Baryonic Number Conservation

[Q-reeus]

I'm not muddying the waters, I'm clarifying them.

Do the research and pay attention: when you drop a brick some of its mass-energy is converted into kinetic energy, which typically gets dissipated, whereafter the brick has a mass deficit. The same thing happens if you drop a proton into a black hole. Before you dropped it there was no rotational energy *, or linear kinetic energy, or gravitational energy, or EM energy*, or heat.

* One might claim that intrinsic spin is rotational energy and that EM energy is rest mass energy, but I don't think TheGod was referring to them in the subatomic context.

Missed your 'clever' use of linking within ordinary text: https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr...lasma+non-conservation+baryon+number&tbs=li:1
So the main article can actually be found unpaywalled at: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9603208
Note it is all theoretical - beyond SM speculation. For sure some kind of asymmetry must have been at work in the very early universe. But there has been no experimental evidence for such - including from the likes of LHC data. I suggest you do your own due diligence, and start by reading the intro here:
http://thesis.library.caltech.edu/8184/

The relevant bit: "...However, lack of any direct evidence for baryon number violation in general puts strong bounds on the naturalness of some of those models..."
As for the rest of your #39, it's the typical irrelevant at best tripe you are famous for. And presuming to read The God's mind is silly, and irrelevant.

 

[The God]

The final state in either case exists in a lower aggregate gravitational potential. There is no mysterious net missing anything overall, if that's what you are implying.

Reduction in aggregate gravitational potential, suggests reduction in (EFE's) right hand side components values (SET value), that means something gets extracted. What is that something ?

Incidently can a binary of around 60 Solar mass, have rotational energy of the order of 3 Solar Mass ? Simple maths would suggest no....so static mass also has to go in the process. The wiki link talks only of angular momentum (rotational energy), which becomes doubtful as you have hinted earlier.

 

[Q-reeus]

Reduction in aggregate gravitational potential, suggests reduction in (EFE's) right hand side components values (SET value), that means something gets extracted. What is that something ?

Something - GW's - gets radiated out of the system. Setting aside subtle consistency issues peculiar to GR, the overall theme is very similar to EM radiation from moving charges. The radiating system suffers a potential energy (thus mass) loss balancing that lost via radiation. You find a mystery in the latter?

Incidently can a binary of around 60 Solar mass, have rotational energy of the order of 3 Solar Mass ? Simple maths would suggest no....so static mass also has to go in the process. The wiki link talks only of angular momentum (rotational energy), which becomes doubtful as you have hinted earlier.

Inspiral results in a continual increase in orbital KE, matched by a reduction of twice that in system PE, the balance being radiated away. Angular momentum is also being radiated out, so despite increasing orbital KE, orbital angular momentum is continually decreasing. This 1:2 ΔKE/ΔPE ratio breaks down near and at final merger when all that remains is mass, spin KE & angular momentum. That was covered in an earlier thread, and evidently you have forgotten or ignored it.

Instead of keeping this Q & A session up, consider corresponding direct with a recognized authority.

 

[The God]

Something - GW's - gets radiated out of the system. Setting aside subtle consistency issues peculiar to GR, the overall theme is very similar to EM radiation from moving charges. The radiating system suffers a potential energy (thus mass) loss balancing that lost via radiation. You find a mystery in the latter?

Inspiral results in a continual increase in orbital KE, matched by a reduction of twice that in system PE, the balance being radiated away. Angular momentum is also being radiated out, so despite increasing orbital KE, orbital angular momentum is continually decreasing. This 1:2 ΔKE/ΔPE ratio breaks down near and at final merger when all that remains is mass, spin KE & angular momentum. That was covered in an earlier thread, and evidently you have forgotten or ignored it.

Instead of keeping this Q & A session up, consider corresponding direct with a recognized authority.

The paper
https://physics.aps.org/featured-article-pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102

says at heading VI (source discussions)

..................Using the fits to numerical simulations of binary black hole mergers in [92,93], we provide estimates of the mass
and spin of the final black hole, the total energy radiated in gravitational waves, and the peak gravitational-wave
luminosity [39]. The estimated total energy radiated in gravitational waves is 3.0 M⊙c^2..........


sans error bars, masses in source frame are,
BH1 mass = 29
BH2 mass = 36
Total pre merger mass = 65
Final BH mass = 62

So a loss of 3 solar mass.......The authors (yes hundreds of them) are not using scaled maths (c=1, G=1) etc, suggesting that this is the mass in regular context.....so 3M is lost, paper has no maths, BH binaries were not discussed in details earlier, nowhere details can be found out about the loss of this 3M....Baryons surely wiped out...3M contains good amount of B number. I can understand your exasperation. I can understand Hansda's insistence in some other thread on simialr issue.

 

[The God]

Another paper..

http://authors.library.caltech.edu/11160/1/THOrmp80b.pdf

Offers nothing beyond what is stated in V (Radiation Reaction in sources)...

 

[origin]

sans error bars, masses in source frame are,
BH1 mass = 29
BH2 mass = 36
Total pre merger mass = 65
Final BH mass = 62

So a loss of 3 solar mass.......The authors (yes hundreds of them) are not using scaled maths (c=1, G=1) etc, suggesting that this is the mass in regular context.....so 3M is lost, paper has no maths, BH binaries were not discussed in details earlier, nowhere details can be found out about the loss of this 3M....Baryons surely wiped out...3M contains good amount of B number.

So is it your contention that the mass of a black hole is comprised of baryons? Can cite sources that would support that contention?

 

[The God]

So is it your contention that the mass of a black hole is comprised of baryons? Can cite sources that would support that contention?

Well, my contention on BH is known to you.

But what is your contention on this (what is BH mass comprised of ?)

 

[origin]

Well, my contention on BH is known to you.

I don't know exactly what you think, but it sounds like you believe a black hole is comprised of baryons so I guess you need to figure out how the evidence of the LIGO experiment fits in with your own ideas.