Black Hole Photo Used Supercomputers and Cloud Computing To Prove Einstein Right (thenextweb.com) 64
An anonymous reader quotes The Next Web:
As stunning and ground-breaking as it is, the EHT project is not just about taking on a challenge. It's an unprecedented test of whether Einstein's ideas about the very nature of space and time hold up in extreme circumstances, and looks closer than ever before at the role of black holes in the universe. To cut a long story short: Einstein was right....
His general theory of relativity has passed two serious tests from the universe's most extreme conditions in the last few years. Here, Einstein's theory predicted the observations from M87 with unerring accuracy, and is seemingly the correct description of the nature of space, time, and gravity. The measurements of the speeds of matter around the center of the black hole are consistent with being near the speed of light.
The advanced computing research center at the University of Texas at Austin says the data for the photo "was collected during a 2017 global campaign, after decades of scientific, engineering, and computational research and preparation." And their own facility played a role in the finished photo, according to an article shared by aarondubrow: Helping to lay the groundwork for the black hole imaging, and providing the theoretical underpinnings that enabled the researchers to interpret the mass, underlying structure, and orientations of the black hole and its environment, were supercomputers at The University of Texas at Austin's Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC) -- Stampede1, Stampede2 and Jetstream -- all three of which were supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF), which also provided key funding for the EHT... "We are doing finite difference, three-dimensional simulations with not just gas dynamics, but also magnetic fields," said Harvard University professor and EHT researcher Ramesh Narayan. "That includes radiation and what is called two-temperature physics in a general relativistic framework. For these, we really do need the TACC's Stampede system with lots of cores and lots of hours.... The simulations are computationally very expensive and supercomputers are definitely needed...."
Alongside the simulation and modeling effort, another group of researchers from the University of Arizona (UA) were using Jetstream -- a large-scale cloud environment for research located both at TACC and Indiana University -- to develop cloud-based data analysis pipelines that proved crucial for combining huge amounts of data taken from the geographically-distributed observatories, and sharing the data with researchers around the world. "New technologies such as cloud computing are essential to support international collaborations like this," said Chi-kwan Chan, leader of the EHT Computations and Software Working Group and an assistant astronomer at UA. "The production run was actually carried out on Google Cloud, but much of the early development was on Jetstream. Without Jetstream, it is unclear that we would have a cloud-based pipeline at all."
His general theory of relativity has passed two serious tests from the universe's most extreme conditions in the last few years. Here, Einstein's theory predicted the observations from M87 with unerring accuracy, and is seemingly the correct description of the nature of space, time, and gravity. The measurements of the speeds of matter around the center of the black hole are consistent with being near the speed of light.
The advanced computing research center at the University of Texas at Austin says the data for the photo "was collected during a 2017 global campaign, after decades of scientific, engineering, and computational research and preparation." And their own facility played a role in the finished photo, according to an article shared by aarondubrow: Helping to lay the groundwork for the black hole imaging, and providing the theoretical underpinnings that enabled the researchers to interpret the mass, underlying structure, and orientations of the black hole and its environment, were supercomputers at The University of Texas at Austin's Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC) -- Stampede1, Stampede2 and Jetstream -- all three of which were supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF), which also provided key funding for the EHT... "We are doing finite difference, three-dimensional simulations with not just gas dynamics, but also magnetic fields," said Harvard University professor and EHT researcher Ramesh Narayan. "That includes radiation and what is called two-temperature physics in a general relativistic framework. For these, we really do need the TACC's Stampede system with lots of cores and lots of hours.... The simulations are computationally very expensive and supercomputers are definitely needed...."
Alongside the simulation and modeling effort, another group of researchers from the University of Arizona (UA) were using Jetstream -- a large-scale cloud environment for research located both at TACC and Indiana University -- to develop cloud-based data analysis pipelines that proved crucial for combining huge amounts of data taken from the geographically-distributed observatories, and sharing the data with researchers around the world. "New technologies such as cloud computing are essential to support international collaborations like this," said Chi-kwan Chan, leader of the EHT Computations and Software Working Group and an assistant astronomer at UA. "The production run was actually carried out on Google Cloud, but much of the early development was on Jetstream. Without Jetstream, it is unclear that we would have a cloud-based pipeline at all."
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, some very stupid peopl who overestimate their abilities think einstein is wrong. I know you think following kooks makes you special, but all it makes you is a gullible moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It hasn't proved anything. (Score:1)
Not necessarily stupid. There are alternative theories (e.g., RTG by A.Logunov) that are mostly equivalent numerically to the general relativity but start to differ when it comes to black holes. Observing a black hole with precision allows to rule out such alternative theories.
Re: It hasn't proved anything. (Score:2, Funny)
Worst Bond sequels ever.
Re: (Score:1)
In those sequels, Commander Bond's relationship entanglements get all spooky.
Re:It hasn't proved anything. (Score:5, Insightful)
GR at its core is amazingly simple. It states that gravitational field and acceleration field are equivalent, i.e. the strong equivalence principle. From there it immediately follows that spacetime is curved around a massive object.
Skepticism is great. It's the cornerstone of science. But it works both ways. You may want to apply a healthy dose to those self-claimed smart people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We know that magic is impossible, but we overestimate how smart we are.
The corollary to Clark's first law, is that any sufficiently complex interaction is indistinguishable from magic to the layman.
This means that since they don't grok GR, the world is flat.
Re:It hasn't proved anything. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: It hasn't proved anything. (Score:1)
Every experiment focused on GR has shown it to be right.
Every experiment focused on GR has not shown it to be wrong.
FTFY. I think GR is correct, but let us at least apply the scientific principle correctly please.
Re: (Score:1)
but observing a black hole ... is not proof of Standard Model by some magic of Einstein
This sentence alone proves you understand nothing. You're not even not even wrong.
Re:Quantum mechanics (Score:5, Informative)
This puff piece seems to be done to trigger Einstein fanbois
This "puff piece" once again confirms predictions made by GR, as every experiment done so far has. So when someone says GR is obviously totally wrong, the only place to go with that is: they are a fucking idiot, and they don't know jack shit about anything. Electric universe is bullshit; that cannot be said enough to relay how completely fucking wrong it is.
102 years since GR was published. We are still, now 102 years later, trying to develop new technology to test it.... and every time we do, we've come up with MORE experimental evidence that it is correct. Your derogatory little bullshit "fanbois" comment only solidifies that you, as well as the OP (that you're not) are fucking idiots. You don't have some magical knowledge that no one else has, otherwise your name would be on a scientific theory. You can claim electric universe if you want, but it's already been shown WRONG. I guess it's about your speed.... bullshit to scam money from cultists who want to feel special because they are not special in reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Quantum mechanics (Score:4, Insightful)
It wasn't so long ago when Einstein was laughed at and derided with just as much passion as you are expressing now.
And when was this? By 1916 when Einstein proposed General Relativity, he was already well known in the scientific community for his 1905 papers. What Einstein proposes in GR was met with skepticism as it should have been because it was ground breaking. No one “laughed” at him.
Re: (Score:2)
And when was this? By 1916 when Einstein proposed General Relativity, he was already well known in the scientific community for his 1905 papers. What Einstein proposes in GR was met with skepticism as it should have been because it was ground breaking. No one “laughed” at him.
Well, to be honest, I bet somebody laughed at him. People are dicks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No one laughed at him.
Well, he did have the entire room in stitches when he told the joke about bringing a honeycomb and a jackass into a brothel.... but everyone loves that joke, even if it is a little short.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what...anyone who says "General Relativity is bullshit. It is wrong. The few predictions it made were shown to be wrong. Only complete fucking idiots continue to push it," is the epitome of a fucking idiot. The first 102 years have shown that every prediction
Re: (Score:2)
Poop emoji? (Score:2)
What would the pic looked like if Einstein were wrong?
Re: (Score:3)
What would the pic looked like if Einstein were wrong?
A solid mass of color without the black spot is one possibility. If it wasn't a black hole and instead just a huge sun type thing, it would be glowing and light would be coming from it. There is probably still work on the way the light is being affected around the edges. How light interacts with the Schwarzchild Radius could tell us something about the battle between relativity and quantum mechanics and which one describes the situation better.
Congratulations Mileva Mari (Score:2)
For helping to make this possible.
"They haven't aged a year..." (Score:2)
Einstein was probably one of them aliens.
Don't you think?
Re: (Score:2)
Remember, science is only as good as the tools we have to measure it, and the tools to this date aren't good enough.
You're of course correct.
They are however good enough to disprove what you just said, so thanks for peddling that horse shit to the detriment of the common IQ.