5 ms·

Didn’t I already reply to you weeks ago about a similar comment? Now you can read the actual papers which explain in detail why your comment is incorrect.

• fasteddie31003 4y ago
  I did read them and I'm not satisfied with their methods.
  • wumpus 4y ago
    You read the 10 just published papers? Impressive.
  • Mehringotio 4y ago
    Either you are an expert in this field than it should be you who writes a clear argument and present it or you are not an expert. Aren't they are peer reviewed? What is your expertise in astrophysics?
    • gilbetron 4y ago
      He has a theoretical degree in astrophysics.
      • Saint_Genet 4y ago
        He still didn’t read and understand 10 papers this fast
        • gilbetron 4y ago
          it was a joke from a Fallout game - he has a "theoretical degree in astrophysics" not a "degree in theoretical astrophysics" :)
      • ajcp 4y ago
        Welcome aboard!
  • wumpus 4y ago
    How about this independent analysis: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220510267P/abstract https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022arXiv220510267P/abstra...
• belter 4y ago
  I think you are talking about the conversation we had here. So in this case you replied to a different person. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31281773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31281773
  • wumpus 4y ago
    No, this one, same user, same skepticism, 19 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31134691 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31134691 Btw we released the 2017 calibrated data today, too.
    • belter 4y ago
      Thanks! You anticipated my question:-)
• panda-giddiness 4y ago
  Thanks for calling them out (again). Honestly people in this forum are too eager to upvote contrarian opinions. I hold a PhD in physics, and I wouldn't feel qualified to challenge ETH's work.
  • wumpus 4y ago
    I’m fine with questions and challenges, but not aggressive ones from people who don’t like my explanation and will not read the literature.
  • aortega 4y ago
    Science is not religion and contrarian opinions strengthen science results. I think it's healthy to always have a dose of skepticism, and is not uncommon for astrophysics papers to be retracted or refuted.
    • panda-giddiness 4y ago
      Absolutely, but those retractions are led by other astronomers/astrophysicists, not lay people presenting straw men. I think people's priors here are out of whack -- perhaps the truth does lie somewhere in the middle, but if so, it will be much closer to ETH's version than the OP's.
      • belter 4y ago
        Astronomers/astrophysicists started first, by misrepresenting the process and bringing the talk of taking photos and having "visual evidence". "...We have seen, and taken a picture, of a Black Hole." https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456 https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456
        • wumpus 4y ago
          Yes? He’s correct.
          • 4y ago