ESOcast 173: First Successful Test of Einstein’s General Relativity Near Supermassive Black Hole

[@condorboss3339]

It would have been nice if the narrator, instead of getting all woozy about how great the collaboration was and the expensive toys, actually took the time to explain how the interferometer worked and the nature of gravitational redshift. Some graphs showing prediction vs measurement would have been nice as well.

[@SEVideoQuant]

Condor Boss yes but too technical for neophytes...

[@JohnShalamskas]

But now ESO missed a good opportunity to share how the scientific method actually works.

[@Allabouthelicopter]

exactly

[@katrinadeltoros7848]

I was waiting through the video for that.

[@tgmtf5963]

well. a woman

[@deadgar69]

If we proved Einstein wrong in some of his ecuations it's ok cause they didn't have our technology but Einstein being prove right with something from 1915, that's incredible that man really was a genius so much respect

[@thomassholemuller677]

I love your channel picture bro:))))

[@taskfailedsuccessfully4791]

Wait, if the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second and 25 million Km/h, and converting this to meters is 6944444.4444 there is something apparentaly realy confusing.

[@PP-Start]

@@taskfailedsuccessfully4791 Speed of light is 1079252848,8 kilometer/hour so more than one billion km per hour. This star which was going 25 million km per hour is impressive but still long way down from speed of light.

[@MaloPiloto]

It truly is amazing. The speed of light is about 186,000 miles per second. Really fast- but the universe is so vast (and expanding at a faster and faster rate!) that even at that speed it still takes an incredibly long time for it to reach us from far-off stars and galaxies. I accept what Einstein said, but I sure do not have a feel for it!

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

Einstein was wrong. None of his theory is correct. There is no gravitational lensing. There is no such thing as the photon. It is all pseudoscience. The equation that "quantized" light is pure mathematical and logical error. The equation is E=hv (or E=hf) where E is energy in Joules, h is Planck's constant in Joules*seconds, and v (or f) is the frequency of light in Hertz. The SI units for Hertz are cycles per second. So a unit analysis of the equation shows Joules=(Joules*seconds)*(cycles/second) which reduces to Joules=Joules*cycles. This is an unbalanced equation that cannot be correct. Physicists will attempt to claim that the Hertz unit is actually 1/s, which makes the equation balance out. This is erroneous. The Hertz is a unit of frequency; the measure of a cyclical event. The Hertz unit is not the inverse of time, it is the amount of cycles per an amount of time. The cycles are a physical measurement and this information cannot just be discarded to make an equation work. The way Planck's constant was determined was by counting the light waves emitted by a material at varying temperatures in a 1 second time interval. The only measurement they were testing was the number cycles in a 1 second time interval, so to throw the cycles information out is to throw out all data from the original experiment from which h was derived. This is quite absurd. You might as well just make up the numbers out of thin air. The other argument physicists will make is that the unit Planck's constant is Joules/Hertz. This is also just wrong. The original paper clearly shows the value as ergs*seconds. An erg is 10^-7 Joules, so the original paper clearly shows Joules*seconds units. Here is a link to the original paper so you can see it for yourself. archive.org/details/onlawdistributio00plan_745

[@thomasfleig1184]

What's crazy to think about is that this closest approach to the black hole they are looking at, which is a 16 year event, happened 25,000 years ago.

[@AnalogDude_]

i believe, it's estimated to be 26.000 light years.

[@creativesource3514]

That is truly amazing

[@anisurfer84]

Came here to see more technical details -- didn't find much.

[@Abhijeetetrx]

AniGamer You are a gamer. Go fk yourself!

[@taunteratwill1787]

AniGamer Technical details. . . . on KZbin? Whahahahaaaa!

[@anisurfer84]

Ha Ha. I am also an Aerospace Scientist, but I see your point. ;-)

[@carpvirunga1382]

AniGamer Dude i did sooo expect you to say some' Like that. I'm wondering why these other guys started the discussion at all.

[@SEVideoQuant]

AniGamer open a textbook for details no?

[@paulfromt.o.7384]

That star sped up to 6,944 km/second as it got pulled nearest that black hole. PER SECOND. The International Space Station moves at just under 8 km/second as comparison. Mind. Blown.

[@atomm4675]

So 4314.802 mp/second

[@atomm4675]

What a ride, · As passengers on Earth we are all carried around the sun at a mean velocity of 66600 mph.

[@nicky_tdbp5353]

*Hax.....* ?

[@Zaluskowsky]

foo shoo! Bunny hop at max level!

[@v-giny5507]

imagine being able to just blink and have ran the distance from wherever you live to where i live in austria

[@mylesbishop1240]

What we accomplished in 100 years is mind boggling. I wish I could be alive for the next 100

[@ghufranfadhil478]

علم، رب ، العا. لم اكبر من. علم. اللبشر

[@gonzalomontes5286]

j j

[@nm1978]

i don't think we will ever understand the universe and everything

[@jdm11060]

Accomplishments in human health and longevity might make just as impressive a leap within the next hundred years making it possible for you to find out.

[@nomaderic]

Who knows. In the next 100 years we might have a much longer life expectancy, and you may very well still be alive

[@exoplanets]

Congratulations !

[@brianfriedman101]

for what?

[@sagebiddi]

Andalusia T.O.L ...and you thought neutron stars were dense lol

[@sagebiddi]

Brian Friedman..... I apologize . I directed that at you and obviously I was very very wrong.

[@sagebiddi]

@Andalusia T.O.L yuuuup. Sure man . Whatever you say

[@sagebiddi]

@Andalusia T.O.L 3 WEEKS ?! .... HOW ARE YOU STILL OM THIS ?!

[@jaytwix2]

einstein intelligence is out of this world and the people who built that instrument is really mind boggling technology

[@MrWick-oe5ij]

Thank you sir. Didn't know that before.

[@deanmurray9711]

I'm a united player and he didn't even have the best of

[@Kheops.]

Oh he was very smart in stealing relativity's theory from Poincaré that's for sure. But he wasn't a genius by any stretch of the imagination...

[@doctorale666]

Would be fun seeing this thing rip apart one of those orbiting stars.

[@n1k32h]

doctorale666 It was observed some years ago ripping apart a huge gas cloud believed to be harbouring a proto star

[@deadgar69]

n1k32h Link? We would really appreciate the source of that amazing statement

[@moongrumpy]

Yes I want to see it too

[@deadgar69]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/gWKyhX98rd6KmdU There are lots of simulations from NASA on KZbin, this is the simulation I liked the most

[@josebarria3233]

I think if that star were closer to the black hole, the intense tidal forces would have actually ripped the star apart

[@SueMead]

*+European Southern Observatory (ESO)* Thanks so much for sharing this and explaining this in such a simple and compelling manner. When I stare up at the stars, hey even when I'm just standing still and trying to comprehend what it is that we're part of this dynamic universe, I try to visualise the event horizon of a black hole. Any black hole. I will never have a degree in cosmology but thanks to the generosity of those willing to share what you know, I feel like I have a much better understanding, such that it is, of this awesome home we know as 'the universe'.

[@seanmc7128]

Sue Mead no no it's eso elder scrolls online. 😎

[@chrisp.401]

Andalusia T.O.L I am open minded, so I looked up this thing, I mean, it's just a theory it seems, but still, as an electrical hobbyist I find it very interesting, thanks for that. I wil look it up later, but for now, could you please explain to me why are you saying that there are no black holes? What would they be replaced by (I'm saying "replaced" because their effects are observable and visible.)? If give it there were electrical charges doing some kind of job there, they wouldn't (probably) trap light, and we could observe what is beyond, but we can't. Could you explain it to me, or just send me a link to an article about that?

[@optimusprime5199]

@@chrisp.401 Lol, they don't reply when real logical questions are asked? Surely, he don't have have anything to replace black hole, in their Electric Universe.

[@epaulk1969]

Andalusia T.O.L -- Well I doubt that I could ever change your mind. But I've tinkered with several ideas described by the electric universe in search for research ideas. I remained open minded as I listened to Wal Thornhill, Stephen Crothers and others attempt to debunk general relativity. I quickly learned that Crothers has no problem revealing his misunderstanding of general relativity. And Wal Thornhill has no problem regurgitating Crothers or anyone else that he would like to believe. I watched Crothers speak to a group of people without any professional knowledge, of how Einstein removed all matter from the universe. His argument holds no water. I exchanged a few comments on one of the thunderbolts KZbin videos and explained in as simple terms as possible the error in his development. I was quickly shadow banned. I can no longer post a single note on any of the thunderbolts KZbin comments from this account. (Actually, I can post a comment, but no-one else will see it.) I never got rude with anyone. I was merely discussing the error of Crothers with someone who cared enough to either copy and paste or to memorize the arguments of Crothers. But I was shadow banned. At that point, I realized that there's something going on other than a mere disagreement of a scientific theory. Exactly what's going on, I really don't know. As I looked for ideas to conduct research, it quickly became apparent why they spend so much time on bashing general and special relativity and quantum mechanics. It's because their ideas are too vague to be considered scientific. They claim that what we perceive as gravity is really electric in essence. But I couldn't find one formula that predicts the trajectory of one mass in the vicinity of another mass. Both newtonian gravitational theory and general relativity do make precise predictions, the latter with an astounding degree of accuracy.

[@chrisp.401]

​@@vesa.tamminen Everything is a theory unless we know that the thing is always true, no matter how many times we observe or derive it, there must be evidence. If you're so into it, okay, but don't throw it at others.

[@packetcreeper]

This is absolutely fascinating. It's mind boggling to imagine that S2 travels at around 3000 miles per second as it whips around Sagittarius A*.

[@taunteratwill1787]

packetcreeper Try to imagine the energy in the mass of a star at that speed and what it would look like if it then impacted another star.

[@mutukas]

More about 7000 km/s

[@Skhillz_FN]

3000mp/s slow

[@coldenvfx]

it's a mindblowing that a guy just thought up general relativity

[@taffyadam6031]

Taunter Atwill probably about a henway

[@RedSkyHorizon]

Could planets exist around S2 and if so, I wonder what the effects of such tidal forces would be ?

[@michaelrohrbaugh1527]

Omg an intelligent thought in the comments lol.

[@PratyakshAgarwalForReal]

A planet may be able to survive under such conditions but life definitely won't. It depends on the mass of the star, mass of the planet, mass of the blackhole and the point of closest approach, among other things.If the star has not been able to form planets before it gets closer to the black hole (planets are formed when a large number of cosmic bodies such as asteroids combine) then it is unlikely that a planet will form. Although there are star systems where a star and a black hole orbit one another (think a binary star system, but with a blackhole in stead of one star) and have planets; the probability that a planet will survive near a supermassive blackhole such as Sagittarius A* is lower than that of even one of us ever going to space.

[@jebes909090]

Tom Mulligan dont let him go muuurph!!!!

[@MrtinVarela]

Tidal forces are actually stronger on _smaller_ black holes for a given orbit's linear velocity because of the ratio between planet radius and distance to black hole.

[@SuperVstech]

Tom Mulligan since, the closest approach of s2 to A is around 5 times the distance between Neptune and Sol... I bet it is at least POSSIBLE for s2 to have a close orbiting planet...

[@tumbleddry2887]

(www.eso.org/public/videos/eso1825o/ ) Here's the full video link (also on ESO's website) that included more detailed explanations of How the measurements were made and what it means for General Relativity.

[@grauwolf1604]

Es ist wirklich beeindruckend. Mehr kann man dazu nicht sagen.

[@idontwantacallsign]

Thank you for the Video. Einstein is without doubt one of the greatest scientists ever, and let's not forget Newton ;-)

[@marcinna8553]

Who?

[@creativesource3514]

@Max yes indeed and Lorentz, Maukaulski, Bohr, Dirac, and many others. Although our human race produces mostly idiots who are greedy, we are lucky that every generation we have a great mind to push the boundaries further.

[@purplefan204]

Seems like the orbit of the star S2 around the black hole takes the star in an ellipse. Which means that the speed of revolution would be different at different points on the orbit - which means that the space-time interaction is dynamic - due to an interaction of the gravitational pull from the black hole and hence, the speed of its motion (which reaches 0.25c at the closest approach). It would be interesting to share the effects of time dilation along its orbit on S2.

[@Casowsky]

I agree with you, it would be extremely interesting to have this explained in more detail because I've wondered the same. Although, my gut feeling is asking the question: in what way is this strictly different to, for example, the first problems with GPS accuracy until time dilation was factored in? Is it not just different in terms of the magnitudes involved? Maybe that IS where the difference lies... and I have more to learn

[@Tadesan]

This was such a vacuuous video! Come on guys! We want details! Plus, there's no absolute proof in science, just higher accuracy. You guys don't have to let your marketing department make you look like amateurs...

[@mattia7277]

kwnyupstate absolute proof doesn’t exist. It’s the basic of science

[@marcinna8553]

Yes, science never claims absolute proof. This is as the philosopher Karl Popper would say -- you can prove a hypothesis is wrong but you can never actually prove a hypothesis is right. You can only say your hypothesis is consistent with the data -- but you don't know if there isn't a better hypothesis that you just haven't thought of yet. So all "truths" in science are provisional... true as far as it goes but never the final word. But the title of this video bugs me "First successful test of Einstein's theory of general relativity...." is of course not true. The claim is qualified by the last four words "near supermassive black hole" Of course even this is not exactly true, the bending of light around black holes has been demonstrated many times, the qualifier here may simply be "supermassive". Yeah, OK, with those qualifications, perhaps this is a "first".

[@seyahacademy4152]

Gravity Field seyah.ca/field-theory-iii/

[@jetsetdotone]

And during the 7 min video you sit and wait for the actual findings but the creator of this video was more interested in telling how good ESO is. Disapointing..... :(

[@johnpatmos1722]

The video was more about promoting ESO than informing me about the physics.

[@ohiovic1236]

I think they said something about the redshift of the starlight but didn't say anything about the rotation of the star orbital ! practical proof of gravitational redshift was achieved a long time ago. So what is the real value of this experiment?

[@perfectlycontent64]

Where can I find more information on how the Gravity component of the telescope works? Also would love to see a more detailed video on the actual measurements that were made of the super massive black hole during this event.

[@EuDouArteHipHopArtCulture21]

amazing thank you for your hard work '

[@Abhijeetetrx]

cryingondamofukabeat O0 your welcome

[@robertofiaschi2830]

Sensational video. Exceptional work! the negative evaluations are ridiculous

[@masbaiy4858]

Too political. I expected to see in this video what Newtonian physic predicts, what Einsteinian physic predicts, and what has been observed. Wouldn't mind long duration if that's what it takes to explain it all, along with method or technical challenge overcame. Seeing lab technician awkwardly eyeing cable and organization spokesperson speaks not exactly the topic at hand is weird. Like, really weird.

[@jmcsquared18]

The fuck are you talking about? There was no politics anywhere in this video.

[@daviddeutsch3311]

Exactly -- I still don't know what prediction of General Theory was met but which Newtonian Theory did not predict. ???

[@jmcsquared18]

@@daviddeutsch3311 The dynamics of motion in the two theories are different. For instance, Mercury's orbit does not obey Newton's laws of motion. It tilts a bit over time. General relativity predicts this tilt to a stunning degree of precision. The tests that were presented in this video are of the dynamics of motion near an object that, according to relativity, should be a supermassive black hole. If it really is a black hole, then the objects orbiting it should orbit it in trajectories that obey Einstein's equations for that scenario, not Newton's equations. This video reports the observation that Einstein's equations correctly described its behavior. They state this at 5:40, where you can see that the closest approach is not at the point of highest curvature of the path. That is what Newton would have predicted since particles orbit heavy objects in hyperbolic trajectories.

[@pabloorqueraisa8898]

jmcsquared thank you!

[@marcinna8553]

What is your definition of "political"?

[@shiggins1324]

Great work by all involved. Congratulated! Very impressive.

[@nilagangbaka2067]

But still my future is darker than a black hole

[@BrutalSammetal]

''surrounded by a tightly-bound group of stars'' Black hole: LOL not for too long

[@luke3501]

This was less a science video and more a commercial for the ESO.

[@andresxj1]

I want to say that both the title and the narration seem to say that this is the first proof of Einstein's General Relativity, and as a bonus, that it is near a black hole. But it is the first proof of the theory *made* using a measurement of a black hole. I know that the video doesn't says explicitly this is the first one, because at the end it is said that the General Relativity is proven «once more» (referring to the black hole), so it is known that it's not the first, or even the second time the theory is proven right. But it can be confusing, specially because the first proof, the eclipse of 1919, is never mentioned. Just wanted to clarify this!

[@MsSomeonenew]

If you give up reading half way in then it suggests that... I guess we do need to expect people coming to a scientific video and doing just that.

[@dlevi67]

Mercury orbit calculations (perihelion advancement), 1915 - even prior to the formal publication of the theory. 1919 eclipse was probably the first "one-off" event confirmation.

[@justaguy4real]

0:57 incredible. I cannot even comprehend how they can zoom in and pick up specs of light that aren't even imaginable. Just HOW, and WOW

[@aceandreimirandilla5391]

I have no idea about this. But when i became an atheist, I enjoyed watching science stuff even i cant understand it. I can say im just a simple minded human that adore the effort of humble scientists. Keep up the good work guys.

[@sherlockholmieblitz4814]

Could've just said you enjoyed watching science stuff. Idk why people feel the impulse to advertise their beliefs.

[@sherlockholmieblitz4814]

Not believing in a god is a belief.

[@tusharpandey858]

Sherlock Holmie Blitz nopes it's fact

[@sherlockholmieblitz4814]

That's... not how it works. Atheists' personalities are commonly just as annoying as the religious :-/ It's pretty ironic since so many have such a ridiculous feeling of superiority because of their beliefs.

[@aceandreimirandilla5391]

Ringo Garvin . Im referring about their common attitude to accept when they are wrong😊

[@shajedurrahman7509]

Extraordinary evidence !

[@thomsch]

Congratulations, that's a fantastic achievement :-)

[@AzharHassanSehwan]

great effort

[@hisroyalairness23MJ]

Great work guys, keep working hard ESO. Congrats for showing ones again that Einstein was right.

[@taunteratwill1787]

Einstein was right ones again.

[@wearealljustclowns]

very awesome. however..I understand that the further we go to space..the more time has past for the light to reach our visible site..so are all these events not long past? and nothing new is occurring that has not already happened?

[@Killatunga]

Oh, finally found the full episode

[@roelfbackus]

How do you know that the star's trajectory around the black hole is perpendicular to the viewing point and not at an angle, and so causing the redshift?

[@LouisEmery]

WELL, how much was the red-shift? Do I have to search the literature by myself? At least tell us the journal where the results are published. ;)

[@oleqkabanov1790]

Thank you. 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@greyedjeff]

Surprised the Electric Universe fools have not commented. They hate Einstein

[@SEVideoQuant]

Jeff Downey they have...

[@bythetimeyoufinishedreadin9083]

who cares what those retards think

[@bringsoutbetter]

Thanks for sharing !

[@BallentineLP]

but can it run Crisis

[@sixkintnts]

too soon

[@johnyjack007]

Such a beautiful video and advancement in astronomy by you seen a master peice of art in space after long time thank you and all the very best for further future Achievements.. congrats ESO team

[@epaulk1969]

A physical theory can never be proven. It can only be disproved.

[@RWBHere]

A theory can be either proven or disproven. To prove it, you have fact. You cannot disprove that someone or something typed this comment; _the fact is_ that you are reading it.

[@epaulk1969]

RWBHere -- Whether or not someone or something typed a comment does not hardly constitute a physical theory. A physical theory consists of postulates (aka axioms) and laws. An example of a physical theory is Newton's theory of gravity. For more than a century, the predictions of planetary and lunar motion, as obtained by Newtonian theory, agreed with the observed motion. But no single observation proved Newtonian theory correct. In fact, the collection of all successful predictions does not prove the theory correct. In the year (I actually forget the year), it was found that the orbital trajectory of Mercury, as predicted by Newtonian theory, significantly differs from the observed trajectory. It was that day that the Newtonian theory was disproved. That said, one could argue that any physical theory is intended to be an approximation of nature. Thus scientists are more likely to say that Newtonian theory is a grosser approximation of reality than say general relativity. If none of this convinces you, then you may be interested to know that I was merely paraphrasing the words of Richard Feynman. I wish I remembered his exact words because it was way more humorous than the way I put it. Essentially he said that an experiment (or observation) that yields an expected outcome does not prove that the theory is correct. It simply means that we have yet to devise an experiment in which the outcome is unexpected, hence disproving the theory. This was in one of his black and white lectures here on KZbin.

[@PMartin7311]

Fascinating stuff!

[@justicewarrior9187]

Learnt shit about the discovery..

[@LiLi-or2gm]

I want a pair of those awesome earrings that Ms. Delplancke-Strobele is wearing! Also, very cool video. Great work, ESO and the VLT team!!

[@hsvmobileac]

Doesn't it disturb anyone that all this "proof" in the video is merely interview segments with bragging scientists and a bunch of CG animations... ???

[@MsSomeonenew]

You can go read all the detailed papers on this and compile 25 years worth of data for yourself. If you imagined they will do it during the video you must be quite mad.

[@dlevi67]

@@MsSomeonenew I imagined that at the very least a chart/table/CGI animation like the one showing the orbit could have been produced to show the red-shift and how that conforms to the predictions of GR. It would not be very difficult and it would be far more interesting than repeating political statements about the importance of collaboration at ESO.

[@jmcsquared18]

@@Oobe You are either a professional idiot, or a troll. Either way, your statement is astronomically wrong at a level I can't even fathom.

[@cyanah5979]

Very well done folks! Cudos!

[@taunteratwill1787]

cyana h Please define 'cudo's' in detail.

[@cyanah5979]

ancient greek word for 'outstanding achievement' hth

[@cvheugten]

Hoping to get some information about the findings. But no, zippo. You are happy that your cooperation is perfect, I would be happy with some graphs, some information about the phenomenon itself. You must have that information, so spread it. Hope you do better next time.

[@RWBHere]

Regard this video as only an advertisement for those who might be interested in learning more, and as entertainment for those who only want some basic information. It would be useful to go to the ESO website for links to scientific papers on the subject, after having seen the video. If memory serves, NASA also mentioned this research some time ago. They should also have links to more information.

[@RWBHere]

Forgot to mention that there is a link to the ESO website in the video Description.

[@cvheugten]

RWBHere ok, thanks. I look into it. Interesting stuff 😀

[@gamphuck]

Didn't LIGO already prove GR by observing gravitational waves?

[@MsSomeonenew]

Well this is very specifically intended to see GR holding true near a super massive black hole.

[@twstf8905]

I'm betting he could have imagined it.

[@carlosdiezdesollano-itsav1777]

Outstanding! Completely amazing :D

[@optimusprime5199]

175 flat earthers disliked this video.

[@dlevi67]

How many of these objected to the fact that the video does not show any of the data collected on redshift, and how well they tally with the predictions of GR? BTW - I have no doubt that the data confirm GR; I'm just saying that I'm disappointed by the video, which was fundamentally marketing for the ESO as opposed to showing why and how the data is important.

[@Bloblobloblown]

What was achieved in the past by Newton, Einstein, Tesla, without computers and technologies as we have today is much more astonishing....Mind blowing!!!

[@grandpaobvious]

Please do not refer to a scientific endeavor as a crusade.

[@Tadesan]

Thomas Hoover they have to spice it up............

[@lordgarion514]

Thomas Hoover cru·sade kro͞oˈsād/ verb 1lead or take part in an energetic and organized campaign concerning a social, political, or religious issue. Words have more than one meaning. I think this other definition fits. Science is a social issue.

[@taunteratwill1787]

Thomas Hoover Please get a life. . . .

[@damian.gamlath]

Robert Pruitt could you please elaborate how science is a social issue?

[@lordgarion514]

27kdon Does science not affect people? Do people not debate science?

[@rajukumar-gz4sf]

Excellent.. Keep hard work.. Thank u..

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

Where are the REAL images? Why just show 'fluffy' cgi, Looks like BS from here.

[@SEVideoQuant]

DigbySirChickenTF2 did you open and read a graduate astrophysics textbook once in your life?

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

Do you mean the ones you pretend to understand, or do you just accept the books authority without true understanding? Btw those books might need some updates.

[@SEVideoQuant]

DigbySirChickenTF2 i never accept anything without scientific evidence. The LambdaCMD is not too bad but also far to be perfect. But actually it one of the top ranked model waiting for a better one to overpass it. And you? What is you preferred cosmogony mathematical model?

[@digbysirchickentf2315]

We need to correct our understanding of red-shift, then we can make progress. That's why this study interested me, but this vid lacks the data.

[@SEVideoQuant]

DigbySirChickenTF2 A video has not for purpose to communicate the data... You must read the corresponding published peer-review paper for the detailed data summary.

[@O_Mateus_Moura]

Espetacular! 🇧🇷✌️

[@DrunkenUFOPilot]

Great science, horrible background music. I want to click thumb-up and thumb-down at the same time.

[@honestmicky]

Excellent video, thanks for posting, much appreciated. New sub : )

[@syedmuneerpasha7417]

Einstein 's legacy goes on. Xcellent video / data.

[@prabhakarv4193]

Very informative. Thank you

[@rasanmar18]

Impressive! Nice work!

[@jsveterans6949]

Interesting, quite a shinning example of human knowledge and ingenuity. Lately I've had trouble saying this: proud to be human. So, whats the next step? Besides creating a Dyson swarm to produce anti-matter for generating a localized gravitational wave to ride across the Galaxy of-course..

[@raviprakash9403]

thank u to u all and love for this

[@kylestail]

I'm very impressed that the creators of this video perfectly placed the introductory image of the supermassive black hole central to the buffer ring. LOL.

[@kristinemccowan6572]

Fascinating! Thank you!

[@alessiosimonato880]

it is possible to obtain information relating to the shape of the Star at the moment of maximum acceleration when it is closest to the black hole in relation to its initial state, example: change in size?

[@stefstef4895]

This is probably one of the most awe-inspiring videos on the internet, and yet it's got less than 200K views. How disappointing

[@amtd3808]

Great work 👍👍

[@keving1774]

5:40 As of Feb. 1, 2020, Voyager 1 is about 13.8 billion miles (22.2 billion kilometers) from the Sun - nearly four times the average distance from the Sun to icy Pluto.

[@avishake5718]

But the images we see here of that far objects aren't happening now right? The light took light years to reach us that means that phenomenon is a past one.. I mean the sun we see is the sun of 8 minutes ago.. isn't it?

[@NazirAhmed-ke8em]

Very inspiring and interesting, thanks.

[@a112Manu]

Congratulazioni!

[@robson9374]

Exclente work of all involved Einsten was well ahead of his time when he created the theory of relativity for goods to all great video, the ESO as always sharing knowledge.

[@owen7185]

I wonder how far is the event horizon of our block hole.

[@owen7185]

So did S2 get within 20 billion km of the black hole at the galactic centre? That's a huge distance yet the gravitational field accelerated it to that incredible speed!!! That's insane

[@Super_Natural_Power]

Yeahhhh... Agreed mate

[@Mp57navy]

Actually, it's awfully close. Pluto is 30 AU from the sun at closest approach, and 50 at the furthest. This star passed at 133 AU. About the distance Voyager 2 is away from us.

[@nunyabisnass1141]

Anyone else find it strange that a video displaying the work of some of the most advanced optical and computer technology, is using 80's synthesizer music for its background?

[@matthewhallen5829]

Is there any proof of gravitational lensing where we expect the black hole to be? if so please link me. Would much appreciate it.

[@upscaleavenue]

Yikes. 20 billion km is still much too close for comfort! 😬

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

Dr. Dowdye already disproved general relativity. The lensing effect is only observable in the plasma around the sun/star and is not observable outside of this area of effect at all. Gravity does not stop at the plasma, so if the lensing was caused by gravity, the light would be bent toward the star outside of the plasma ring as well and this effect would lessen with distance from the sun/star. Thus, there is no gravitational lensing. The lensing effect of stars is due purely to the plasma "atmosphere" surrounding the stars.

[@Journeywrrr]

How you ensure that observed result is due to general relativity and not because of telescope malfunction?

[@rrung2196]

I perfectly understood. Perfectly..

[@andrewlabat9963]

The great unknowns.. So much to know still, so many laws of the universe yet to be revealed that will dispel what we think we know.. And how cool is that..!!

[@colinbrown3170]

How exciting to be able to in some way see a black hole 🤯

[@denispol79]

So, what exactly was the experiment? Star light redshift due to regular dopler effect and the gravitational time dilation? Giving a explanation in the video would have been nice, instead of "Eeey, we're so cool and multinational".

[@belllarosa]

💙Einstein remaining relevant for eternity!!! Well done ESO! Amazing stuff👏🌌🛰

[@chetanwithlove]

"Massive lab, than he could have possibly imagined" ..... We are talking about Einstein and we possibly cannot imagine what all he could have imagined ... and he proved it

[@lwandilecebekhulu9489]

Very useful accomplishment.

[@bghnilsson5920]

They never say, what the exact result of the measurements was. Besides the high speed detection by the red shift light from the star. Was there an additional red shift, etc. caused by the enormous gravity during the close passing..?

[@JohnShalamskas]

Yes.

[@lienakh1627]

Does anyone know what the name of the soundtrack is in this video????? Please 😊

[@scottadams5858]

I'm looking forward to see what data comes from this endeavor

[@akshatsingh978]

Just to make sense of the staggering distance, the closest distance between S2 and the black hole is 20 billion kms. The average distance between Sun and Pluto is 150 million kms.

[@miguelcardenas6419]

That's so amazing!

[@maciejrawwo9337]

I don't quite understand this sentence: "This star, called S2, recently passed very close to the black hole at a speed grater than 25 million kilometers per hour". Earth is about 25000 light years from the center of our galaxy, so I understand, that the passage was only recently observed, right? Or it actually (based on calculations) recently passed the black hole?

[@xnownxinc5680]

I think the guy who formulated those equations , understand and can imagine the laboratory also. But, i can imagine the pity for the narrator.

[@truthiz7873]

Them: some of the most intellectual scientific minds on earth working together. Me: just bowled a strike on my Playstation Wii 🙃

[@jannmutube]

So, where are the color photos of the blue to red shift?

[@hozza9901]

That is so cool!