Talk:2135: M87 Black Hole Size Comparison

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Revision as of 11:37, 12 April 2019 by (talk)
Jump to: navigation, search

inb4 anti-semitic troll vandalizes the page 19:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Jeez, it hasn't happened yet? --Youforgotthisthing (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Shhh! You'll jinx it! Herobrine (talk) 21:07, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I’m surprised. “That Guy from the Netherlands” (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I always miss it, you guys are too fast for me to see it. Not that I want to see it of course. Linker (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, we made it until 15:40 on the 11th. Since it was created at 18:50 on the 10th, that's about... 20 hours and 15 minutes. Considering how it only took 13 minutes for #2133 to be vandalized-I-mean-corrected, and 25 minutes for #2125, it seems they're getting slower! I wonder if the poor lil fellas need more attention. :( --Youforgotthisthing (talk) 00:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Am I the only to one who is amazed at just how *far* Voyager has come? 19:52, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I thought the dark disk on the photo is 2.6 Schwartzchild radii, not 1? -- 20:50, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

I Googled to get a sense of scale. Apparently the sun would be less than 4 miles across if compressed into a black hole. The magnitude is incomprehensible. 02:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I believe "Voyager I" in the title text is a typo and Randall meant to say Voyager II. The location Randall notes would correspond closer to Voyager II than I(9.3 billion miles away from earth vs 11 billion miles). 06:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

I updated a few things in the explanation a couple hours back. It should read more smoothly now. Fmccarthy (talk) 08:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC) Rephrase scale reference 2.5 times smaller is not a good way to express reduction in size. It's clearer to say that it's two-fifths as big or it's 40% of the size. 09:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Is anyone agreeing with the source ? haven't found a clear attribution of the image to NSF; and also would be suprised to find one.

NSF link to image, NSF page with attribution, "The National Science Foundation (NSF) played a pivotal role in this discovery by funding individual investigators, interdisciplinary scientific teams and radio astronomy research facilities since the inception of EHT. Over the last two decades, NSF has directly funded more than $28 million in EHT research, the largest commitment of resources for the project." Source Article and NSF relation to EHT -- 16:30, 11 April 2019 (UTC)Zenthere

This is alot like the Pluto comic from a few years back. Take The A Train To Watertown (talk) 12:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Why is pluto bigger than the sun? Lekkin007 (talk)

I am trying to spread truth and good critical thinking, but IP editors keep reverting My well-intention edits! What can I do? 16:59, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

See 18:26, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
HAVE YOU TRIED WALKING INTO THE SEA (can't find the relevant xkcd sorry) on a more serious note, I'd be for banning IP editors myself, it wouldn't matter much and just stop me from editing on mobile. If the comments section could somehow be left IP editable but not the articles, that would be an interesting Midway point, but any degree necessary is fine.

Anyone else find it ironic for an IP editor to refer to logged-in editors as IP editors? That's the pot calling the brass teapot black! Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 06:09, 12 April 2019 (UTC)