2019 11:53 AM  

of course, someone beat me to it...

Blogger The Pitchfork Rebel April 17, 2019 12:07 PM  

According to Github, she was responsible for a small portion of the code usef to produce this result while a fellow named Andrew Chael brought the lion's share. Predictably, questions about her portrayal as Marie Curie 2.0 are being dismissed as sexist, despite the fact she said it was a team effort.

Blogger justaguy April 17, 2019 12:25 PM  

While I agree with #27 above, that this is merely a small step in complex engineering- nothing big, but something so massive that it hasn't been done before. It seems to me the real credit should go to the small group that put this together and managed to fight for the disparate streams of funding... but that is management expertise in the overly bureaucratic field of government grants.

I guess the girl gets a fool-proof route to tenure now-- but apparently she at least had the ability women in the field needed before this. I don't know how different it is between men and women, but imagine a brilliant white male trying to get on the tenure track.

I am wondering when we will get advances in physics, beyond small engineering developments. The last set was really in the late 40s and early 50s as quantum theory integrated with the existing new theories of matter. The nobel prize winning scientists papers are a good read for any smart physicist but one can see the transition from real advancement to we have to pick someone. I am sure that it is out there-- but probably being squashed by the big-wig who dole out the tenure and the grants needed to stay alive in the research academic world.

Blogger Solon April 17, 2019 12:28 PM  

I mean, the picture is cool and all, but it's not an actual "image," it's a recreation of a bunch of images and some math magic to put them all together into something our eyes can identify.

A black hole will always be invisible to our eyes, since not even light escapes its gravitational pull, so any "image" someone creates of a black hole is, at best, a fanciful recreation, and at worst is a complete fabrication.

You can paint a banana on a canvas and people will know what they're looking at, because a banana is a tangible, visible thing. You can also paint a black hole on a canvas, but it's no more an accurate representation of reality than a painting of a unicorn.

I'm not saying black holes are a "myth," mind you, just that trying to portray what one looks like is a foolish waste of time.

And what about all the crap we're dealing with here on Earth? What if we spent the millions or billions of dollars and thousands of man-hours on something useful like, say, developing an alternative energy source to fossil fuels?

This whole thing to me is one giant example of taking the mote out of another's eye while ignoring the massive beam in our own.

We have problems here. Fix those. Then, we can worry about fancy physics phenomenon that are some fifty-plus million light years away.

Blogger Uncephalized April 17, 2019 12:29 PM  

@Azimus what Slagenthor said, and also a couple of other reasons. Because gravity is so high in the region of the event horizon, light actually orbits the black hole as as though it were a satellite. So you only see the light rays that come off tangentially from the sphere in your direction. That ends up looking like a ring no matter what direction you look from. Relativity is weird.

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 12:31 PM  

...to take a photo of something that probably does not exist...

Oh, brother.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 17, 2019 12:45 PM  

Ahh, so feminists are fabricating yet another hero that does not exist.

The vast majority of the credit actually belongs to Andrew Chael. Typical feminists. About one quarter of one percent code contribution, and somehow it's suddenly her sole accomplishment.

"Can anyone tell me why this technique of combining the signals of multiple radio telescopes is somehow new and innovative?"

It's not really. The new and innovative parts are probably automation to do some things that were previously done manually. It's the concept of a sensor array. It's been done before, all the applicable mathematics are already neck deep in the history books.

Most of the work is probably just figuring out how to get different operating systems and resolutions to interface, and then mapping the interpretations to the correct locations over time and space. More like dialing in particulars of this usage than inventing anything.

All assuming, of course, that the thing isn't fabricated wholesale.

"In 1943 Herman Hesse published The Glass Bead game, a critique of a disturbing modern trend in academia. It described a vast academic establishment using the cutting edge of science, mathematics, and dozens of interdisciplinary fields to play a pointless board game at the expense of the public coffers."

Can anyone say bankster-gov coop subversion? Just like they did with the medical fields a couple of decades earlier. Set the systemic wheels spinning to the tune of fraudulent cash, and what else could be produced but a new fraudulent system?

"They don't know you're there until you look at them..."

So what you're saying is that the Dank Matter operates on thuglife?

Really though, is this an allusion to something actual?

"In other words, we have to "trust" scientists.....which many are beginning that some of them have their own agendas that have nothing to so with advancing science."

Yep. Got a coin?

"The good thing is that this is astronomy."

As in, the word we chose to replace "astrology" after frauds took that discipline as a skinsuit?

"The final result is that men with suitable talents for scientific research will unfortunately devote their energies elsewhere, thus slowing real scientific progress."

Pfft. Much of the slowing is because of a parasitic system. Being kicked out of said system is a benefit in the long run. The system is conformed to stifle most real progress anyway. Can't have any genuine lights to expose the scum hiding in the dark, y'know?

"more of a,societal level hultgreen due to encouraging this kind of nonsense..."

Yes.

Blogger Azimus April 17, 2019 12:47 PM  

Thank you gentlemen! In a brief two minute comment you have explained more than the Associated Press, HuffPo, Yahoo, CNN, and a few others were unable to. I will look to youtube for more info and examples (as counter-intuitive as that sounds).

Blogger Lance E April 17, 2019 12:53 PM  

SonofLonginus wrote:What they’re not saying is that she was part of a very large team, and one person on that team, a young MAN, wrote something to the tune of 850,000 out of 900,000 lines of code.

Damn it. I was actually feeling a little guilty about myself, thinking "I need to take a breath, I've become so jaded by all the propaganda that I'm automatically assuming she contributed hardly anything to this project without even reading the full story." And of course it turns out that's exactly what happened.

Part of me wants to look on GitHub to see what she actually contributed, but I fear it would be too depressing.

Blogger cloom April 17, 2019 12:54 PM  

I expected this thread to be full of predictions about how she Hultgreen-Curie-Syndrome-expires.

I predict she is put under house arrest, like Galileo, and is eaten by cats.

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 12:56 PM  

As in, the word we chose to replace "astrology" after frauds took that discipline as a skinsuit?

Oh, FFS. You do realize you have an actual black hole astrophysicist here, right? It's one thing to be reasonably skeptical of scientific claims, and another to turn that into a retarded competitive sport.

Blogger Servant April 17, 2019 1:00 PM  

I think some of you are giving them free real estate in your head.

As soon as i read about this i said fake. They gave credit to a woman for fake work she did photographing a fake black hole.

Einstein's here be dragons suddenly able to be photographed. Next katie can take a picture of some dark matter

Blogger Stilicho April 17, 2019 1:02 PM  

Come now, people. It isn't as if you haven't seen a picture of Kamala Harris before this.

Blogger mike April 17, 2019 1:05 PM  

You meant to say "I don't want to be optimistic" :)

Blogger GK Chesterton April 17, 2019 1:20 PM  

As others here have commented she's been vastly more humble than her fawning press. She's even included a picture of the whole team with her off center and in the background for emphasis in one of her talks. Blame the White Knights and Feminist cunts all you like, so far I haven't seen any evidence of her being a jerk about this.

Blogger tuberman April 17, 2019 1:41 PM  

"I predict she is put under house arrest, like Galileo, and is eaten by cats."

Nope, Gamma radiation Poisoning, as in multiple Gamma nerds will now stalk her to Death. When she looked at the abyss, the abyss attends back. That or just Arkincide.

Blogger Fuzzums Wuzzums April 17, 2019 1:42 PM  

"Female Scientistician Does Her Job: World In Awe"

Blogger tuberman April 17, 2019 1:53 PM  

When will the current "Mary-Sue" BS end? Even the most intelligent/competent women are 2 full SD's behind the most competent guys, and those women are rare and mentored by males, and usually their dads.

Blogger Contrarian April 17, 2019 1:55 PM  

While everyone seem busy arguing how much a girl contributed to the project... I'm curious about the photo itself.

The "photo" is, like another poster mentioned, a composite of images that have gone through some fancy algorithm.

In other areas, we've seen image synthesis progress so far you can now generate 100% fake, yet ultra-realistic, human photos with the help of generative adversarial networks.

The astonishing "photo" of a black hole is a circle with some orange smudge around it. Open Gimp and create a similar photograph in 2 minutes with the paintbrush.

What indicates that this is a correct representation of a black hole? They're clear about that it's NOT a photograph of one. But if it's composited by a fancy NASA algorithm, what differentiates it from a CGI effect from the latest Transformers?

Are we just going to take their word for its authenticity?

Blogger tuberman April 17, 2019 2:05 PM  

"...she's been vastly more humble than her fawning press. She's even included a picture of the whole team with her off center and in the background for emphasis in one of her talksshe's been vastly more humble than her fawning press. She's even included a picture of the whole team with her off center and in the background for emphasis in one of her talks."

But, ya see, that's just the problem...the Narrative is ALL, her life is so small.

Blogger Robert What? April 17, 2019 2:09 PM  

Totally as an aside, being a coder myself, measuring a contribution based on the number of lines of code is bogus. The importance of a critical, innovative thousand lines of code could outweigh the importance of the other 999,000 lines.

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 2:09 PM  

"Oh, brother. "

its an image. its not a photograph. I'm sorry buddy but this is just laughable to assert that this is evidence of anything but a giant circle jerk. How many assumptions got made to make this happen?

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 2:15 PM  

"As soon as i read about this i said fake. They gave credit to a woman for fake work she did photographing a fake black hole. "

its not fake work. its real work. Its just not even close to proof that black holes exist

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 2:27 PM  

Of course it's not proof that black holes exist. It's confirmation of what general relativity predicts an extreme gravity field looks like around what is generally accepted -- via other, independent lines evidence -- to be a black hole.

Blogger Jim Blake April 17, 2019 2:31 PM  

Yup, made from many calculations based on many assumptions. And buried deep in the paper they acknowledge that image may not be what the media says it is.

Blogger Avalanche April 17, 2019 2:32 PM  

@15 " I think in general that both nuclear physics and astrophysics are suspect. The theories have too many things in them that seem unsound to me. "

Oh Johnny, spend some pleasurable time looking into the Electric Universe! MAN! Do they ever puncture pomposity and lies... Wal Thornhill, the EU2014, EU20156, EUY2016, EU2017 conference speeches are all on YT. Some of the stuff is a bit huh? Most of it is solid as HELL!!

GREAT stuff!

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 2:53 PM  

". It's confirmation of what general relativity predicts an extreme gravity field looks like around what is generally accepted -- via other, independent lines evidence -- to be a black hole."

it isn't that either.

its a circle jerk house of cards built of bullshit assumptions of what should happen if all the math is right and everything operates in exactly the right way that the assumptions require.

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 2:55 PM  

Modern Science... Can't take a picture of the flag on the moon... but totally can take a picture of a super massive black hole billions of light years away.

K.

Blogger maniacprovost April 17, 2019 2:56 PM  

The vast majority of the credit actually belongs to Andrew Chael.

measuring a contribution based on the number of lines of code is bogus.

This is why I did some research before repeating the meme talking point. This is a physics project. It's entirely possible that the most important work was done by a mathematician / astrophysicist, then translated to an algorithm by a computer scientist, and the actual code itself was written by some schlub coder that knows nothing about black holes. The whole idea of "the" algorithm is suspect to begin with.

Blogger Gregory the Tall April 17, 2019 3:02 PM  

3 things we know aboutblack holes:

1. They might not exist.
2. On photos they look a bit like the eye of Dauron.
3. Some say they suck.

Blogger Crunchy Cachalot April 17, 2019 3:08 PM  

I love astronomy, but taking a "picture" of a black hole ain't gonna change our lives in any significant way

I find cosmology fascinating as well, but would be hard-pressed to offer an explanation for why it is not, for all practical purposes, simply staring off into space.

Blogger Daniel April 17, 2019 3:44 PM  

As the intrepid young scientess steadied her Earth-spanning tripod, held her breath and poised her finger at the camera button, she reflected on all the bossy, naysaying men who warned her that there were some subjects too dangerous for girl science.

Now, as the first ever black hole portrait photographer in world history, she looked to upend all expectations.

One such expectation was her own.

Just as the camera responded to her caress with a satisfying "click", a deep, distant and otherworldly word whispered across the galaxy, chilling her soul:

"Cheese..."

Blogger weka April 17, 2019 4:02 PM  

Basic grantmanship in thia corrupt.age. Put the minorities in the front line, and keep. The scientists well away from the humanities graduates on the committee.

Tends to backfire if you have an oral examination for a PhD at a competent university though.

The converged University, by definition is incompetent

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 4:43 PM  

Modern Science... Can't take a picture of the flag on the moon... but totally can take a picture of a super massive black hole billions of light years away.

That's correct, and you can easily see why using nothing more than high school trig and physics.

Ability to resolve details depends on the angular size of the details, the size of the telescope, and the wavelength of light you're trying to detect.

A flag on the Moon is going to be about 0.7 thousandths of an arcsecond in angular size, about 0.0000002 degree. There isn't a single facility capable of resolving something that size on the Moon from the Earth in visible wavelengths. Even with the best adaptive optics on the single largest telescope, the smallest thing we could resolve at that distance is about 200 feet across.

But with a de facto telescope the size of the Earth, we can resolve details in the radio part of the spectrum that are smaller than 30 millionths of an arcsecond, about twice the resolution needed to see M87’s black hole silhouette.

Blogger Gregory the Tall April 17, 2019 4:52 PM  

Suddenly the black hole sensed who was on the spaceship which was now a mere 2 light years away: Ben Shapiro who had been expelled from hell as none of his tormentors there had been able to stand his shrieks. "To suck or not to suck, that is the question,' the black hole murmured directing its words to God. The answer came within milliseconds, and the hole proceeded accordingly...

Blogger Gregory the Tall April 17, 2019 5:20 PM  

She fainted, but qickly regained her senses at the thought of the massive cheque that would be coming in from Olympus.

Blogger Slagenthor April 17, 2019 5:45 PM  

Don't forget about the infrared time lapse images showing stars whipping around an x-ray source in the center of our own Galaxy. Those were done years ago.

Blogger SirHamster April 17, 2019 5:59 PM  

Sun Xhu wrote:Stickwick Stapers wrote:They don't know you're there until you look at them...

You've doomed us all!!!


Women Ruin Everything.

Blogger exfarmkid April 17, 2019 6:01 PM  

This is just another bout of "big science".

Two years ago a spokesman for the extended research groups proudly proclaimed their project to "image" a black hole so of course they were going to come up with a visual construction from all of the data.

Last week we saw massive international media coverage coupled with immediate publication of multiple papers.

Repeat: Big science in action. It may be real, but whatever.

Blogger Slagenthor April 17, 2019 6:12 PM  

That describes the appearance of the black hole itself: an annular ring around the hole due to gravitational lensing, but that isn't what is in the image. The image is of the accretion disk...the large cloud of dust and gas spiraling into the hole, heating up as it grinds down, giving off higher and higher energy light as it goes.
The accretion disk is large enough that it extends beyond the annulus of the "naked" event horizon and is outside of the gross gravitational lensing. It would be a large glowing cloud circling the annulus like Saturn's rings circle the place at. Depending on your viewing angle wrt the plane of the disk, parts of the backside may be visible. This portion was expected to be red-shifted and/or dimmer than the front side because the "light" traveling from the back had to transit the black hole.

Blogger Akulkis April 17, 2019 6:18 PM  

azimusa as someone who has never scored below 97 % on a physics test, including electricity and optics (399 out of 400 points for the class), you are correct. to the others who responded to azimus, on physicist has ever shown a mechanism by which an "accretion disk" can form without the contents of said disk having been a previously single body which was broken up. matter coming into a gravity well does NOT organize itself into a coherent disk. that violates the 2nd and 3rd laws of thermodynamics.

and yes i can and do solve Newtonian physics problems using vector calculus.

Blogger Azimus April 17, 2019 6:25 PM  

Stickwick this is a total novice question coming from my limited experience w/telescopes and microscopes, but if hypothetically the moon landing site were greatly illuminated with intense light or with a radio beam, would that increase the resolution capabilities and allow us to map the moon landing site?

Blogger Johnny April 17, 2019 7:22 PM  

>>but if hypothetically the moon landing site were greatly illuminated with intense light...

The limits of a large earth based telescope are its absolute resolution, determined by size and quality; and atmospheric disturbance of the image. The disturbance is bigger with a bigger telescope. With a brighter object the 'shutter speed' can be less, potentially reducing atmospheric blurring. When lit, the moon is so bright already I doubt more light would help much.

I suppose if you really, really wanted to, maybe use an explosion to produce a flash of light. The 'shutter speed' would be almost instantaneous.

Blogger Slagenthor April 17, 2019 7:24 PM  

Akulkis:

" on physicist has ever shown a mechanism by which an "accretion disk" can form without the contents of said disk having been a previously single body which was broken up. matter coming into a gravity well does NOT organize itself into a coherent disk. "

I don't think anyone in this entire thread has said anything like that. Accretion "disks" form because much of the in-falling matter was originally orbiting in the same plane and angular momentum is conserved. That's not the same thing as saying that all material coming in from above or below the orbital plane gets shoehorned into a planar disk...it can easily be a shell or cloud, and it can be completely absent depending on the particulars of the solar system that the black hole formed in.

A black hole in binary or multiple systems could reasonably be expected to have a lot of material pulled in on the same plane, likewise for a black hole at the center of a large elliptical galaxy.



Blogger State Estimation April 17, 2019 7:53 PM  

Chael wrote in a follow-up tweet that he is a gay astronomer and hoped to tweet “more about black holes and other subjects I am passionate about.”

I'm not even gonna say it...

Blogger Jack Ward April 17, 2019 8:34 PM  

@ 34. McChuck April 17, 2019 9:29 AM
The Very Large Array has been stitching together observations since the 1970's.

When I lived out west visited the VLA a few times. Very cool place. If you can, and are in New Mexico go check it out. Be worth your time.

Blogger Didas Kalos April 17, 2019 8:41 PM  

Count me SKEPTICAL. So light can be stopped by gravity? Hence, the speed of light is not constant? $$$$$$$$$$

Blogger Jack Ward April 17, 2019 8:44 PM  

There has been a comment or two that found Ms. Katie humble and quick to credit the team effort.
Consider this: She probably did not ask for the narrative that a lot of people are barbecuing her over. She is in a tough situation which may have no solution that except, perhaps, torpedoes her career. From now until times end she will be labeled as the 'woman' who benefited greatly from a completely out of control media monster that can create or kill off anyone. I can sympathize with and for her. I wish her luck and not letting the media crap go to her head. About the only way out may be for her, on her lonesome, to do something so stupendous and original, like, you know, authentic Nobel original, that it erases any memories of this pothole in life's highway.

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 9:09 PM  

if hypothetically the moon landing site were greatly illuminated with intense light or with a radio beam, would that increase the resolution capabilities and allow us to map the moon landing site?

The Moon is always illuminated with intense light from the Sun. The intensity of the light doesn’t help to resolve small features. We don't need to contrive difficult ways to image the surface of the Moon when we can easily see details of the Apollo landing sites imaged by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 9:16 PM  

Count me SKEPTICAL. So light can be stopped by gravity? Hence, the speed of light is not constant? $$$$$$$$$$

No. Light always travels at the same speed. It loses energy in a gravity well, hence gravitational redshifting. At the event horizon, it loses so much energy to the black hole that it's essentially redshifted out of existence.

Blogger Uncephalized April 17, 2019 9:53 PM  

Black holes are fake and Einstein was a plagiarist? That is news to me. What evidence brought you to these conclusions?

Blogger Nate April 17, 2019 9:56 PM  

" We don't need to contrive difficult ways to image the surface of the Moon when we can easily see details of the Apollo landing sites imaged by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter."

yeah. sure. Now do it from here.

Blogger Uncephalized April 17, 2019 9:56 PM  

"Sounds pretty typical of most software development these days. Men do the coding and women do the QA."

That's a pretty decent description of sex roles more broadly, too.

Blogger Uncephalized April 17, 2019 10:01 PM  

Cheers stevev, you still did a pretty good job explaining it.

Blogger JAG April 17, 2019 10:03 PM  

Didas Kalos wrote:Count me SKEPTICAL. So light can be stopped by gravity? Hence, the speed of light is not constant? $$$$$$$$$$

Light can be slowed down by traveling through water as the H2O molecules can absorb, and re-emit the light. A chain of this happening because water is more dense than air will cause it to take longer to travel through the distance than it would if there was only air.

There was also a video on youtube about slowing down light much further, but I have no effing clue how that works.

Blogger Uncephalized April 17, 2019 10:06 PM  

"but it's not an actual "image," it's a recreation of a bunch of images and some math magic to put them all together into something our eyes can identify."

I shake my head a little every time this argument is made--not singling you out really as I've seen the same sentiment on this page three times or so--but this is exactly what a digital camera does. We don't say digital cameras don't take 'real' pictures because they mathematically combine a bunch of separate pixels into a coherent image. This is 'just' a digital camera that uses the diameter of the Earth as its aperture, which enables a really spectacular resolution at a really phenomenal distance.

Blogger Jack (LJCSOGHMOMAS) April 17, 2019 10:08 PM  

Any amateur graphic designer could have made that "black hole photograph." The only real black hole is the budget that disappeared however many billions or trillions of dollars, all to produce that "miraculous image."

I find myself pining for the days when the government would at least hire Stanley Kubrick and give us fakes that were impressive and moving. Is there nothing the decline does not touch?

Blogger Stickwick Stapers April 17, 2019 10:12 PM  

Nate, you need to find your 9th grade math teacher, slap him silly, and ask for your money back.

Blogger Johnny April 17, 2019 10:17 PM  

>>Count me SKEPTICAL. So light can be stopped by gravity? Hence, the speed of light is not constant? $$$$$$$$$$

Hardly an expert here, but if I understand it correctly gravity warps space itself. Effectively the black hole pulls space itself into the the black whole. If it can do that, one would think the whole bloody universe would suck into the hole. Or something like that?

I don't trust any of this stuff unless it is proven to an obvious certainty. And the more complex the proof, the less reliable it is. I believe they have proven that velocity slows time by putting a highly accurate clock in an orbiting spacecraft and noted that time did indeed slow owing to the high speed.

Blogger PG April 17, 2019 11:06 PM  

All I noticed was:

1. Dudes going gaga over "cute nerdy female"
2. Hype over something irrelevant to more pressing concerns back on earth.

Blogger Noah B. April 17, 2019 11:34 PM  

Trigonometry and physics all changed with the invention of the Katie filter. Now if NASA can't show us some crystal clear images of that flag we know they've been lying to us about the moon landing all along.

Blogger Justin S April 17, 2019 11:45 PM  

According to Rupert Sheldrake's research the speed of light has changed over time he made a banned ted talk about it called the science delusion, here is a transcript: https://amara.org/en/videos/srtZB3MpMW0w/en/26983/

Blogger Uncephalized April 18, 2019 12:00 AM  

@Akulkis too bad the physics of light in extreme gravity wells are non-Newtonian; otherwise your response might have been relevant.

Blogger Brutus April 18, 2019 12:51 AM  

The Australian mathematician Stephen Crothers has written extensively, and very convincingly, detailing the problems of Relativity and the impossibility of black holes. He employs both differential geometry and also actual clear English. He uses actual arguments and proofs as opposed to rhetoric. In the past, everyone automatically dismissed all criticism of Special and General Relativity as kooks and cranks. Crothers' is not. And after about 15 years of carefully watching his work, I am ready to say he is a more skilled mathematician than his critics and the establishment "experts." (They in fact even admit he is a talented mathematician, btw). He is worth a look.

Blogger Shrugger April 18, 2019 5:22 AM  

She's a smart girl, no doubt. You can't write Python code by falling off a turnip truck. But data conversion is a peripheral function, not a breakthrough algorithm.

Blogger Nate April 18, 2019 7:45 AM  

we both know it cant be done right now. I don't recall exactly what the Hubble's pixel size is when looking at the moon but it's way to big to make out landers and such. but hey... someday we will.

Blogger Tino April 18, 2019 10:12 AM  

Stephen Crother commits a classic error. Reality trumps math. We have three high confidence observations of deep gravity wells alongside the image referenced in this blog. Not the least of which are the orbits around Sag*A. Calculations of the stars orbits crams so much mass in the center of gravity that we have a black hole by any name and by any math. Crother has proved not that black holes can't exist but that the math of relativity actually fails when the metric moves past light speed curvature/causality. He probably deserves a Nobel for finding the flaw.

Blogger Silent Draco April 18, 2019 10:20 AM  

Python is excellent for including code or executables into your project. It lets you incorporate a lot of code which is already complete and works. She's a clever girl, perhaps not as smart as first indications. Data conversion? That could be a set of "include" functions to pull in converters, then let it run under Python overnight to get the correct data format and delimiting.

You don't fall off the turnip truck using Python, but it's not that hard.
I'm mentoring some high school students who are using a Python server to incorporate existing libraries and Javascript into a project, so they don't need to re-create the wheel. This lets them focus on the technical core of their idea.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 18, 2019 10:50 AM  

"Oh, FFS. You do realize you have an actual black hole astrophysicist here, right? It's one thing to be reasonably skeptical of scientific claims, and another to turn that into a retarded competitive sport."

I'm not saying that it is worthless yet. I'm saying it could become worthless with extreme rapidity.

Personally I believe black holes exist. That doesn't mean this one does. That doesn't mean the image is real even if this one does.

There are so many possible layers of fault, why do you assume that I mean the bottom layer is bad when it could be any or several of them in between?

"But with a de facto telescope the size of the Earth"

Come now, you and I both know that that is a misleading statement. This couldn't have higher than something like a fraction of a millionth of the resolution something like that would have. Sure, it'd have much more capability than any single 'scope, but not that much.

"has ever shown a mechanism by which an "accretion disk" can form without the contents of said disk having been a previously single body which was broken up. matter coming into a gravity well does NOT organize itself into a coherent disk."

Concur. The only reason it's called a disk is because:
#1: You usually can't even pick it up unless something nearby is falling in in the first place.
#2: It'd look like a disk from whatever single perspective, even though it isn't.

"Count me SKEPTICAL. So light can be stopped by gravity? Hence, the speed of light is not constant?"

More that the shape of the space it has to travel through is not constant. Obviously the speed isn't constant either if it's moving through a non-vacuum medium, hence refraction....

"We don't need to contrive difficult ways to image the surface of the Moon when we can easily see details of the Apollo landing sites imaged by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter."

Just going to point out that they're already pointing out that that too was a NASA project and saying it would be easy to photoshop.

That's why Nate's saying to do it from here.

"All I noticed was:

1. Dudes going gaga over "cute nerdy female"
2. Hype over something irrelevant to more pressing concerns back on earth."


Yep. Nerds gonna nerd.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 18, 2019 10:56 AM  

"Crother has proved not that black holes can't exist but that the math of relativity actually fails when the metric moves past light speed curvature/causality. He probably deserves a Nobel for finding the flaw."

Unsurprising. It's the same sort of problem as dividing by zero. As a function it makes perfect sense, but the output is incomprehensible so we rule it out as a valid function. An event horizon is the point at which we can't know what is happening on the other side, according to everything I'm aware of.

Blogger P hall April 18, 2019 12:09 PM  

Actually, since this image was created from radio astronomy, it is false color to begin with, as it isn't part of the visible spectrum.

Blogger Tino April 18, 2019 12:27 PM  

@142 Yes, the unwarranted assumption is that the equations carry weight past the event horizon. Singularities probably don't exist, just as matter is crushed into neutrons in neutron stars, there is probably some exotic quark matter globe deep in the gravity well. Geometrically we know galaxies collide and we know some merge. Eventually we will image an orbiting pair of black holes and that will give new insights. There is/are missing terms probably in the equations at high metrics.

Blogger Slagenthor April 18, 2019 1:42 PM  

Azimus:

"#2: It'd look like a disk from whatever single perspective, even though it isn't."

This is mistaken. A large enough diameter accretion disk would have different appearances depending upon the angle between Earth's line of sight and the orbital plane of the disk. This is because the direct background grav lensing effect around the BH decreases WRT the foreground of the disk with increasing diameter of the orbit. The annulus effect of the event horizon will always be there, but as the disk size and orbital diameter increases it will become visually distinct and in front of the BH annulus if you are observing from the orbital plane. There will always be some red-shifted or dimming of EM coming straight out from the BH so if you are observing from the side, the portion of the disk obscuring the hole could appear red-shifted. Obviously this only applies to BH that have a planar accretion disk or cloud, and not a shell cloud or no disk at all.

Blogger IreneAthena April 18, 2019 3:04 PM  

And here's MORE of it. I can't do this with you Brawny Paper Towels!!!! I was looking forward to using the 50 cent coupon until I got to the store and saw that the burly (male) lumberjack in the red and black plaid flannel shirt no longer graces the packaging of the six-pack, but has been replaced with a tri-racial trio of women in identical red and black flannel shirts, and the slogan "Strength Has No Gender." Well... unless you're talking about average upper body strength and a few other above-the-neck strengths. Shouldn't one train one's daughter, not to pretend she's something she's not, but to look for a companion who is strong in the places she is weak? I'm all for encouraging and celebrating a talented woman in whatever endeavor that individual excels, unless that celebration excludes males whose achievements are also extraordinary.

Blogger Paul M April 18, 2019 4:18 PM  

People have been using arrays of radio telescopes for years.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 18, 2019 4:42 PM  

"This is mistaken. A large enough diameter accretion disk would have different appearances depending upon the angle between Earth's line of sight and the orbital plane of the disk."

I'm not talking about a disk looking like a disk. I'm talking about something more like a sphere looking like a disc because of perspective limitations.

Also, I'm not Azimus.

Blogger eclecticme April 18, 2019 10:38 PM  

I did not read all the comments above.
IMO she did not claim credit for the project, others shoved her front and center because she is a girl. Now others are attacking her because she was shoved front and center.

Leave her alone. I doubt she likes any of this crap.

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 3:48 AM  

According to astronomers and cosmologists, the mass of a black hole is concentrated in a 'physical singularity' of zero volume, infinite density, and infinite gravity. But no mass has zero volume, infinite density, and infinite gravity.

Similarly, these astronomers and cosmologists assign to a black hole two different escape velocities (v_esc = 0 metres per second and v_esc = c = 300,000,000 metres per second, in the same equation) and no capacity for an escape velocity (they claim not even light can escape), simultaneously, at the same location (at the 'event horizon'). That is, they claim two different escape velocities and no capacity for an escape velocity, simultaneously. (Notice, too, an object not attaining escape velocity, say a missile fired from the surface of a body, can and does travel some distance x from the surface. It just does not escape the pull of gravity, i.e. break away from the object permanently. Not reaching escape velocity does not mean absolute barrier or not being able to "leave." But cosmologists claim light cannot even *leave* the event horizon at all. Most people do not even notice this violation of what an escape velocity actually is.)

On the mathematical level, the black hole is conjured by violations of geometry. Geometrically speaking, the theory of black holes moves a sphere originally centered at the origin of a coordinate system to some other location in that same coordinate system, but leaves its centre behind. By this means, the two 'singularities' of the black hole are produced, the centre of the moved sphere, now thought to be an event horizon, and the left behind centre at the origin of coordinates, thought to be the 'physical singularity'. Analytically speaking, the violation of geometry manifests in black hole theory as the requirement that the absolute value of a real number must take on negative values.

Blogger Uncephalized April 19, 2019 11:42 AM  

@150 given that all of that is accurate--which I neither grant nor dispute, not being a cosmologist or physicist but a lowly engineer--sounds like the problem is a set of missing terms or another 'layer' of physics that takes over from relativity when gravity gets that large.

Or, maybe real numbers representing spactetime can in fact be negative and it will turn out that negative space balances out positive space, much like momentum and matter/antimatter etc. Perhaps the black hole is the place where spacetime inverts and connects to to its opposite?

Just spitballing.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 19, 2019 11:43 AM  

"Not reaching escape velocity does not mean absolute barrier or not being able to "leave.""

Yes it does when you have no source of ongoing propulsion, as would nearly anything that doesn't carry fuel. This is the basic concept that escape velocity calculations are predicated on.

The complaints about assigning zero volume to the physical mass itself are fair enough. The "center of the sphere" is not the event horizon in any way shape or form, which is not itself singularity as it has volume. No one claims infinite gravity.

Blogger John Regan April 19, 2019 2:25 PM  

So, Brutus (@150): I get that a point of "infinite" density would have no volume. I don't get why positing the actual existence of such things is so important to the adherents of what I believe our host refers to as "scientistry"; or, put another way, why are black holes important to those wishing to deny the supernatural origin of the universe, the existence of God, etc.? I'm trying to sort all this out over Easter weekend :)

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 3:01 PM  

@152 Yes, they certainly do claim infinite gravity. Crothers cites verbatum the literature. It is all over the literature. You are doing just what Crothers has demonstrated over and over and over: Showing that even most of the present day researchers and "experts" do not even have a good command of their own favorite theory. This goes double for the cheering section and army of internet goobers defending with everything they have the pronouncements of the "experts."

You are wrong on escape velocity. Propulsion does not even figure in the equations, let alone "the basic concept" they are predicated on.

Yes, again, that is what the even horizon is according to the geometry proposed by cosmologists. They are silly when you actually take the time to learn differential geometry and take a good look at their mathematics instead of simply guru worshiping.

@151, yes, and perhaps wealthy people really find all their money in pots at the end of rainbows. Perhaps there really are gooses that lay golden eggs. Or maybe, probably, some core sets of assumptions are just dead wrong and all the exotic bending over backwards to force fit answers is a fools errand?

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 4:02 PM  

It is a confusion of certain phenomena with "it is proved every day by physicists" that is going on with both black hole theory and General and Special Relativity. In the case of black holes, it is jets of high energy x-rays and other observations that enormous concentrations of gravity by way of black holes are invoked to explain. But pointing to such phenomena is not a proof of a theory or hypothesis no more than your wife being late from work or being seen talking to a man at a gas pump is proof positive she is having an affair, or that pointing to a cancer ward is proof of a certain heavily promoted cancer cure. In the same kind of way, diversity of life or the fact of blue eyes or skin folds are not proofs of Darwinian Evolution. There are alternative explanations that can be more accurate but do not satisfy some emotional reaction or attachment on your part.

People like Don Scott, Anthony Peratt, Eric Learner and others have been developing alternative and, by my way of seeing things, better and more realistic explanations of exactly what these phenomena really are and what is causing it. They are worth a good look and read. See Don Scott, for example, on what is likely a far more plausible explanation--electromagnetics--without need for exotic extrapolation of impossible runaway gravity wells like black holes and other violations of experimentally supported physics. There is zero experimental support for supposing runaway and cascading gravitational collapse to the point of forming "neutron stars," and infinite gravity wells for example. In fact, what we know of physical chemistry tells us there is no such infinite collapse possible and that it comes to a halt far short of such a state.

What we are seeing here with black holes is the same thing as with evolutionary theories: Some basic core assumptions are taken for granted and will not be deviated from. As a result, you see bending and twisting of disciplines and tools such as statistics in evolution being used to force fit needed support.

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 4:13 PM  

@153 Black Hole universes are in fact incompatible with big band universes, according to their own theories (which, as I mentioned, most are not even very well conversant with).

Black Hole Universes:

(1) Have no k-curvature.
(2) Are spatially infinite.
(3) Are eternal.
(4) Contain only one mass.
(5) Are not expanding (not non-static).
(6) Are asymptotically flat.
(7) Cannot be superposed with anything.

Big Bang Universes:

(1) Have a k-curvature.
(2) Are either spatially finite (k = 1) orspatially infinite (k = −1 or k = 0).
(3) Not eternal (~13.8 billion years old)
(4) Contain arbitrarily many masses.
(5) Are expanding (non-static).
(6) Are not asymptotically anything.
(7) Cannot be superposed with anything.

Blogger John Regan April 19, 2019 4:22 PM  

@154 Brutus, sorry if it's impertinent, but do we really have a good handle on "gravity" in the sense it is used in cosmology, to say nothing of "infinite gravity"? I'm out of my depth here but some basic knowledge and understanding would be nice.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 19, 2019 5:50 PM  

"Yes, they certainly do claim infinite gravity."

You're swapping values. You're doing something like looking at x amount of gravity coming from zero volume and assuming that that is equivalent to infinite gravity coming from any positive value of volume. It isn't. You're literally trying to divide by zero.

No, they do not state that black holes have infinite gravity, because that would make for an infinitely large event horizon.

"You are wrong on escape velocity. Propulsion does not even figure in the equations, let alone "the basic concept" they are predicated on."

You're repeating exactly what I said. Escape velocity does not take anything beyond moment impulse into account. Strictly, what direction and speed would be required for something to "coast" out of given gravity well. Any further propulsion -- such as from a missile's engines -- has nothing whatsoever to do with escape velocity calculations. You're the one trying to use a missile to disprove escape velocity calculations. The very attempt proves you don't know what you're talking about in that regard.

"or, put another way, why are black holes important to those wishing to deny the supernatural origin of the universe, the existence of God, etc.?"

There's no relation as far as I can tell. Brutus just has a hate-on for the concept for some reason.

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 6:27 PM  

@157 No, not really. Newtonian Mechanics only supplies an accurate description of behavior within certain ranges of conditions. It does not attempt to explain what gravity is. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was supposed to state what this force is, but it is in fact unsatisfactory and contains multiple logical errors and other nonsense. GR essentially posits a geometric interpretation of gravity. GR holds that space itself deforms and bends due to mass. The "rubber sheet analogy" is generally invoked to illustrate and visualize the situation. A rubber sheet stretched out taught like firemen holding a blanket for a jumper to jump in is pictured in one's mind. Then, mentally, a bowling ball is placed in the center of the sheet. The rubber is deformed by the mass of the ball and a bulge appears. The bending and deformity of space is said to provide what you are thinking of as gravity (there are forces in General Relativity, but gravity is not one of them).

Among many other serious problems, comically, what is lost in all of this high praise and intellectual chest pounding and worship is the simple fact that General Relativity, asserted to be THE theory of gravity, cannot even account for a grocer's scale that you weigh your spuds and beans on at the store! THAT IS AN ABSOLUTE FACT!

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 7:33 PM  

No, I'm not swapping, trying to divide by zero, taking, assuming, doing anything. I'm looking at and reading the actual words and statements of cosmologists and their literature. They most certainly have and DO claim infinite gravity. They claim that space-time curvature becomes infinite.

I never tried to disprove escape velocity equations. Go back and read my original post again. I pointed out that escape velocity does not mean you cannot travel off a surface or not travel some distance. It only means you need to achieve escape velocity to break away from--to escape--the field of gravity of an object and continue on. But cosmologists say light can't even travel any distance, none at all, from the event horizon. This is not what is meant by escape velocity. It should travel some distance x, just not be able to escape the pull of gravity and continue on.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 19, 2019 9:33 PM  

"They most certainly have and DO claim infinite gravity. They claim that space-time curvature becomes infinite."

Oh, so you just don't understand what you're reading. Infinite spacetime curvature doesn't mean infinite gravity. It means supreme gravity. It means the gravity is strong enough to conform space 100% to itself. This is not infinite gravity.

"But cosmologists say light can't even travel any distance, none at all, from the event horizon."

It's not that it can't travel out from the event horizon. It's that it can't reach it from the inside to begin with. You actually don't even need to take escape velocity into account to understand this. It has to do with there being literally no spatial directions that are "away" from the black hole from within the event horizon. The closer you get to the event horizon from outside, the less degrees of arcs from your perspective are "out" of the hole, until that narrows to a pinprick and disappears as you hit the event horizon.

Beyond that, the reason you're seeing different escape velocities is because they are escape velocities from different places, at least on of them ignoring general relativity for the sake of argument. One is from the event horizon, the other is from the presumed point singularity well inside of that. The third is to point out that since you can't exceed the speed of light under current understanding, you can't have a starting velocity high enough to escape anything which light can't.

I don't know why I'm wasting time on you. You've made an entire diatribe out of the multiple modes of your inability to understand the difference between an event horizon and the object producing it. Cosmologists don't say that light can't travel "from" the event horizon. They say it can't get to it from inside of it.

Perhaps I'm being too harsh and you're just not phrasing what you mean correctly. Is English your first language?

Blogger Brutus April 19, 2019 10:38 PM  

Thank you for setting me straight, Azure Amaranthine. You are a super smart boy. I'll buy you a candy bar and pat you on the head if ever I see you out.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine April 20, 2019 1:01 PM  

"I'll buy you a candy bar and pat you on the head if ever I see you out."

You could have just said okay, or stopped talking, or just kept talking about the non-absurd parts, but you had to gamma.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts