Why not take a picture of a closer black hole? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?Can A Black Hole Exist?Star versus Black HoleCan things move faster than light inside the event horizon of a black hole?What conditions would lead to this event around the black hole in the Pictor A galaxy?Why do “they” portray colliding black holes like that?Black Hole growthWhat will happen to the shape of a galaxy when a super massive black hole lying in its center dies(evaporates out)?Black hole, escape velocity, going up?Shouldn't we not be able to see some black holes?Is this a black hole?

What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?

How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?

Return to UK after having been refused entry years ago

Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT

Can a flute soloist sit?

Lightning Grid - Columns and Rows?

slides for 30min~1hr skype tenure track application interview

Are there incongruent pythagorean triangles with the same perimeter and same area?

Button changing it's text & action. Good or terrible?

Why do we hear so much about the Trump administration deciding to impose and then remove tariffs?

Does the shape of a die affect the probability of a number being rolled?

Should I use my personal e-mail address, or my workplace one, when registering to external websites for work purposes?

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

What is the motivation for a law requiring 2 parties to consent for recording a conversation

Reference request: Oldest number theory books with (unsolved) exercises?

What does ひと匙 mean in this manga and has it been used colloquially?

Can we generate random numbers using irrational numbers like π and e?

FPGA - DIY Programming

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

How to manage monthly salary

Did Section 31 appear in Star Trek: The Next Generation?

Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?

Is bread bad for ducks?



Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?Can A Black Hole Exist?Star versus Black HoleCan things move faster than light inside the event horizon of a black hole?What conditions would lead to this event around the black hole in the Pictor A galaxy?Why do “they” portray colliding black holes like that?Black Hole growthWhat will happen to the shape of a galaxy when a super massive black hole lying in its center dies(evaporates out)?Black hole, escape velocity, going up?Shouldn't we not be able to see some black holes?Is this a black hole?










8












$begingroup$


There are closer galaxies than Messier 87 for sure, even ours! It sparked my curiosity that they went with one 53 million light years away. Is there a reason for this?










share|improve this question







New contributor




Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$
















    8












    $begingroup$


    There are closer galaxies than Messier 87 for sure, even ours! It sparked my curiosity that they went with one 53 million light years away. Is there a reason for this?










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$














      8












      8








      8


      2



      $begingroup$


      There are closer galaxies than Messier 87 for sure, even ours! It sparked my curiosity that they went with one 53 million light years away. Is there a reason for this?










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      There are closer galaxies than Messier 87 for sure, even ours! It sparked my curiosity that they went with one 53 million light years away. Is there a reason for this?







      black-hole supermassive-black-hole event-horizon-telescope






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 5 hours ago









      MorganMorgan

      1412




      1412




      New contributor




      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Morgan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6












          $begingroup$

          I was surprised too when I first heard they were trying to image M87's black hole.



          The short answer is because it's really, really big. It is 1500 times bigger (diameter) than our Sagittarius A*, and 2100 times farther away. This makes its apparent size about 70% of that of Sgr A*.



          A cursory search of wikipedia's List of Largest black holes shows that there's no other black holes with a combination of size and closeness greater than these two.



          A couple of other candidates are not too far off. Andromeda's black hole is 50x the size of ours, and at 100x the distance, it would appear half the size of Sgr A*. The Sombrero galaxy is 380 times farther way than Sgr A*, and has a black hole estimated to be 1 billion solar masses, which is 232 times Sr A*, resulting in an angular diameter about 60% of Sgr A*.



          There appear to be many other considerations to which black holes were chosen, as explained in this similar question. At a guess these would include how obscured each black hole is with foreground dust/stars etc, how active (and therefore bright) the nuclei are, and their inclination w.r.t earth affecting which observatories could observe them at which times.



          Edit: I've found another plausible candidate. NGC_1600 is 200 M light years away with a central black hole estimated to be 17 billion solar masses heavy. This would put it at about 40% the apparent diameter of Sgr A*.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
            $endgroup$
            – Florin Andrei
            39 mins ago


















          3












          $begingroup$

          There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the event-horizons telescope. They are, in importance:



          • Active Feeding: you need a thick accretion disk with lots of matter accreting onto the black hole. M87 fits this criteria, and is a glut, consuming about 90 Earth masses a day.

          • Apparent size. Even though it is 15 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, it’s distance is made up for by sheer scale.




          share









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Ingolifs
            3 hours ago











          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
          );



          );






          Morgan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30339%2fwhy-not-take-a-picture-of-a-closer-black-hole%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









          6












          $begingroup$

          I was surprised too when I first heard they were trying to image M87's black hole.



          The short answer is because it's really, really big. It is 1500 times bigger (diameter) than our Sagittarius A*, and 2100 times farther away. This makes its apparent size about 70% of that of Sgr A*.



          A cursory search of wikipedia's List of Largest black holes shows that there's no other black holes with a combination of size and closeness greater than these two.



          A couple of other candidates are not too far off. Andromeda's black hole is 50x the size of ours, and at 100x the distance, it would appear half the size of Sgr A*. The Sombrero galaxy is 380 times farther way than Sgr A*, and has a black hole estimated to be 1 billion solar masses, which is 232 times Sr A*, resulting in an angular diameter about 60% of Sgr A*.



          There appear to be many other considerations to which black holes were chosen, as explained in this similar question. At a guess these would include how obscured each black hole is with foreground dust/stars etc, how active (and therefore bright) the nuclei are, and their inclination w.r.t earth affecting which observatories could observe them at which times.



          Edit: I've found another plausible candidate. NGC_1600 is 200 M light years away with a central black hole estimated to be 17 billion solar masses heavy. This would put it at about 40% the apparent diameter of Sgr A*.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
            $endgroup$
            – Florin Andrei
            39 mins ago















          6












          $begingroup$

          I was surprised too when I first heard they were trying to image M87's black hole.



          The short answer is because it's really, really big. It is 1500 times bigger (diameter) than our Sagittarius A*, and 2100 times farther away. This makes its apparent size about 70% of that of Sgr A*.



          A cursory search of wikipedia's List of Largest black holes shows that there's no other black holes with a combination of size and closeness greater than these two.



          A couple of other candidates are not too far off. Andromeda's black hole is 50x the size of ours, and at 100x the distance, it would appear half the size of Sgr A*. The Sombrero galaxy is 380 times farther way than Sgr A*, and has a black hole estimated to be 1 billion solar masses, which is 232 times Sr A*, resulting in an angular diameter about 60% of Sgr A*.



          There appear to be many other considerations to which black holes were chosen, as explained in this similar question. At a guess these would include how obscured each black hole is with foreground dust/stars etc, how active (and therefore bright) the nuclei are, and their inclination w.r.t earth affecting which observatories could observe them at which times.



          Edit: I've found another plausible candidate. NGC_1600 is 200 M light years away with a central black hole estimated to be 17 billion solar masses heavy. This would put it at about 40% the apparent diameter of Sgr A*.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
            $endgroup$
            – Florin Andrei
            39 mins ago













          6












          6








          6





          $begingroup$

          I was surprised too when I first heard they were trying to image M87's black hole.



          The short answer is because it's really, really big. It is 1500 times bigger (diameter) than our Sagittarius A*, and 2100 times farther away. This makes its apparent size about 70% of that of Sgr A*.



          A cursory search of wikipedia's List of Largest black holes shows that there's no other black holes with a combination of size and closeness greater than these two.



          A couple of other candidates are not too far off. Andromeda's black hole is 50x the size of ours, and at 100x the distance, it would appear half the size of Sgr A*. The Sombrero galaxy is 380 times farther way than Sgr A*, and has a black hole estimated to be 1 billion solar masses, which is 232 times Sr A*, resulting in an angular diameter about 60% of Sgr A*.



          There appear to be many other considerations to which black holes were chosen, as explained in this similar question. At a guess these would include how obscured each black hole is with foreground dust/stars etc, how active (and therefore bright) the nuclei are, and their inclination w.r.t earth affecting which observatories could observe them at which times.



          Edit: I've found another plausible candidate. NGC_1600 is 200 M light years away with a central black hole estimated to be 17 billion solar masses heavy. This would put it at about 40% the apparent diameter of Sgr A*.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          I was surprised too when I first heard they were trying to image M87's black hole.



          The short answer is because it's really, really big. It is 1500 times bigger (diameter) than our Sagittarius A*, and 2100 times farther away. This makes its apparent size about 70% of that of Sgr A*.



          A cursory search of wikipedia's List of Largest black holes shows that there's no other black holes with a combination of size and closeness greater than these two.



          A couple of other candidates are not too far off. Andromeda's black hole is 50x the size of ours, and at 100x the distance, it would appear half the size of Sgr A*. The Sombrero galaxy is 380 times farther way than Sgr A*, and has a black hole estimated to be 1 billion solar masses, which is 232 times Sr A*, resulting in an angular diameter about 60% of Sgr A*.



          There appear to be many other considerations to which black holes were chosen, as explained in this similar question. At a guess these would include how obscured each black hole is with foreground dust/stars etc, how active (and therefore bright) the nuclei are, and their inclination w.r.t earth affecting which observatories could observe them at which times.



          Edit: I've found another plausible candidate. NGC_1600 is 200 M light years away with a central black hole estimated to be 17 billion solar masses heavy. This would put it at about 40% the apparent diameter of Sgr A*.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 4 hours ago

























          answered 4 hours ago









          IngolifsIngolifs

          1,5921619




          1,5921619







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
            $endgroup$
            – Florin Andrei
            39 mins ago












          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
            $endgroup$
            – Florin Andrei
            39 mins ago







          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
          $endgroup$
          – Florin Andrei
          39 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          Don't forget to say space is kind of dusty in the direction of Sgr A*. It's quite a bit clearer in the direction of M87.
          $endgroup$
          – Florin Andrei
          39 mins ago











          3












          $begingroup$

          There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the event-horizons telescope. They are, in importance:



          • Active Feeding: you need a thick accretion disk with lots of matter accreting onto the black hole. M87 fits this criteria, and is a glut, consuming about 90 Earth masses a day.

          • Apparent size. Even though it is 15 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, it’s distance is made up for by sheer scale.




          share









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Ingolifs
            3 hours ago















          3












          $begingroup$

          There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the event-horizons telescope. They are, in importance:



          • Active Feeding: you need a thick accretion disk with lots of matter accreting onto the black hole. M87 fits this criteria, and is a glut, consuming about 90 Earth masses a day.

          • Apparent size. Even though it is 15 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, it’s distance is made up for by sheer scale.




          share









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Ingolifs
            3 hours ago













          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$

          There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the event-horizons telescope. They are, in importance:



          • Active Feeding: you need a thick accretion disk with lots of matter accreting onto the black hole. M87 fits this criteria, and is a glut, consuming about 90 Earth masses a day.

          • Apparent size. Even though it is 15 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, it’s distance is made up for by sheer scale.




          share









          $endgroup$



          There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the event-horizons telescope. They are, in importance:



          • Active Feeding: you need a thick accretion disk with lots of matter accreting onto the black hole. M87 fits this criteria, and is a glut, consuming about 90 Earth masses a day.

          • Apparent size. Even though it is 15 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, it’s distance is made up for by sheer scale.





          share











          share


          share










          answered 4 hours ago









          cmscms

          2364




          2364







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Ingolifs
            3 hours ago












          • 1




            $begingroup$
            The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
            $endgroup$
            – Ingolifs
            3 hours ago







          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Ingolifs
          3 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          The distance is about 50 million ly, I thought.
          $endgroup$
          – Ingolifs
          3 hours ago










          Morgan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          Morgan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Morgan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          Morgan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30339%2fwhy-not-take-a-picture-of-a-closer-black-hole%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          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







          Popular posts from this blog

          ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_13_input to have shape (3, 150, 150) but got array with shape (150, 150, 3)2019 Community Moderator ElectionError when checking : expected dense_1_input to have shape (None, 5) but got array with shape (200, 1)Error 'Expected 2D array, got 1D array instead:'ValueError: Error when checking input: expected lstm_41_input to have 3 dimensions, but got array with shape (40000,100)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_1 to have shape (7,) but got array with shape (1,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_2 to have shape (1,) but got array with shape (0,)Keras exception: ValueError: Error when checking input: expected conv2d_1_input to have shape (150, 150, 3) but got array with shape (256, 256, 3)Steps taking too long to completewhen checking input: expected dense_1_input to have shape (13328,) but got array with shape (317,)ValueError: Error when checking target: expected dense_3 to have shape (None, 1) but got array with shape (7715, 40000)Keras exception: Error when checking input: expected dense_input to have shape (2,) but got array with shape (1,)

          Ружовы пелікан Змест Знешні выгляд | Пашырэнне | Асаблівасці біялогіі | Літаратура | НавігацыяДагледжаная версіяправерана1 зменаДагледжаная версіяправерана1 змена/ 22697590 Сістэматыкана ВіківідахВыявына Вікісховішчы174693363011049382

          Illegal assignment from SObject to ContactFetching String, Id from Map - Illegal Assignment Id to Field / ObjectError: Compile Error: Illegal assignment from String to BooleanError: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectError on Test Class - System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectRemote action problemDML requires SObject or SObject list type error“Illegal assignment from List to List”Test Class Fail: Batch Class: System.QueryException: List has no rows for assignment to SObjectMapping to a user'List has no rows for assignment to SObject' Mystery