Dealer of Death wrote:
It should have put you in your place, for no matter it's silliness, it shows what an image IS
image - n a visual representation of something
clearly silhouettes can produce an image which is what this clearly is then, an image of a black hole.
1) By that definition, a circle drawn with a crayon is an image of a black hole, and if that circle is an image of a black hole (a visual representation of one) (a crude/simple representation but still ...) then pretty much any vaguely circular bug splat on a windscreen, or a picture of a tire, or ... are also images of black holes. For that reason, I don't think that definition is a useful one in this conversation. English is a slippery language.
2) The last time I checked (there may have been improvements I missed, or I might have misunderstood) the only way to get information from a black hole (assuming that you want to sense and record that information) was to capture some Hawking radiation released by the hole. Since the sensor that produced that image wasn't a Hawking radiation detector, I still contend that it is an image of stuff that is evidence a black hole is there, but it's not an image of a black hole.
Opulon wrote:
Gentlemen, you invest way too much intellectual power to fuel the afterburner of a idiotic pleasantry of mine