The prevailing idea was that an organism is too wet, warm and unstable to maintain any quantum effect. The reality shows that these organisms are more efficient and creating these effects than in highly controlled lab experiments. 3.5 billions years of practice goes a long way.
@hubcapsignstop
The way I see it, there’s a difference between practical, heuristic innovations that get refined through the centuries, and certain scientific discoveries that require a different modality of thought and radical experimentation entirely. Those kinds of shifts require a curious, creative mind that will at least approach the fringe idea, in order to create a worthwhile experiment.
But in other news, this is pretty cool:
Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar Produced The Most Scientifically Accurate Visualisation of a Black Hole
I’ve always imagined something similar except more like a 360 degree torus lensing of light, . I love the visual of this, impressive 800 terrabytes of rendering.
Huh, so when Superman: The Animated Series portrayed a 'hole(and it was already done well before this news), it really WAS pretty accurate, even in those days… Wow.
Take a look, and compare this(made in 1999) to the other picture farther up, and remember that this one is being looked at as if looking right in instead of from the side like the other one.
The DCAU version had spot-on spaghettification(including of characters, shiver) of anything going in, so it’s got that up on most fictional depictions lol.
Basically, a black hole is a black sphere. The event horizon is equivalent to the surface on a terrestrial object (Earth/Venus), or equivalent to the outer most part of the atmosphere of a non-terrestrial object (Sun/Vega).
The DCAU one is probably just drawn with the general image of a black hole in mind, though. The idea is accurate, but the actual image is still just artistic rendition. Even back then, everyone pretty much knew that black holes would look like black spheres with a glowing accretion disk around it. Lol when I was a kid I even read about in the Popular Science Vol.1 book, and that was published in the 80s or something?
What’s new about the Interstellar one is that they fed the computer the equations that tell you how space will behave around a black hole, had the computer crunch the numbers to determine what light goes where, then had the computer generate an image based on what light strikes a viewing plane. There’s no artistic rendition in the mix. I think that’s what’s more amazing about the Interstellar depiction, not the fact that it shows the black hole as a black sphere with an accretion disk.
There were a couple of problems the landing, namely on the initial attempt it bounced off the surface after the harpoons that were designed to tether it to the comet’s surface failed to deploy.
This caused the lander to deviate from the selected landing spot and end up somewhere far less ideal.
