Tjyylli

How did passengers keep warm on sail ships?

How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?

Using dividends to reduce short term capital gains?

Do working physicists consider Newtonian mechanics to be "falsified"?

What happens to a Warlock's expended Spell Slots when they gain a Level?

Drawing arrows from one table cell reference to another

Is it ethical to upload a automatically generated paper to a non peer-reviewed site as part of a larger research?

Is 'stolen' appropriate word?

Why are PDP-7-style microprogrammed instructions out of vogue?

Could an empire control the whole planet with today's comunication methods?

Visa regaring travelling European country

Did the UK government pay "millions and millions of dollars" to try to snag Julian Assange?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

University's motivation for having tenure-track positions

Can each chord in a progression create its own key?

How to handle characters who are more educated than the author?

Python - Fishing Simulator

Example of compact Riemannian manifold with only one geodesic.

Would an alien lifeform be able to achieve space travel if lacking in vision?

how can a perfect fourth interval be considered either consonant or dissonant?

Single author papers against my advisor's will?

How to determine omitted units in a publication

What information about me do stores get via my credit card?

How do spell lists change if the party levels up without taking a long rest?

Why was M87 targeted for the Event Horizon Telescope instead of Sagittarius A*?

31

5

$begingroup$

The first image of a black hole has been released today, April 10th, 2019. The team targeted the black hole at the center of the M87 galaxy.

Why didn't the team target Sagittarius A* at the center of our own galaxy? Intuitively, it would seem to be a better target as it is closer to us.

black-holes astronomy event-horizon

share|cite|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  9
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Related question on Astronomy Stack Exchange: astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/30313/2153.
  $endgroup$
  – HDE 226868
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Another similar question on Astronomy - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
  $endgroup$
  – BruceWayne
  yesterday
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

31

5

$begingroup$

The first image of a black hole has been released today, April 10th, 2019. The team targeted the black hole at the center of the M87 galaxy.

Why didn't the team target Sagittarius A* at the center of our own galaxy? Intuitively, it would seem to be a better target as it is closer to us.

black-holes astronomy event-horizon

share|cite|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  9
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Related question on Astronomy Stack Exchange: astronomy.stackexchange.com/q/30313/2153.
  $endgroup$
  – HDE 226868
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Another similar question on Astronomy - Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?
  $endgroup$
  – BruceWayne
  yesterday
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

The first image of a black hole has been released today, April 10th, 2019. The team targeted the black hole at the center of the M87 galaxy.

Why didn't the team target Sagittarius A* at the center of our own galaxy? Intuitively, it would seem to be a better target as it is closer to us.

black-holes astronomy event-horizon

share|cite|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

share|cite|improve this question

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

edited yesterday

Peter Mortensen

1,95511323

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

asked 2 days ago

MaxterMaxter

332210

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

44

$begingroup$

Of course they targeted Sgr A* as well.

I think though that this is a more difficult target to get good images of.

The black hole is about 1500 times less massive than in M87, but is about 2000 times closer. So the angular scale of the event horizons should be similar. However Sgr A* is a fairly dormant black hole and may not be illuminated so well, and there is more scattering material between us and it than in M87.

A bigger problem may be variability timescales$^{dagger}$. The black hole in M87 is light days across, so images can be combined across several days of observing. Sgr A* is light minutes across, so rapid variability could be a problem.

The penultimate paragraph of the initial Event Horizon Telescope paper says:

Another primary EHT source, Sgr A*, has a precisely measured mass three orders of magnitude smaller than that of M87*, with dynamical timescales of minutes instead of days. Observing the shadow of Sgr A* will require accounting for this variability and mitigation of scattering effects caused by the interstellar medium

$dagger$ The accretion flow into a black hole is turbulent and variable. However, the shortest timescale upon which significant changes can take place across the source is the timescale for light (the fastest possible means of communication) to travel across or around it. Because the material close to the black hole is moving relativistically, we do expect things to vary on these kinds of timescales. The photon sphere of a black hole is approximately $6GM/c^2$ across, meaning a shortest timescale of variability is about $6GM/c^3$. In more obvious units:
$$ tau sim 30 left(frac{M}{10^6 M_{odot}}right) {rm seconds}.$$
i.e. We might expect variability in the image on timescales of 30 seconds multiplied by the black hole mass in units of millions of solar masses. This is 2 minutes for Sgr A* and a much longer 2.25 days for the M87 black hole.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited yesterday

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I was going to protest this answer, but now just have a catch to add. In some places (looking at you, Veritasium) a simulated image of SgrA* is easy to mistake as a genuine photo. Now I understand why SgrA* isn't even in the press release. The circulating SgrA* image is just a simulation. See source material and comments section: youtu.be/VnsZj9RvhFU
  $endgroup$
  – World Outsider
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I'd intuitively think that dust in the disk of our galaxy plays a part by obscuring the innermost regions.
  $endgroup$
  – Allure
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Allure The centre isn't obscured at 1.3mm wavelengths.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  So why not Andromeda, or any closer galaxy? Size of central black hole? Orientation of galaxy (edge-on, face-on, or in between)?
  $endgroup$
  – David Conrad
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DavidConrad You will find another question about that somewhere. Yes, the angular size of the Andromeda black hole would be a bit smaller.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
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

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f471792%2fwhy-was-m87-targeted-for-the-event-horizon-telescope-instead-of-sagittarius-a%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

44

$begingroup$

Of course they targeted Sgr A* as well.

I think though that this is a more difficult target to get good images of.

The black hole is about 1500 times less massive than in M87, but is about 2000 times closer. So the angular scale of the event horizons should be similar. However Sgr A* is a fairly dormant black hole and may not be illuminated so well, and there is more scattering material between us and it than in M87.

A bigger problem may be variability timescales$^{dagger}$. The black hole in M87 is light days across, so images can be combined across several days of observing. Sgr A* is light minutes across, so rapid variability could be a problem.

The penultimate paragraph of the initial Event Horizon Telescope paper says:

Another primary EHT source, Sgr A*, has a precisely measured mass three orders of magnitude smaller than that of M87*, with dynamical timescales of minutes instead of days. Observing the shadow of Sgr A* will require accounting for this variability and mitigation of scattering effects caused by the interstellar medium

$dagger$ The accretion flow into a black hole is turbulent and variable. However, the shortest timescale upon which significant changes can take place across the source is the timescale for light (the fastest possible means of communication) to travel across or around it. Because the material close to the black hole is moving relativistically, we do expect things to vary on these kinds of timescales. The photon sphere of a black hole is approximately $6GM/c^2$ across, meaning a shortest timescale of variability is about $6GM/c^3$. In more obvious units:
$$ tau sim 30 left(frac{M}{10^6 M_{odot}}right) {rm seconds}.$$
i.e. We might expect variability in the image on timescales of 30 seconds multiplied by the black hole mass in units of millions of solar masses. This is 2 minutes for Sgr A* and a much longer 2.25 days for the M87 black hole.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited yesterday

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I was going to protest this answer, but now just have a catch to add. In some places (looking at you, Veritasium) a simulated image of SgrA* is easy to mistake as a genuine photo. Now I understand why SgrA* isn't even in the press release. The circulating SgrA* image is just a simulation. See source material and comments section: youtu.be/VnsZj9RvhFU
  $endgroup$
  – World Outsider
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I'd intuitively think that dust in the disk of our galaxy plays a part by obscuring the innermost regions.
  $endgroup$
  – Allure
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Allure The centre isn't obscured at 1.3mm wavelengths.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  So why not Andromeda, or any closer galaxy? Size of central black hole? Orientation of galaxy (edge-on, face-on, or in between)?
  $endgroup$
  – David Conrad
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DavidConrad You will find another question about that somewhere. Yes, the angular size of the Andromeda black hole would be a bit smaller.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

44

$begingroup$

Of course they targeted Sgr A* as well.

I think though that this is a more difficult target to get good images of.

The black hole is about 1500 times less massive than in M87, but is about 2000 times closer. So the angular scale of the event horizons should be similar. However Sgr A* is a fairly dormant black hole and may not be illuminated so well, and there is more scattering material between us and it than in M87.

A bigger problem may be variability timescales$^{dagger}$. The black hole in M87 is light days across, so images can be combined across several days of observing. Sgr A* is light minutes across, so rapid variability could be a problem.

The penultimate paragraph of the initial Event Horizon Telescope paper says:

Another primary EHT source, Sgr A*, has a precisely measured mass three orders of magnitude smaller than that of M87*, with dynamical timescales of minutes instead of days. Observing the shadow of Sgr A* will require accounting for this variability and mitigation of scattering effects caused by the interstellar medium

$dagger$ The accretion flow into a black hole is turbulent and variable. However, the shortest timescale upon which significant changes can take place across the source is the timescale for light (the fastest possible means of communication) to travel across or around it. Because the material close to the black hole is moving relativistically, we do expect things to vary on these kinds of timescales. The photon sphere of a black hole is approximately $6GM/c^2$ across, meaning a shortest timescale of variability is about $6GM/c^3$. In more obvious units:
$$ tau sim 30 left(frac{M}{10^6 M_{odot}}right) {rm seconds}.$$
i.e. We might expect variability in the image on timescales of 30 seconds multiplied by the black hole mass in units of millions of solar masses. This is 2 minutes for Sgr A* and a much longer 2.25 days for the M87 black hole.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited yesterday

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I was going to protest this answer, but now just have a catch to add. In some places (looking at you, Veritasium) a simulated image of SgrA* is easy to mistake as a genuine photo. Now I understand why SgrA* isn't even in the press release. The circulating SgrA* image is just a simulation. See source material and comments section: youtu.be/VnsZj9RvhFU
  $endgroup$
  – World Outsider
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I'd intuitively think that dust in the disk of our galaxy plays a part by obscuring the innermost regions.
  $endgroup$
  – Allure
  2 days ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Allure The centre isn't obscured at 1.3mm wavelengths.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  So why not Andromeda, or any closer galaxy? Size of central black hole? Orientation of galaxy (edge-on, face-on, or in between)?
  $endgroup$
  – David Conrad
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @DavidConrad You will find another question about that somewhere. Yes, the angular size of the Andromeda black hole would be a bit smaller.
  $endgroup$
  – Rob Jeffries
  yesterday
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

$begingroup$

Of course they targeted Sgr A* as well.

I think though that this is a more difficult target to get good images of.

The black hole is about 1500 times less massive than in M87, but is about 2000 times closer. So the angular scale of the event horizons should be similar. However Sgr A* is a fairly dormant black hole and may not be illuminated so well, and there is more scattering material between us and it than in M87.

A bigger problem may be variability timescales$^{dagger}$. The black hole in M87 is light days across, so images can be combined across several days of observing. Sgr A* is light minutes across, so rapid variability could be a problem.

The penultimate paragraph of the initial Event Horizon Telescope paper says:

Another primary EHT source, Sgr A*, has a precisely measured mass three orders of magnitude smaller than that of M87*, with dynamical timescales of minutes instead of days. Observing the shadow of Sgr A* will require accounting for this variability and mitigation of scattering effects caused by the interstellar medium

$dagger$ The accretion flow into a black hole is turbulent and variable. However, the shortest timescale upon which significant changes can take place across the source is the timescale for light (the fastest possible means of communication) to travel across or around it. Because the material close to the black hole is moving relativistically, we do expect things to vary on these kinds of timescales. The photon sphere of a black hole is approximately $6GM/c^2$ across, meaning a shortest timescale of variability is about $6GM/c^3$. In more obvious units:
$$ tau sim 30 left(frac{M}{10^6 M_{odot}}right) {rm seconds}.$$
i.e. We might expect variability in the image on timescales of 30 seconds multiplied by the black hole mass in units of millions of solar masses. This is 2 minutes for Sgr A* and a much longer 2.25 days for the M87 black hole.

share|cite|improve this answer

edited yesterday

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

$endgroup$

share|cite|improve this answer

edited yesterday

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248

answered 2 days ago

Rob JeffriesRob Jeffries

71.1k7151248