Gravitational waves from black hole merger

paddoboy said:
:) I never cop out my friend...and what adhoms are you referring too?
The truth hitting home as to your trolling?
Again, your questions on charge and spin being negated have all been answered.
Take it or leave it.
Remember, what you try and fanatically push and over turn in this forum, makes no difference to the professionals at the coal face. It gets you know where: You must accept that as ego deflating that it is!;)
Although Krash put that a lot more succulently. :)
Click to expand...

Then answer what is the charge negation time ...that quickie time ? and spin negation time...that normal time ?
 
The God said:
Then answer what is the charge negation time ...that quickie time ? and spin negation time...that normal time ?
Click to expand...
I don't succumb to bullying demands and false claims by cranks.
Your questions have all been answered in this thread.
 
paddoboy said:
I did read.....
You said.......

Now google again...If that doesn't help, E-Mail one of the professional experts...easy peasy!
Click to expand...

You are claiming this quickiee and you are not able to support that.....so you are resorting to nonsense...as usual Paddoboyish cop out.
 
The God said:
You are claiming this quickiee and you are not able to support that.....so you are resorting to nonsense...as usual Paddoboyish cop out.
Click to expand...
No, it's actually your nonsense. I have given links supporting that fact...Professor Hamilton for one.
Let me state it again: A BH can have three properties: Mass, spin, and charge:
Charge and spin are negated over time. Even mass, according to Hawking Radiation will see a BH evaporate over the lifetime of the Universe.

If you want to argue against mainstream cosmology, then submit some reference please.
 
The God said:
This is much better...
You qualified this with some 'quickly' etc...
Good, you learnt.
Click to expand...
??? Wow! Such arrogant pedant.
Let me then rephrase.......charge is negated over time, rather quickly, and spin over larger time frames.......
But again you omit any reputable links to support any of your unsupported nonsense.
 
paddoboy said:
??? Wow! Such arrogant pedant.
Let me then rephrase.......charge is negated over time, rather quickly, and spin over larger time frames.......
But again you omit any reputable links to support any of your unsupported nonsense.
Click to expand...

Can you quantify this 'rather quickly' ?
 
The God said:
Can you quantify this 'rather quickly' ?
Click to expand...
Do I need to? Isn't this just another effort by you to attempt to gloss over all that which you have previously denied, and all that you claim but as yet have never been able to verify with suitable reputable links.
Quite an extensive list in actual fact.
I mean, you aren't naive enough surely to pretend that we should take any notice of your unsupported claims?

The "rather quickly" is aptly addressed in a previous post: I'll let you do the searching. ;)
 
hansda said:
The God,

It seems you don't have any further reply to my post #406.
Click to expand...

Yes, well thats what he said that this conversion should not be restricted to EMR..

But I have another question in this Gravitational Radiation thing, I am also searching, Did the baryonic number remain conserved in this loss of 3 Solar Mass ?
 
James R said:
Moderator note: I have just handed out several warnings relating to the childish squabbles that are going on among several of the participants of this thread.

If you intend to report the kind of name-calling and sniping at each other that has been happening here, bear in mind that a moderator may well review the thread as a whole, evaluating the posts of both complainant and target of the complaint. It may well be the case that both parties end up with warning points.
Click to expand...
The process is time consuming, expensive and leaves at least this Moderator drained of the will to exert even the least bit of human sympathy. But the process continues and justice will come.
 
I haven't read the whole thread, sorry if you been over this already.

If we are at a greater radial distance with respect to the 2 BH's that merged then the gravitational attract should remain the same to that general direction of space. We have always been attracted to the barycenter of the BH's before they merged with the same attraction after they merged, unless their mass changed.

There should be no change in our detected gravity before or after the merge from that region.

what am I missing here?
 
BdS said:
There should be no change in our detected gravity before or after the merge from that region.

what am I missing here?
Click to expand...
First of all the gravitation detected from the black holes before or after the merger is 0.
 
origin said:
First of all the gravitation detected from the black holes before or after the merger is 0.
Click to expand...
????? Black hole have, of course, a non-zero gravitational field.

There will be no big change before and after (only minor losses because of gravitational radiation), so "is the same" or "has a difference 0" would be ok.
 
Schmelzer said:
????? Black hole have, of course, a non-zero gravitational field.

There will be no big change before and after (only minor losses because of gravitational radiation), so "is the same" or "has a difference 0" would be ok.
Click to expand...
His question was, would there be a difference in the amount of gravity we detected here on earth before and after the black holes merged. We of course could not detect any gravity from black holes 1.3 billion miles away.
 
river said:
In what plane would these " gravitational waves manifest " ?
Click to expand...
The same plane that the Lense -Thirring effect and gravity itself manifests itself in I suggest...undulations in spacetime.
You do know what gravitational waves are?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top