Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?












38












$begingroup$


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.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
    $endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    2 hours ago
















38












$begingroup$


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.







$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
    $endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    2 hours ago














38












38








38


6



$begingroup$


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 yesterday









MorganMorgan

29326




29326




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.








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
    $endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    2 hours ago














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
    $endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    12 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
    $endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    2 hours ago








1




1




$begingroup$
Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
12 hours ago




$begingroup$
Because black holes are dangerous and the IRB wouldn't let them get too close.
$endgroup$
– David Richerby
12 hours ago












$begingroup$
53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
53 million ly is just a short trip down the road, galactically speaking.
$endgroup$
– PM 2Ring
2 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















53












$begingroup$

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*.



black hole size comparison, self madeComparison of the apparent size of the largest nearby black holes



And of course obligatory XKCD to remind us how small these objects really appear.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 31




    $begingroup$
    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
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
    $endgroup$
    – pela
    20 hours ago






  • 37




    $begingroup$
    @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
    $endgroup$
    – Konrad Rudolph
    18 hours ago






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
    $endgroup$
    – pela
    17 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
    $endgroup$
    – S. Imp
    11 hours ago



















25












$begingroup$

There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the Event Horizon 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 53 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, its distance is made up for by sheer scale.






share|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
    $endgroup$
    – Chappo
    22 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Barmar
    11 hours ago



















10












$begingroup$

As Ingolifs says, Sgr A* and M87* are the obvious candidates. At the press conference, Heino Falcke explained why they got a picture of M87* first:




But it would take some more time because Sagittarius A Star is 1000 times faster and smaller. Its like a toddler who is moving constantly. In comparison, M87 is much slower, like a big bear.




— The Deccan Herald






share|improve this answer








New contributor




user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$





















    8












    $begingroup$

    Another quick note - They are trying to get a photo of Sag. A*:



    From Space.com




    The project has been scrutinizing two black holes — the M87 behemoth, which harbors about 6.5 billion times the mass of Earth's sun, and our own Milky Way galaxy's central black hole, known as Sagittarius A*. This latter object, while still a supermassive black hole, is a runt compared to M87's beast, containing a mere 4.3 million solar masses.



    Both of these objects are tough targets because of their immense distance from Earth. Sagittarius A* lies about 26,000 light-years from us, and M87's black hole is a whopping 53.5 million light-years away.



    From our perspective, Sagittarius A*'s event horizon "is so small that it's the equivalent of seeing an orange on the moon or being able to read the newspaper in Los Angeles while you're sitting in New York City," Doeleman said during the SXSW event last month.



    ...



    And in case you're wondering about Sagittarius A*: The EHT team hopes to get imagery of that supermassive black hole soon, Doeleman said today. The researchers looked at M87 first, and it's a bit easier to resolve than Sagittarius A* because it's less variable over short timescales, he explained.







    share|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














      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

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      53












      $begingroup$

      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*.



      black hole size comparison, self madeComparison of the apparent size of the largest nearby black holes



      And of course obligatory XKCD to remind us how small these objects really appear.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 31




        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        20 hours ago






      • 37




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
        $endgroup$
        – Konrad Rudolph
        18 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        17 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
        $endgroup$
        – S. Imp
        11 hours ago
















      53












      $begingroup$

      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*.



      black hole size comparison, self madeComparison of the apparent size of the largest nearby black holes



      And of course obligatory XKCD to remind us how small these objects really appear.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 31




        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        20 hours ago






      • 37




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
        $endgroup$
        – Konrad Rudolph
        18 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        17 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
        $endgroup$
        – S. Imp
        11 hours ago














      53












      53








      53





      $begingroup$

      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*.



      black hole size comparison, self madeComparison of the apparent size of the largest nearby black holes



      And of course obligatory XKCD to remind us how small these objects really appear.






      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*.



      black hole size comparison, self madeComparison of the apparent size of the largest nearby black holes



      And of course obligatory XKCD to remind us how small these objects really appear.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 22 hours ago

























      answered yesterday









      IngolifsIngolifs

      1,8061921




      1,8061921








      • 31




        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        20 hours ago






      • 37




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
        $endgroup$
        – Konrad Rudolph
        18 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        17 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
        $endgroup$
        – S. Imp
        11 hours ago














      • 31




        $begingroup$
        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
        yesterday






      • 2




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        20 hours ago






      • 37




        $begingroup$
        @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
        $endgroup$
        – Konrad Rudolph
        18 hours ago






      • 5




        $begingroup$
        @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
        $endgroup$
        – pela
        17 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
        $endgroup$
        – S. Imp
        11 hours ago








      31




      31




      $begingroup$
      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
      yesterday




      $begingroup$
      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
      yesterday




      2




      2




      $begingroup$
      @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
      $endgroup$
      – pela
      20 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @FlorinAndrei Actually that doesn't really matter much, since the observations are made in radio where there's barely any extinction.
      $endgroup$
      – pela
      20 hours ago




      37




      37




      $begingroup$
      @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
      $endgroup$
      – Konrad Rudolph
      18 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @FlorinAndrei It may be dusty in the direction of Sgr A* but it’s messier in the direction of M87.
      $endgroup$
      – Konrad Rudolph
      18 hours ago




      5




      5




      $begingroup$
      @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
      $endgroup$
      – pela
      17 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      @KonradRudolph I see what you did there :D
      $endgroup$
      – pela
      17 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
      $endgroup$
      – S. Imp
      11 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Given that we are on the edge of the milky way, half the dust and contents of the milky way are between us and Sgr A*. I'm not sure the exact orientation of milky way relative to M87, but I believe they mentioned Sgr A* being obscured in the press conference. They also said Sgr A*, being much smaller, was also much more highly variable over time. I REALLY hope they make a time lapse video or something. That'd rule.
      $endgroup$
      – S. Imp
      11 hours ago











      25












      $begingroup$

      There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the Event Horizon 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 53 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, its distance is made up for by sheer scale.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
        $endgroup$
        – Chappo
        22 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Barmar
        11 hours ago
















      25












      $begingroup$

      There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the Event Horizon 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 53 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, its distance is made up for by sheer scale.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$













      • $begingroup$
        Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
        $endgroup$
        – Chappo
        22 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Barmar
        11 hours ago














      25












      25








      25





      $begingroup$

      There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the Event Horizon 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 53 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, its distance is made up for by sheer scale.






      share|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      There are a few criteria necessary to see a black hole with the Event Horizon 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 53 million light-years away, M87 is 6.5 billion solar masses. Since the radius of the event horizon scales linearly with mass, its distance is made up for by sheer scale.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited yesterday









      Cendolt

      677




      677










      answered yesterday









      cmscms

      45615




      45615












      • $begingroup$
        Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
        $endgroup$
        – Chappo
        22 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Barmar
        11 hours ago


















      • $begingroup$
        Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
        $endgroup$
        – Chappo
        22 hours ago










      • $begingroup$
        Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Barmar
        11 hours ago
















      $begingroup$
      Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
      $endgroup$
      – Chappo
      22 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Calculates quickly... the M87 BH consumes one Earth mass every 16 MINUTES!
      $endgroup$
      – Chappo
      22 hours ago












      $begingroup$
      Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
      $endgroup$
      – Barmar
      11 hours ago




      $begingroup$
      Mmmmm, Earth-masses. :)
      $endgroup$
      – Barmar
      11 hours ago











      10












      $begingroup$

      As Ingolifs says, Sgr A* and M87* are the obvious candidates. At the press conference, Heino Falcke explained why they got a picture of M87* first:




      But it would take some more time because Sagittarius A Star is 1000 times faster and smaller. Its like a toddler who is moving constantly. In comparison, M87 is much slower, like a big bear.




      — The Deccan Herald






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$


















        10












        $begingroup$

        As Ingolifs says, Sgr A* and M87* are the obvious candidates. At the press conference, Heino Falcke explained why they got a picture of M87* first:




        But it would take some more time because Sagittarius A Star is 1000 times faster and smaller. Its like a toddler who is moving constantly. In comparison, M87 is much slower, like a big bear.




        — The Deccan Herald






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        $endgroup$
















          10












          10








          10





          $begingroup$

          As Ingolifs says, Sgr A* and M87* are the obvious candidates. At the press conference, Heino Falcke explained why they got a picture of M87* first:




          But it would take some more time because Sagittarius A Star is 1000 times faster and smaller. Its like a toddler who is moving constantly. In comparison, M87 is much slower, like a big bear.




          — The Deccan Herald






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          $endgroup$



          As Ingolifs says, Sgr A* and M87* are the obvious candidates. At the press conference, Heino Falcke explained why they got a picture of M87* first:




          But it would take some more time because Sagittarius A Star is 1000 times faster and smaller. Its like a toddler who is moving constantly. In comparison, M87 is much slower, like a big bear.




          — The Deccan Herald







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          user24582 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 answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered 20 hours ago









          user24582user24582

          2012




          2012




          New contributor




          user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          user24582 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.























              8












              $begingroup$

              Another quick note - They are trying to get a photo of Sag. A*:



              From Space.com




              The project has been scrutinizing two black holes — the M87 behemoth, which harbors about 6.5 billion times the mass of Earth's sun, and our own Milky Way galaxy's central black hole, known as Sagittarius A*. This latter object, while still a supermassive black hole, is a runt compared to M87's beast, containing a mere 4.3 million solar masses.



              Both of these objects are tough targets because of their immense distance from Earth. Sagittarius A* lies about 26,000 light-years from us, and M87's black hole is a whopping 53.5 million light-years away.



              From our perspective, Sagittarius A*'s event horizon "is so small that it's the equivalent of seeing an orange on the moon or being able to read the newspaper in Los Angeles while you're sitting in New York City," Doeleman said during the SXSW event last month.



              ...



              And in case you're wondering about Sagittarius A*: The EHT team hopes to get imagery of that supermassive black hole soon, Doeleman said today. The researchers looked at M87 first, and it's a bit easier to resolve than Sagittarius A* because it's less variable over short timescales, he explained.







              share|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                8












                $begingroup$

                Another quick note - They are trying to get a photo of Sag. A*:



                From Space.com




                The project has been scrutinizing two black holes — the M87 behemoth, which harbors about 6.5 billion times the mass of Earth's sun, and our own Milky Way galaxy's central black hole, known as Sagittarius A*. This latter object, while still a supermassive black hole, is a runt compared to M87's beast, containing a mere 4.3 million solar masses.



                Both of these objects are tough targets because of their immense distance from Earth. Sagittarius A* lies about 26,000 light-years from us, and M87's black hole is a whopping 53.5 million light-years away.



                From our perspective, Sagittarius A*'s event horizon "is so small that it's the equivalent of seeing an orange on the moon or being able to read the newspaper in Los Angeles while you're sitting in New York City," Doeleman said during the SXSW event last month.



                ...



                And in case you're wondering about Sagittarius A*: The EHT team hopes to get imagery of that supermassive black hole soon, Doeleman said today. The researchers looked at M87 first, and it's a bit easier to resolve than Sagittarius A* because it's less variable over short timescales, he explained.







                share|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  8












                  8








                  8





                  $begingroup$

                  Another quick note - They are trying to get a photo of Sag. A*:



                  From Space.com




                  The project has been scrutinizing two black holes — the M87 behemoth, which harbors about 6.5 billion times the mass of Earth's sun, and our own Milky Way galaxy's central black hole, known as Sagittarius A*. This latter object, while still a supermassive black hole, is a runt compared to M87's beast, containing a mere 4.3 million solar masses.



                  Both of these objects are tough targets because of their immense distance from Earth. Sagittarius A* lies about 26,000 light-years from us, and M87's black hole is a whopping 53.5 million light-years away.



                  From our perspective, Sagittarius A*'s event horizon "is so small that it's the equivalent of seeing an orange on the moon or being able to read the newspaper in Los Angeles while you're sitting in New York City," Doeleman said during the SXSW event last month.



                  ...



                  And in case you're wondering about Sagittarius A*: The EHT team hopes to get imagery of that supermassive black hole soon, Doeleman said today. The researchers looked at M87 first, and it's a bit easier to resolve than Sagittarius A* because it's less variable over short timescales, he explained.







                  share|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  Another quick note - They are trying to get a photo of Sag. A*:



                  From Space.com




                  The project has been scrutinizing two black holes — the M87 behemoth, which harbors about 6.5 billion times the mass of Earth's sun, and our own Milky Way galaxy's central black hole, known as Sagittarius A*. This latter object, while still a supermassive black hole, is a runt compared to M87's beast, containing a mere 4.3 million solar masses.



                  Both of these objects are tough targets because of their immense distance from Earth. Sagittarius A* lies about 26,000 light-years from us, and M87's black hole is a whopping 53.5 million light-years away.



                  From our perspective, Sagittarius A*'s event horizon "is so small that it's the equivalent of seeing an orange on the moon or being able to read the newspaper in Los Angeles while you're sitting in New York City," Doeleman said during the SXSW event last month.



                  ...



                  And in case you're wondering about Sagittarius A*: The EHT team hopes to get imagery of that supermassive black hole soon, Doeleman said today. The researchers looked at M87 first, and it's a bit easier to resolve than Sagittarius A* because it's less variable over short timescales, he explained.








                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 15 hours ago

























                  answered 15 hours ago









                  BruceWayneBruceWayne

                  21817




                  21817






















                      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

                      Last logged in always never, not logging

                      Colouring column values based on a specific condition. How could I do this?

                      Iĥnotaksono