Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy not take a picture of a closer black hole?Why don't Neutron Stars form event horizon?Does matter accumulate just outside the event horizon of a black hole?What conditions would lead to this event around the black hole in the Pictor A galaxy?Does conservation of energy make black holes impossible?How does the Event Horizon Telescope implement the interferometry?Whats the deal with black holes and “no information from inside the event horizon can leave”?What defines the plane of an accretion disk around a black hole?Black hole, escape velocity, going up?Why did the Event Horizon Telescope take so long to take a photo of a black hole?

Why is ParallelDo slower than Do?

Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?

The difference between dialogue marks

Keeping a retro style to sci-fi spaceships?

Merge two greps into single one

Can withdrawing asylum be illegal?

Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?

Vorinclex, does my opponents land untap if they were tapped before i summoned him?

Why doesn't UInt have a toDouble()?

In a sentence, do you use 'waga' or 'onoga' for possession?

What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?

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

How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?

How to deal with speedster characters?

APIPA and LAN Broadcast Domain

Straighten subgroup lattice

Compute the product of 3 dictionaries and concatenate keys and values

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

How to obtain a position of last non-zero element

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Cooking pasta in a water boiler

What is the most efficient way to store a numeric range?

How do I free up internal storage if I don't have any apps downloaded?

I am an eight letter word. What am I?



Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InWhy not take a picture of a closer black hole?Why don't Neutron Stars form event horizon?Does matter accumulate just outside the event horizon of a black hole?What conditions would lead to this event around the black hole in the Pictor A galaxy?Does conservation of energy make black holes impossible?How does the Event Horizon Telescope implement the interferometry?Whats the deal with black holes and “no information from inside the event horizon can leave”?What defines the plane of an accretion disk around a black hole?Black hole, escape velocity, going up?Why did the Event Horizon Telescope take so long to take a photo of a black hole?










20












$begingroup$


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?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
    $endgroup$
    – BruceWayne
    4 hours ago
















20












$begingroup$


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?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
    $endgroup$
    – BruceWayne
    4 hours ago














20












20








20


3



$begingroup$


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?










share|improve this question











$endgroup$




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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









HDE 226868

20.9k269130




20.9k269130










asked yesterday









White PrimeWhite Prime

20429




20429











  • $begingroup$
    Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
    $endgroup$
    – BruceWayne
    4 hours ago

















  • $begingroup$
    Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
    $endgroup$
    – BruceWayne
    4 hours ago
















$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
4 hours ago





$begingroup$
Related question - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
$endgroup$
– BruceWayne
4 hours ago











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















33












$begingroup$

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.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    18












    $begingroup$

    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.







    share|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      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
      6 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
      $endgroup$
      – Glorfindel
      6 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
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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









    33












    $begingroup$

    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.






    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      33












      $begingroup$

      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.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        33












        33








        33





        $begingroup$

        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.






        share|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        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.







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited 23 hours ago

























        answered yesterday









        HDE 226868HDE 226868

        20.9k269130




        20.9k269130





















            18












            $begingroup$

            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.







            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              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
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
              $endgroup$
              – Glorfindel
              6 hours ago















            18












            $begingroup$

            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.







            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              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
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
              $endgroup$
              – Glorfindel
              6 hours ago













            18












            18








            18





            $begingroup$

            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.







            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            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.








            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            GlorfindelGlorfindel

            2,2092927




            2,2092927











            • $begingroup$
              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
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
              $endgroup$
              – Glorfindel
              6 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
              6 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
              $endgroup$
              – Glorfindel
              6 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
            6 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
            6 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
            $endgroup$
            – Glorfindel
            6 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            I'm just quoting one of the people involved in the project, I haven't verified his statements ...
            $endgroup$
            – Glorfindel
            6 hours ago

















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            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%2f30313%2fwhy-didnt-the-event-horizon-telescope-team-mention-sagittarius-a%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

            名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

            格濟夫卡 參考資料 导航菜单51°3′40″N 34°2′21″E / 51.06111°N 34.03917°E / 51.06111; 34.03917ГезівкаПогода в селі 编辑或修订

            聖斯德望教堂 (塞克什白堡) 參考資料 导航菜单