Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?
$begingroup$
At the press conference this morning, the Event Horizon Telescope team did not say much about Sagittarius A*, which was the target many of us have we been waiting for.
Is there any explanation anywhere for this omission?
black-hole supermassive-black-hole sagittarius-a event-horizon-telescope
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At the press conference this morning, the Event Horizon Telescope team did not say much about Sagittarius A*, which was the target many of us have we been waiting for.
Is there any explanation anywhere for this omission?
black-hole supermassive-black-hole sagittarius-a event-horizon-telescope
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At the press conference this morning, the Event Horizon Telescope team did not say much about Sagittarius A*, which was the target many of us have we been waiting for.
Is there any explanation anywhere for this omission?
black-hole supermassive-black-hole sagittarius-a event-horizon-telescope
$endgroup$
At the press conference this morning, the Event Horizon Telescope team did not say much about Sagittarius A*, which was the target many of us have we been waiting for.
Is there any explanation anywhere for this omission?
black-hole supermassive-black-hole sagittarius-a event-horizon-telescope
black-hole supermassive-black-hole sagittarius-a event-horizon-telescope
edited yesterday
HDE 226868♦
20.9k269130
20.9k269130
asked yesterday
White PrimeWhite Prime
21429
21429
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There was a mention of Sagittarius A* during the Q+A portion of the press conference; the team indicated that they hope to produce an image sometime in the future (although they were careful to make no promises, and they're not assuming they'll be successful).
That said, I'm not wholly surprised that we ended up seeing M87, rather than Sgr A*, for a couple reasons which the team mentions in their first paper:
- As Glorfindel said, Sgr A*'s event horizon is much smaller, meaning matter orbiting the black hole has a shorter orbital period. This contributes to variability on the timescale of minutes. The observations of M87 took place over the course of a week - roughly the timescale over which that target varies, meaning the source should not change significantly over that time.
- Second - and this is the reason I've seen cited more often - Sgr A* lies in the center of our galaxy, and so thick clouds of gas and dust lie between it and us. That results in scattering, which is a problem. There are ways to mitigate this, of course, and the team has spent a long time on this, but it's simpler to just look at the black hole that doesn't have that problem in the first place. That's why M87's black hole is an attractive target.
Neither of these are impossible hurdles to overcome, but they're certainly very real difficulties that can't be ignored.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've found an explanation in Dutch here by Heino Falcke, one of the EHT founders. Translation:
Hard to photograph
It was easiest to take a picture of M87. "It is very difficult to photograph the black hole in our Milky Way, because the material around it moves very fast: the vortex rotates around its axis in 20 minutes. Compare it to a toddler who has to sit still for hours to be photographed: that's not possible. With M87, the matter revolves around the hole in two days, so it's easier to photograph", says Falcke.
(The original text is as follows:)
Lastig te fotograferen
Het lukte het beste om een foto te maken van M87. "Het is heel lastig om het zwarte gat in onze Melkweg op de foto te zetten, doordat de materie daaromheen heel snel beweegt: de draaikolk draait in 20 minuten om zijn as. Vergelijk het met een kleuter die urenlang stil moet zitten om op de foto te gaan: dat gaat niet. Bij M87 draait de materie in twee dagen om het gat heen, dus dat is makkelijker te fotograferen", zegt Falcke.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "514"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30313%2fwhy-didnt-the-event-horizon-telescope-team-mention-sagittarius-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There was a mention of Sagittarius A* during the Q+A portion of the press conference; the team indicated that they hope to produce an image sometime in the future (although they were careful to make no promises, and they're not assuming they'll be successful).
That said, I'm not wholly surprised that we ended up seeing M87, rather than Sgr A*, for a couple reasons which the team mentions in their first paper:
- As Glorfindel said, Sgr A*'s event horizon is much smaller, meaning matter orbiting the black hole has a shorter orbital period. This contributes to variability on the timescale of minutes. The observations of M87 took place over the course of a week - roughly the timescale over which that target varies, meaning the source should not change significantly over that time.
- Second - and this is the reason I've seen cited more often - Sgr A* lies in the center of our galaxy, and so thick clouds of gas and dust lie between it and us. That results in scattering, which is a problem. There are ways to mitigate this, of course, and the team has spent a long time on this, but it's simpler to just look at the black hole that doesn't have that problem in the first place. That's why M87's black hole is an attractive target.
Neither of these are impossible hurdles to overcome, but they're certainly very real difficulties that can't be ignored.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There was a mention of Sagittarius A* during the Q+A portion of the press conference; the team indicated that they hope to produce an image sometime in the future (although they were careful to make no promises, and they're not assuming they'll be successful).
That said, I'm not wholly surprised that we ended up seeing M87, rather than Sgr A*, for a couple reasons which the team mentions in their first paper:
- As Glorfindel said, Sgr A*'s event horizon is much smaller, meaning matter orbiting the black hole has a shorter orbital period. This contributes to variability on the timescale of minutes. The observations of M87 took place over the course of a week - roughly the timescale over which that target varies, meaning the source should not change significantly over that time.
- Second - and this is the reason I've seen cited more often - Sgr A* lies in the center of our galaxy, and so thick clouds of gas and dust lie between it and us. That results in scattering, which is a problem. There are ways to mitigate this, of course, and the team has spent a long time on this, but it's simpler to just look at the black hole that doesn't have that problem in the first place. That's why M87's black hole is an attractive target.
Neither of these are impossible hurdles to overcome, but they're certainly very real difficulties that can't be ignored.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There was a mention of Sagittarius A* during the Q+A portion of the press conference; the team indicated that they hope to produce an image sometime in the future (although they were careful to make no promises, and they're not assuming they'll be successful).
That said, I'm not wholly surprised that we ended up seeing M87, rather than Sgr A*, for a couple reasons which the team mentions in their first paper:
- As Glorfindel said, Sgr A*'s event horizon is much smaller, meaning matter orbiting the black hole has a shorter orbital period. This contributes to variability on the timescale of minutes. The observations of M87 took place over the course of a week - roughly the timescale over which that target varies, meaning the source should not change significantly over that time.
- Second - and this is the reason I've seen cited more often - Sgr A* lies in the center of our galaxy, and so thick clouds of gas and dust lie between it and us. That results in scattering, which is a problem. There are ways to mitigate this, of course, and the team has spent a long time on this, but it's simpler to just look at the black hole that doesn't have that problem in the first place. That's why M87's black hole is an attractive target.
Neither of these are impossible hurdles to overcome, but they're certainly very real difficulties that can't be ignored.
$endgroup$
There was a mention of Sagittarius A* during the Q+A portion of the press conference; the team indicated that they hope to produce an image sometime in the future (although they were careful to make no promises, and they're not assuming they'll be successful).
That said, I'm not wholly surprised that we ended up seeing M87, rather than Sgr A*, for a couple reasons which the team mentions in their first paper:
- As Glorfindel said, Sgr A*'s event horizon is much smaller, meaning matter orbiting the black hole has a shorter orbital period. This contributes to variability on the timescale of minutes. The observations of M87 took place over the course of a week - roughly the timescale over which that target varies, meaning the source should not change significantly over that time.
- Second - and this is the reason I've seen cited more often - Sgr A* lies in the center of our galaxy, and so thick clouds of gas and dust lie between it and us. That results in scattering, which is a problem. There are ways to mitigate this, of course, and the team has spent a long time on this, but it's simpler to just look at the black hole that doesn't have that problem in the first place. That's why M87's black hole is an attractive target.
Neither of these are impossible hurdles to overcome, but they're certainly very real difficulties that can't be ignored.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
HDE 226868♦HDE 226868
20.9k269130
20.9k269130
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've found an explanation in Dutch here by Heino Falcke, one of the EHT founders. Translation:
Hard to photograph
It was easiest to take a picture of M87. "It is very difficult to photograph the black hole in our Milky Way, because the material around it moves very fast: the vortex rotates around its axis in 20 minutes. Compare it to a toddler who has to sit still for hours to be photographed: that's not possible. With M87, the matter revolves around the hole in two days, so it's easier to photograph", says Falcke.
(The original text is as follows:)
Lastig te fotograferen
Het lukte het beste om een foto te maken van M87. "Het is heel lastig om het zwarte gat in onze Melkweg op de foto te zetten, doordat de materie daaromheen heel snel beweegt: de draaikolk draait in 20 minuten om zijn as. Vergelijk het met een kleuter die urenlang stil moet zitten om op de foto te gaan: dat gaat niet. Bij M87 draait de materie in twee dagen om het gat heen, dus dat is makkelijker te fotograferen", zegt Falcke.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've found an explanation in Dutch here by Heino Falcke, one of the EHT founders. Translation:
Hard to photograph
It was easiest to take a picture of M87. "It is very difficult to photograph the black hole in our Milky Way, because the material around it moves very fast: the vortex rotates around its axis in 20 minutes. Compare it to a toddler who has to sit still for hours to be photographed: that's not possible. With M87, the matter revolves around the hole in two days, so it's easier to photograph", says Falcke.
(The original text is as follows:)
Lastig te fotograferen
Het lukte het beste om een foto te maken van M87. "Het is heel lastig om het zwarte gat in onze Melkweg op de foto te zetten, doordat de materie daaromheen heel snel beweegt: de draaikolk draait in 20 minuten om zijn as. Vergelijk het met een kleuter die urenlang stil moet zitten om op de foto te gaan: dat gaat niet. Bij M87 draait de materie in twee dagen om het gat heen, dus dat is makkelijker te fotograferen", zegt Falcke.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've found an explanation in Dutch here by Heino Falcke, one of the EHT founders. Translation:
Hard to photograph
It was easiest to take a picture of M87. "It is very difficult to photograph the black hole in our Milky Way, because the material around it moves very fast: the vortex rotates around its axis in 20 minutes. Compare it to a toddler who has to sit still for hours to be photographed: that's not possible. With M87, the matter revolves around the hole in two days, so it's easier to photograph", says Falcke.
(The original text is as follows:)
Lastig te fotograferen
Het lukte het beste om een foto te maken van M87. "Het is heel lastig om het zwarte gat in onze Melkweg op de foto te zetten, doordat de materie daaromheen heel snel beweegt: de draaikolk draait in 20 minuten om zijn as. Vergelijk het met een kleuter die urenlang stil moet zitten om op de foto te gaan: dat gaat niet. Bij M87 draait de materie in twee dagen om het gat heen, dus dat is makkelijker te fotograferen", zegt Falcke.
$endgroup$
I've found an explanation in Dutch here by Heino Falcke, one of the EHT founders. Translation:
Hard to photograph
It was easiest to take a picture of M87. "It is very difficult to photograph the black hole in our Milky Way, because the material around it moves very fast: the vortex rotates around its axis in 20 minutes. Compare it to a toddler who has to sit still for hours to be photographed: that's not possible. With M87, the matter revolves around the hole in two days, so it's easier to photograph", says Falcke.
(The original text is as follows:)
Lastig te fotograferen
Het lukte het beste om een foto te maken van M87. "Het is heel lastig om het zwarte gat in onze Melkweg op de foto te zetten, doordat de materie daaromheen heel snel beweegt: de draaikolk draait in 20 minuten om zijn as. Vergelijk het met een kleuter die urenlang stil moet zitten om op de foto te gaan: dat gaat niet. Bij M87 draait de materie in twee dagen om het gat heen, dus dat is makkelijker te fotograferen", zegt Falcke.
answered yesterday
GlorfindelGlorfindel
2,2192927
2,2192927
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
Are you sure about the "matter revolves around the hole in two days" part ? I've heard the event horizon has roughly a diameter of 100 billions km, and even at speed close to c that's about 2 weeks for a complete revolution
$endgroup$
– Keelhaul
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
$begingroup$
I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
$endgroup$
– Glorfindel
13 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Astronomy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30313%2fwhy-didnt-the-event-horizon-telescope-team-mention-sagittarius-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
11 hours ago