On 05/03/2017 06:57, Chris.B wrote:
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 07:17:45 UTC+1, RichA wrote:
https://petapixel.com/2017/03/04/bla...ographed-2017/

At the [distinct] risk of pedantry: "Imaged" would be a better term.

"Photographed" sounds more like some amateur taking a snap of their monitor with their "iPhoney®"

PrtSc and paste into free image handling software?
Then the cynics will simply [sic] claim it was Photoshopped from the film.

Does anybody else remember when they used to say that radio astronomy would never produce an image remotely as fine as optical?

That point was reached when the 5km Ryle aperture synthesis telescope
was built at Lord's bridge and surpassed later by the VLA. VLBI was able
to do a couple of orders of magnitude better even back then but only for
tiny fields of view and incredibly bright sources.

The new system will be a form of VLBI but operating at very much higher
frequencies and hopefully enough antenna to see something. The problem
might be if the assumption of a constant source is not met.

That was back in the days when every astronomy text book had exactly the same picture of Jupiter taken by the 200" at Palomar.
It's a pity they didn't "cheat" and use Registax. ;-)

They won't see the event horizon either. The will image the bright
accretion disk orbiting above the event horizon on its way down.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown