Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Giant Radio Telescope Tackles Black Holes
Cosmiverse ^

Posted on 04/03/2002 8:18:40 AM PST by Texaggie79

Giant Radio Telescope Tackles Black Holes
April 2, 2002 08:00 CST

Space exploration requires a great deal of imagination. With the international Space Very Long Baseline Interferometry mission (VLBI), supported by NASA until last month, a global team of scientists and engineers not only imagined a telescope larger than Earth, they actually created it.

Black holes are perhaps the most elusive cosmic entity. Although we cannot see black holes, astronomers have confirmed their existence from the behavior of objects near the areas thought to be black holes. To learn more about these giant mysteries, scientists have to get a closer look at them. The very successful international joint mission has propelled astronomers one step closer to understanding the complex mechanisms that control black holes.

Although people generally think of black holes as all-consuming vacuums, they also eject material at speeds nearing the speed of light. The material emits radio waves, which can be detected by radio telescopes.

Right image: Artist's concept of Very Long Baseline Interferometry space and ground radio telescopes that, together, created a virtual telescope three times Earth's diameter.

However, for a radio telescope to be able to observe details as fine as those observed by the Hubble Space Telescope, it has to be roughly 100,000 times larger than Hubble, or about 161 kilometers (100 miles) in diameter, said Dr. David Murphy, a JPL radio astronomer currently visiting the Japanese Space Agency.

To expand the resolution capabilities of ground radio telescopes, many radio telescopes can observe simultaneously to effectively "create" a telescope as big as the array of telescopes. However, even radio telescopes peppered across the globe aren’t sufficient to see the necessary details around black holes.

So a Japanese-built radio telescope in space was added to an array of 40 ground telescopes. The resulting "radio telescope" was as big as the orbit (32,187 kilometers or 20,000 miles). It revealed details in the observed objects more than 100 times finer than the Hubble Space Telescope can see. Sixteen different nations participated in the ambitious five-year mission.

"It was the United Nations of radio astronomy," said Dr. David Meier, a JPL astrophysicist. "To see different countries working together to build a single, very complex instrument was very impressive."

Above image: Radio images taken during the mission near the supermassive black hole in the quasar 1928+738

The project was "perhaps the most complicated science mission ever," according to project scientist Dr. Bob Preston of JPL.

The space telescopes relayed radio signals from the celestial sources to NASA’s Deep Space Network, a set of communication antennas on three different continents, as well as to sites at the U.S. National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO) and in Japan. These signals, along with those received at ground radio telescopes, were recorded on high-density videotape.

The videotapes were then sent to a common facility to be ‘read’ by a correlator that synchronizes tapes from every receiver to within one millionth of a second. With the help of computer software that mimics the focus of a camera, the radio waves become celestial images.

"It’s like looking at a picture made with radio waves by a camera that’s larger than Earth," said Dr. David Meier, JPL astrophysicist. "We are able to zoom into the centers of black holes closer than any other imaging technique."

Left image: The Very Long Baseline Array is a global interferometer combining signals from radio telescopes from the Virgin Islands to Hawaii. This is equivalent to a telescope nearly as large as the earth. Click image to enlarge.

In addition to many awe-inspiring pictures, scientists have gained extensive scientific information from the mission, with results appearing in more than 200 scientific papers. A lot has been learned at the most fundamental level about the environment near super massive black holes. Material escaping in jets from black holes in the center of galaxies was confirmed to be moving nearly at the speed of light. The structure, time-variability and magnetic fields of material near the black holes provided additional clues to the nature of these violent regions of space.

The mission also concentrated its enormous magnification power on other energetic celestial objects, such as pulsars. A pulsar is a neutron star, an extremely dense object formed by a supernova explosion at the end of a massive star's lifetime. The mission also studied molecular masers in star-forming regions. A maser is a cousin of the laser that transmits a highly focused beam of microwave energy.

In the future, radio astronomy will become even more precise. If selected by NASA, the Advanced Radio Interferometry between Space and Earth mission will further the study of supermassive black holes by obtaining images with resolutions 3,000 times greater than NASA's Hubble Space Telescope.

Source: NASA



TOPICS: Astronomy; Science
KEYWORDS: blackholes; crevolist; space
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

1 posted on 04/03/2002 8:18:40 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: petuniasevan; edwin hubble; longshadow; blam; jlogajan; A. Pole; e_engineer; Doctor Stochastic...
ping
2 posted on 04/03/2002 8:20:42 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; jennyp; junior; longshadow; crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman...
Ping.
3 posted on 04/03/2002 8:29:50 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Pong.
4 posted on 04/03/2002 8:36:23 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Space exploration requires a great deal of imagination

Even with rudimentary imagination, it is more productive in an atmosphere of deliberate consilience.

5 posted on 04/03/2002 8:44:02 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I hate "paradigm." I hate "synergy." And now I hate "consilience."
6 posted on 04/03/2002 8:56:26 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I forgot I hate "meme."
7 posted on 04/03/2002 8:57:12 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79;all
Layman question:

As I understand it, a Black Hole is a "tear" caused in three-dimensional space-time by an infinitely dense object.

All depictions I've ever seen of Black Holes show them to be like infintely deep whirlpools. I assume that these holes "fall off" in all directions, depending on their formation.

So what determines the direction in which a Black Hole forms? Are there variations in the "density" of space-time, such that different Black Holes "fall off" in different directions?

Also, do all known black holes "rotate" in the same direction?

8 posted on 04/03/2002 9:01:02 AM PST by martin_fierro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Use a word three times in context, and it is yours. :)
9 posted on 04/03/2002 9:07:01 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Even with rudimentary imagination, it is more productive in an atmosphere of deliberate consilience.

You know what you can do with your "deliberate consilience." If we were doing space exploration in a small, enclosed ship, I suspect we'd have a knife fight before very long.

10 posted on 04/03/2002 9:08:57 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro; Radio Astronomer; ThinkPlease; Physicist
As I understand it, a Black Hole is a "tear" caused in three-dimensional space-time by an infinitely dense object.

First, I'm not sure "tear" is a good term for it. Second, space-time is FOUR dimensional (in Special Relativity, at least), not three. A better way to think of it is that all masses cause a localized curvature of spacetime; the bigger the mass, the greater the curvature. A Black Hole forms when the mass is SO large (and the density so high) that the curvature of Space-time becomes infinite.

All depictions I've ever seen of Black Holes show them to be like infintely deep whirlpools. I assume that these holes "fall off" in all directions, depending on their formation.

So what determines the direction in which a Black Hole forms? Are there variations in the "density" of space-time, such that different Black Holes "fall off" in different directions?

There's no "direction" the Black Hole is falling "into." The Black hole is located exactly where the center of mass of the material that formed the Black Hole was just BEFORE the BH formed. Another way to think of it is that the localized Spacetime curvature caused by a mass has no "direction" either; it causes a uniform curvature in all directions. The space-time curvature of the BH is only moreso.

Also, do all known black holes "rotate" in the same direction?

The short answer is I'm not sure, but I expect the rotational distribution of BH is about the same as the rotational distribution of other celestial matter, such as stars, clusters, galaxies, etc. It is interesting that you ask, in that rotation (actually angular momentum) is one of the few physical characteristics a BH has. The others are mass and (I think) electric charge.

I hereby defer to those more knowledgeable than I am on this subject whom I've pinged to revise and extend my remarks as needed to correct any errors or ommissions.

11 posted on 04/03/2002 9:29:34 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry,VadeRetro
Is this National Hate A Word Day?

If we want to use a defined, autolimited language, why not just speak Arabic or French?

12 posted on 04/03/2002 9:33:23 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
the localized Spacetime curvature caused by a mass

What if spacetime curvature and mass are coincidental, circumstantial, and are not cause and effect. Or what if spacetime curvature causes mass? There was a comment quite a while back pertaining to the old vortex theory of gravity, that if a planet were not there, say, Jupiter, its gravitational field would still be present, that the presence of gravity causes the planet to form right there. This is just to point out that these are all hypotheses and that flat statements might close some doors to speculation.

13 posted on 04/03/2002 9:42:08 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
The others are mass and (I think) electric charge.

I don't think electric charge survives. Just mass and spin. But the mass which was the big bang probably wasn't even spinning, in that there was no reference frame for determining spin.

14 posted on 04/03/2002 9:42:17 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Thanks for the ping. Wish he wouldn't have said this,

"It was the United Nations of radio astronomy," said Dr. David Meier, a JPL astrophysicist. "To see different countries working together to build a single, very complex instrument was very impressive."

15 posted on 04/03/2002 9:49:22 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Is this National Hate A Word Day?

Ugly, trendy neologisms are the noiseless equivalent of fingernails on a blackboard.

16 posted on 04/03/2002 9:55:01 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Is this National Hate A Word Day?

I don't know, but as long as we're getting things off our chests, there are some constructions I hate:

Boy, those grate on me.

I also hate the word "twee".

17 posted on 04/03/2002 9:55:59 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Physicist
I don't think electric charge survives. Just mass and spin. But the mass which was the big bang probably wasn't even spinning, in that there was no reference frame for determining spin.

I'm sure there are THREE parameters that describe a BH; if electric charge ISN'T the third one (after mass and angular momentum), then I'm not sure what it would be...

18 posted on 04/03/2002 10:05:32 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
.... but you can't convince him to do something. You persuade him to do something.

OR, in more technical terms: "persuade" takes the infinitive; "convince" does not.

19 posted on 04/03/2002 10:07:56 AM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
You may have been a pupil in my grandfather's English class. Not your everyday, ordinary English teacher, he knew rules of grammar such as are not often written in textbooks. He corresponded regularly in seven languages, including with a German he met and took prisoner in the trenches in Flanders during WW I.
20 posted on 04/03/2002 10:09:52 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson