Hostname: page-component-784d4fb959-57n77 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-16T14:47:07.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Theory-Laden Are Observations of Black Holes?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2025

Juliusz Doboszewski Open the ORCID record for Juliusz Doboszewski [Opens in a new window]  and
Jamee Elder Open the ORCID record for Jamee Elder [Opens in a new window]
Juliusz Doboszewski
Affiliation:
Black Hole Initiative, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
Jamee Elder*
Affiliation:
Black Hole Initiative, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA Department of Philosophy, Tufts University, Medford, MA, USA
*
Corresponding author: Jamee Elder; Email: jamee.elder@tufts.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We evaluate the roles general relativistic assumptions play in simulations used in recent observations of black holes including with LIGO-Virgo and the Event Horizon Telescope. In both experiments, simulations play an ampliative role, enabling the extraction of more information from the data than would be possible otherwise. This comes at a cost of theory-ladenness. We discuss the issue of inferential circularity, which arises in some applications; classify some of the epistemic strategies used to reduce the extent of theory-ladenness; and discuss ways in which these strategies are model independent.

Information

Type
Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , First View , pp. 1 - 23
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

Authors contributed equally.

References

Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abernathy, M. R., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., et al. 2016a. “GW150914: First Results from the Search for Binary Black Hole Coalescence with Advanced LIGO.” Physical Review D 93 (12):122003. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.122003.Google Scholar
Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abernathy, M. R., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., et al. 2016b. “Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger.” Physical Review Letters 116 (6):061102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102.Google Scholar
Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abernathy, M. R., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., et al. 2016c. “Observing Gravitational-Wave Transient GW150914 with Minimal Assumptions.” Physical Review D 93 (12):122004. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.122004.Google Scholar
Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Abernathy, M. R., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., et al. 2016d. “Tests of General Relativity with GW150914.” Physical Review Letters 116 (22):221101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.221101.Google Scholar
Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., Acernese, F., Ackley, K., Adams, C., Adhikari, N., Adhikari, R. X., et al. 2023. “GWTC-3: Compact Binary Coalescences Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the Second Part of the Third Observing Run.” Physical Review X 13 (4):041039. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041039.Google Scholar
Abedi, Jahed, Dykaar, Hannah, and Afshordi, Niayesh. 2017. “Echoes from the Abyss: Tentative Evidence for Planck-Scale Structure at Black Hole Horizons.” Physical Review D 96 (8):082004. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.082004.Google Scholar
Abelson, Shannon Sylvie. 2022. “Variety of Evidence in Multimessenger Astronomy.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A 94:133–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2022.05.006.Google Scholar
Abramowicz, Marek A., and Chris Fragile, P.. 2013. “Foundations of Black Hole Accretion Disk Theory.” Living Reviews in Relativity 16 (1):1. https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2013-1.Google Scholar
Abuter, Roberto, Amorim, A., Anugu, N., Bauböck, M., Benisty, M., Berger, J. P., Blind, N., et al. 2018. “Detection of the Gravitational Redshift in the Orbit of the Star S2 near the Galactic Centre Massive Black Hole.” Astronomy and Astrophysics 615:L15. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201833718.Google Scholar
Anderl, Sibylle. 2016. “Astronomy and Astrophysics.” In Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Science, edited by Humphreys, Paul, 652–70. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199368815.013.45.Google Scholar
Arun, K. G., Belgacem, Enis, Benkel, Robert, Bernard, Laura, Berti, Emanuele, Bertone, Gianfranco, Besancon, Marc, et al. 2022. “New Horizons for Fundamental Physics with LISA.” Living Reviews in Relativity 25 (1):4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41114-022-00036-9.Google Scholar
Beauchemin, Pierre-Hugues. 2017. “Autopsy of Measurements with the ATLAS Detector at the LHC.” Synthese 194:275–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0944-5.Google Scholar
Boyd, Nora Mills, Siska De Baerdemaeker, Heng, Kevin, and Matarese, Vera, eds. 2023. Philosophy of Astrophysics: Stars, Simulations, and the Struggle to Determine What Is Out There. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Brito, Richard, Cardoso, Vitor, and Pani, Paolo. 2020. Superradiance: New Frontiers in Black Hole Physics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Cardoso, Vitor, and Pani, Paolo. 2019. “Testing the Nature of Dark Compact Objects: A Status Report.” Living Reviews in Relativity 22:4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41114-019-0020-4.Google Scholar
Chang, Hasok. 2004. Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Curiel, Erik. 2019. “The Many Definitions of a Black Hole.” Nature Astronomy 3 (1):27–34. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-018-0602-1.Google Scholar
Currie, Adrian. 2018. Rock, Bone, and Ruin: An Optimist’s Guide to the Historical Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
de Kleuver, Joost, Bronzwaer, Thomas, Falcke, Heino, Narayan, Ramesh, Mizuno, Yosuke, Porth, Oliver, and Olivares, Hector. 2023. “Testing the Existence of Event Horizons against Rotating Reflecting Surfaces.” Preprint, ArXiv, November 10. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.05555.Google Scholar
Doboszewski, Juliusz, and Elder, Jamee. 2024. “Robustness and the Event Horizon Telescope: The Case of the First Image of M87*.” Philosophy of Physics 2 (1):3. https://doi.org/10.31389/pop.74.Google Scholar
Doboszewski, Juliusz, and Lehmkuhl, Dennis. 2023. “On the Epistemology of Observational Black Hole Astrophysics.” In Philosophy of Astrophysics: Stars, Simulations, and the Struggle to Determine What Is Out There, edited by Nora Mills Boyd, Siska De Baerdemaeker, Kevin Heng, and Vera Matarese, 225–47. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26618-8.Google Scholar
Eckart, A., and Genzel, R.. 1997. “Stellar Proper Motions in the Central 0.1 pc of the Galaxy.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 284 (3):576–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/284.3.576.Google Scholar
Eckart, Andreas, Hüttemann, Andreas, Kiefer, Claus, Britzen, Silke, Zajacek, Michal, Claus Lämmerzahl, Manfred Stöckler, Valencia, Monica, Karas, Vladimir, and García-Marín, Macarena. 2017. “The Milky Way’s Supermassive Black Hole: How Good a Case Is It? A Challenge for Astrophysics and Philosophy of Science.” Foundations of Physics 47:553–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-017-0079-2.Google Scholar
Elder, Jamee. 2020. The Epistemology of Gravitational-Wave Astrophysics. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Elder, Jamee. 2023. “Black Hole Coalescence: Observation and Model Validation.” In Physical Laws and the Limits of Explanation; or, What the Equations Don’t Say, edited by Lydia Patton and Erik Curiel, 79–104. Springer Briefs. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25686-8_5.Google Scholar
Elder, Jamee. 2024. “Independent Evidence in Multi-messenger Astrophysics.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 104:119–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2024.02.006.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019a. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L1. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0ec7.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019b. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. II. Array and Instrumentation.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L2. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c96.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019c. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. III. Data Processing and Calibration.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L3. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0c57.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019d. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. IV. Imaging the Central Supermassive Black Hole.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L4. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0e85.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019e. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Physical Origin of the Asymmetric Ring.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L5. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab0f43.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2019f. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. The Shadow and Mass of the Central Black Hole.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 875 (1):L6. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ab1141.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2021a. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VII. Polarization of the Ring.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 910 (1):L12. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abe71d.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2021b. “First M87 Event Horizon Telescope Results. VIII. Magnetic Field Structure near the Event Horizon.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 910 (1):L13. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/abe4de.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022a. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. I. The Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole in the Center of the Milky Way.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L12. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6674.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022b. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. II. EHT and Multiwavelength Observations, Data Processing, and Calibration.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L13. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6675.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022c. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. III. Imaging of the Galactic Center Supermassive Black Hole.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L14. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6429.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022d. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. IV. Variability, Morphology, and Black Hole Mass.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L15. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6736.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022e. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. V. Testing Astrophysical Models of the Galactic Center Black Hole.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L16. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6672.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2022f. “First Sagittarius A* Event Horizon Telescope Results. VI. Testing the Black Hole Metric.” Astrophysical Journal Letters 930 (2):L17. https://doi.org/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6756.Google Scholar
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration et al. 2024. “The Persistent Shadow of the Supermassive Black Hole of M 87-I: Observations, Calibration, Imaging, and Analysis.” Astronomy and Astrophysics 681:A79. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202347932.Google Scholar
Franklin, Allan. 2015. “The Theory-Ladenness of Experiment.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 46 (1):155–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-015-9285-9.Google Scholar
Ghez, A. M., Klein, B. L., Morris, M., and Becklin, E. E.. 1998. “High Proper-Motion Stars in the Vicinity of Sagittarius A*: Evidence for a Supermassive Black Hole at the Center of Our Galaxy.” Astrophysical Journal 509 (2):678. https://doi.org/10.1086/306528.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian. 1989. “Extragalactic Reality: The Case of Gravitational Lensing.” Philosophy of Science 56 (4):555–81. https://doi.org/10.1086/289514.Google Scholar
Jacquart, Melissa. 2020. “Observations, Simulations, and Reasoning in Astrophysics.” Philosophy of Science 87 (5):1209–20. https://doi.org/10.1086/710544.Google Scholar
Kim, Jae-Young, Krichbaum, Thomas P., Broderick, Avery E., Maciek Wielgus, Lindy Blackburn, Gómez, José L., Johnson, Michael D., et al. 2020. “Event Horizon Telescope Imaging of the Archetypal Blazar 3C 279 at an Extreme 20 Microarcsecond Resolution.” Astronomy and Astrophysics 640:A69. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202037493.Google Scholar
King, Martin. 2024. “Deep Learning and Model Independence.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
McCoy, C. D., and Massimi, Michela. 2018. “Simplified Models: A Different Perspective on Models as Mediators.” European Journal for Philosophy of Science 8 (1):99–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-017-0178-0.Google Scholar
Patton, Lydia. 2020. “Expanding Theory Testing in General Relativity: LIGO and Parametrized Theories.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part B 69:142–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsb.2020.01.001.Google Scholar
Ripley, Justin L. 2022. “Numerical Relativity for Horndeski Gravity.” International Journal of Modern Physics D 31 (13):2230017. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271822300178.Google Scholar
Ritson, Sophie, and Staley, Kent. 2021. “How Uncertainty Can Save Measurement from Circularity and Holism.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A 85:155–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.10.004.Google Scholar
Skulberg, Emilie, and Elder, Jamee. Forthcoming. “What Is a ‘Direct’ Image of a Shadow? A History and Epistemology of ‘Directness’ in Black Hole Research.” Centaurus.Google Scholar
Smith, George. 2014. “Closing the Loop: Testing Newtonian Gravity—Then and Now.” In Newton and Empiricism, edited by Biener, Zvi and Schliesser, Eric, 262–352. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, George E., and Seth, Raghav. 2020. Brownian Motion and Molecular Reality: A Study in Theory-Mediated Measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tal, Eran. 2012. “The Epistemology of Measurement: A Model-Based Account.” PhD diss., University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Tal, Eran. 2016. “Making Time: A Study in the Epistemology of Measurement.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 67 (1):297–335. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43946115.Google Scholar
Thompson, A. Richard, Moran, James M., and Swenson, George W. Jr. 2017. Interferometry and Synthesis in Radio Astronomy. Astronomy and Astrophysics Library. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Tiede, Paul, Pu, Hung-Yi, Broderick, Avery E., Gold, Roman, Karami, Mansour, and Preciado-López, Jorge A.. 2020. “Spacetime Tomography Using the Event Horizon Telescope.” Astrophysical Journal 892 (2):132. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/ab744c.Google Scholar
Wielgus, Maciek, Akiyama, Kazunori, Blackburn, Lindy, Chan, Chi-kwan, Dexter, Jason, Doeleman, Sheperd S., Fish, Vincent L., et al. 2020. “Monitoring the Morphology of M87* in 2009–2017 with the Event Horizon Telescope.” Astrophysical Journal 901 (1):67. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/abac0d.Google Scholar
Woodward, James F. 2011. “Data and Phenomena: A Restatement and Defense.” Synthese 182 (1):165–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9618-5.Google Scholar
Yunes, Nicolás, and Pretorius, Frans. 2009. “Fundamental Theoretical Bias in Gravitational Wave Astrophysics and the Parametrized Post-Einsteinian Framework.” Physical Review D 80 (12):122003. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.80.122003.Google Scholar