A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 15th 19, 11:57 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!

The original is on the screen of Katie Bouman's laptop:

https://sites.google.com/site/testso...ies/bouman.jpg

So there are other similar structures around the black hole formation. Either this makes the program or they actually exist. In the last case we would have several black holes.

Best regards

Walter
Ads
  #2  
Old April 17th 19, 09:21 PM posted to sci.astro
Steve Willner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,157
Default The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!

In article ,
writes:
The original is on the screen of Katie Bouman's laptop:
https://sites.google.com/site/testso...ies/bouman.jpg

Why do you think a random image on a laptop is "the original" rather
than some work-in-progress image?

What do you even mean by "the original?" EHT made images on four
different days, each processed independently by four different teams.
Which is "the original?"

The paper at
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...41-8213/ab0e85
gives an _overview_ of the imaging process.

All the relevant papers are linked from
https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/2...e/Focus_on_EHT

--
Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls.
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
  #3  
Old April 18th 19, 08:03 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!

Am Mittwoch, 17. April 2019 22:21:47 UTC+2 schrieb Steve Willner:
In article ,
writes:
The original is on the screen of Katie Bouman's laptop:
https://sites.google.com/site/testso...ies/bouman.jpg


Why do you think a random image on a laptop is "the original" rather
than some work-in-progress image?

What do you even mean by "the original?" EHT made images on four
different days, each processed independently by four different teams.
Which is "the original?"


Even in papers the images are already retouched. Compare the image on Katie Bouman's laptop and there left image from Paper

https://cdn.iopscience.com/images/20...b0e85f4_lr.jpg

Katie Bouman's image is sharper and includes more details.
  #4  
Old April 18th 19, 08:27 AM posted to sci.astro
Martin Brown[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 179
Default The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!

On 18/04/2019 08:03, wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 17. April 2019 22:21:47 UTC+2 schrieb Steve Willner:
In article ,
writes:
The original is on the screen of Katie Bouman's laptop:
https://sites.google.com/site/testso...ies/bouman.jpg

Why do you think a random image on a laptop is "the original" rather
than some work-in-progress image?

What do you even mean by "the original?" EHT made images on four
different days, each processed independently by four different teams.
Which is "the original?"


Even in papers the images are already retouched. Compare the image on Katie Bouman's laptop and there left image from Paper

https://cdn.iopscience.com/images/20...b0e85f4_lr.jpg

Katie Bouman's image is sharper and includes more details.


They are not necessarily "details" so much as imaging artefacts that
haven't quite been fully calibrated out yet. There looks to still be a
faint copy of the ring structure displaced by half a diameter south to
me in that first version - though it clearly does show a main ring.

The choice of final detail shown is usually shown convolved with a
gaussian beamshape to be as conservative as possible. The raw beamshape
of a sparse interferometry synthesis map is truly horrible to look at.

The choice is pretty much to either have resolution that depends
strongly on local signal to noise (which experienced practitioners
sometimes prefer) or convolved to some nominal resolution like a normal
photographic image which is much easier for most people to understand.

I suggest you read the paper already referenced before making baseless
accusations against the researchers. They have done a very good job of
testing how robust their results are with partial data and individual
observing days taken in isolation. The ring stands.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/1...41-8213/ab0e85

The only thing on her image that would have interested me is the single
bright blob at about 12 o'clock. Everything else looks like it is a
faint copy of the true image not quite aligned with the phase centre.

I'd have much preferred it if they had also made an image zoomed out by
10x or 100x (or whatever the isoplanatic patch will allow). I'd be very
interested to see the start of the jets in the field of view.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #5  
Old April 18th 19, 10:55 AM posted to sci.astro
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default The "photo" of the black hole has been retouched!

Am Donnerstag, 18. April 2019 09:27:08 UTC+2 schrieb Martin Brown:
On 18/04/2019 08:03, wrote:


Katie Bouman's image is sharper and includes more details.


They are not necessarily "details" so much as imaging artefacts that
haven't quite been fully calibrated out yet.


The image in Paper is more blurred and also darkened on the edge. The good word "Calibrate" I would not use for this kind of editing
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PBS 2 hour "Black Hole Apocalypse" NOVA special was pretty good RichA[_6_] Amateur Astronomy 6 January 18th 18 03:25 PM
Black hole form in finite "external" time [email protected] Astronomy Misc 4 February 16th 07 03:48 PM
"Is There a Force of Gravity?" (my deathblows; also anbringup of the black hole) Autymn D. C. Astronomy Misc 0 December 2nd 06 07:01 AM
Scientists Find Black Hole's "Point of No Return" (Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 January 9th 06 04:48 PM
Scientists Find Black Hole's "Point of No Return" (Forwarded) Andrew Yee News 0 January 9th 06 04:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.