Aetherist: I think you still don’t understand the difference between pixels and resolution.
I suppose that pixels cant remedy a lack of resolution, but pixels can make resolution look worse.
When I had to demonstrate the spatial resolution of my company’s imaging systems to our customers, I always displayed finer pixel spacing then the physical resolution. Otherwise, you couldn’t see it. This is elementary.
Yes, naturally.
But, u didn’t fake the image & its resolution.
Of course not. Nor did they. The relatively low resolution in the 2D images is obvious. If you look at the paper, there are more quantitative displays of the reconstructed data. Please be more careful about accusing scientists of fraud.
According to Pierre Marie Robitaille they claim that a team of dishes can see 1250 times as well as an individual dish, hence an 80 mm doughnut on the moon would have the same resolution as a 100 m doughnut.
Here i was making a comparison in the context of their cosmic measurement – taking an individual dish microwave image of a doughnut on the speedy moon & taking a team image would i suppose present additional difficulties.
Another way of looking at it, 0.2 micro-arcsec at 384,400,000,000 mm (the ave dist to the moon) is 0.373 mm.
80 mm (the size of the doughnut) divided by 0.373 mm is 214.
214 times 214 is 46,000 pixels of resolution.
32,000,000 pixels (the pixels in their blackhole image) divided by 46,000 is 700.
Hence the resolution of their blackhole image is 700 times the resolution of their array.