Talk:Event Horizon Telescope

Feb 2023 observation of NRAO 530
The EHT team published a new paper on Feb 1, 2023 revealing a new image and analysis of the Quasar NRAO 530. This is not yet reflected on the page. Anyone with better knowledge on the subject want to add it? StereoFolic (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Added, thanks! Artem.G (talk) 16:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Your paper is very important to us, but please hold the line.
Near the top of the Messier 87* section, there is a grammatically incorrect sentence (added in this edit) that appears to be about a separate announcement, i.e. not about the April 2019 announcement of the first direct image of a black hole, which the paragraph is mainly about, but about a separate and much less high-profile February 2020 publication of proof of clockwise rotation of M87*. That line may be a little out of place in that paragraph. If it still deserves inclusion in this article (which, recall, is on the radio telescope collaboration), maybe it should be first copyedited and then worked into the section or article a bit further down, in a way that clearly distinguishes the news of the 2020 paper from the 2019 global front page news event. As it is, the 2020 (w)riðer appears to be saddled atop the tails of the 2019 (w)riðer's coat, if you'll forgive the orthographically challenged pun. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 20:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

PS: Just for context: The origin edit I mentioned above also included an explanation of the degrees of statistical significance of the discovery asserted in the clockwise rotation paper. Artem.G removed that explanation as redundant. In response to this, IP-user 121.179.131.132, the contributor of the origin edit, added a section to this Talk page—which has since been archived—in which they accused Artem.G of vandalism, and started edit-warring over the inclusion or non-inclusion of the degrees-of-sigma explanation. According to the IP-user's talk page, this triggered their being banned for a year. For his part, Artem.G appears to have simply left the remainder of the grammatically incorrect sentence in place. All this happened between the 5th and 6th of August 2021 (cf. article history). I would agree that an explanation of the degrees of sigma proudly achieved is probably redundant, but on the other hand, what presently remains is somewhat cryptic. The man on the Clapham omnibus might be reading the "was observed in the 6σ region" part (on his steampunk-Victorian smartphone, no doubt) and incorrectly come to believe this was the part of the sky the black hole was observed in. At the peril of shifting into the raspberry register, maybe we should take six degrees of sigma to ligma. And—speaking of six degrees—the reason we should do that is because of what I will modestly propose be termed R.O.A's law: Any topic can be included in the explanation of any other topic once you allow yourself to recursively go six degrees of off-topic.