Gravitational waves from black hole merger

Are you kidding me? Do you think this experiment was done by some dudes in their mom's garage. Seriously, are you really that out of touch that you think you are coming up with shit they didn't think of?

How can you possibly think the gods absurd statement, "You can't possibly get two suns at light-micro-seconds apart, leave aside getting two BHs of around 30 Solar masses so close" is real skeptism? You seem to be becoming a first rate crank!

Well then, how could they get that close, hmm lets see, how about they were that close the instant before combining; after spiralling into each other for millions of years! There is no need to lose it in your golden years!


Tom and Dick....just waiting for Harry. ;)
 
The problem is that "spiralling into each other" needs a lot of time. The Earth is spiralling into the Sun how long now, without an end in sight? So the question how they come so close to each other is a reasonable one.
Possibly because they started out closer together, and of course much stronger gravitational attraction then the Earth and Sun.
 
Theory permits this, no mass/em radiation escapes from inside the EH, but curvature of spacetime (gravity) extends till infinity...
Gravity/spacetime is non linear: plus the gravitational field of a stellar BH is a fossil field from the original star.
 
"Hawking radiation" is only a mathematical/theoretical prediction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation . This is not Physically verified.
A theoretical prediction held in high regard by most cosmologists and in conjunction with quantum field theory a logical assertion.




What is "time-space" ? Is it same as "space-time" ? We have also seen that "space-time" is a mathematical model and not the physical reality.
Timespace, spacetime...the same I would imagine.
Spacetime has shown to be able to be warped, curved, twisted, and rippled.
That makes it real enough for me...just as real as space, or just as real as time.
[this was debated previously]

The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.
:Hermann Minkowski:
 
Not at all. But you'd be surprised how often the wrong compromises are made in real life engineering. The Concorde's tires and the Shuttle's many problems with ceramic tiles and Morton Thiokol's gaskets, and Perkin-Elmer's fiasco with the first Hubble optics are all something that shows just how easy it is to mess up when the pressure is on and the stakes are high.


Take this reply Dan as a continuation of my post to you at post 60.......
Sure mainstream science makes mistakes, as happens in every field, but just as sure is the fact that the discoveries of these mistakes, the anomalies sometimes discovered, the falsification of incumbent theories etc, are all revealed and solved and modified by those same mainstream scientists and cosmologists.
It is not solved, nor falsified, nor modified by any Tom, Dick, Harry or Dan or paddoboy or the god, from a sliver of cyber space on a remote science forum, posting incognito and without any fallback or consequence of their outrageous actions and/or silly claims.
Surely you realise that? Others obviously do not, being snowed under by delusions of grandeur and inflated egos. Or perhaps you don't.
 
There is a lot of radiation from infalling matter. There is no fixed ratio for this, if, say, something neutral would fall directly into the black hole there would be no such radiation, but the usual way to fall inside is much longer. Usually matter rotates a lot of time around the BH in some accretion disc, similar to the ring of Saturn.

But all this is the long way from far away toward the BH horizon. Nothing special, in principle this is similar for matter falling into the Sun or on Earth. The role of the atmosphere of the Earth, which transforms the invisible meteorites into fireballs before they reach the surface can be played by this accretion disc.

And, the more close to the horizon, gravitational waves become more and more important for the loss of energy.

The discussion I feel was about Gravitational radiation, which is a different aspect then general EM radiation of infalling material. I am sure the gravitational waves are not the carrier for for EM energy, they are the carrier for Gravitational Energy. (You can correct me on that, if required)

Like when a charged particle is accelerated, EM radiation is produced, and similarly when a mass is accelerated the Gravitational Radiation is produced, and thats what get transmitted through GW.

The bigger point is do we really need GR to accommodate this concept ? It can be analogical that like accelerated charge produces EM radiation and in the similar fashio accelerated mass produces Gravitational radiation. Possibly the problem is propagation without GR that is without ripples in the fabric of spacetime.

Another valid point, where is the question of accelerataion under GR, however absurd or convoluted the GR spacetime be, the motion is not envisaged as accelerating, so Gravitational radiation should be countering GR instead of supporting.
 
Take this reply Dan as a continuation of my post to you at post 60.......
Sure mainstream science makes mistakes, as happens in every field, but just as sure is the fact that the discoveries of these mistakes, the anomalies sometimes discovered, the falsification of incumbent theories etc, are all revealed and solved and modified by those same mainstream scientists and cosmologists.
It is not solved, nor falsified, nor modified by any Tom, Dick, Harry or Dan or paddoboy or the god, from a sliver of cyber space on a remote science forum, posting incognito and without any fallback or consequence of their outrageous actions and/or silly claims.
Surely you realise that? Others obviously do not, being snowed under by delusions of grandeur and inflated egos. Or perhaps you don't.

I do not know about any Tom, Dick or Harry....but you are a misfit in the list. It cannot come from you.
 
The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality.
:Hermann Minkowski:

The origin of Pseudoscience, and still plaguing..
 
I do not know about any Tom, Dick or Harry....but you are a misfit in the list. It cannot come from you.


Nor you my friend: This subject is done and dusted, irrespective of the noise you see the need to create.
And guess what? More to come in reasonably short time I suggest. :)
 
Gravity/spacetime is non linear: plus the gravitational field of a stellar BH is a fossil field from the original star.

And that fossil gets excited or aroused when he/she/it sees another of its clan....thats how two BH merge...Is it some kind of sexual union ?
 
And the work continues.................
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/first-ligo-now-lisa-finding-gravitational-waves-space

First LIGO, now LISA: finding gravitational waves in space
We've picked up gravitational waves on Earth – now, astrophysicists intend to do the same from space. Belinda Smith reports on the first steps to a space-based detector.


Overnight, a spacecraft 1.5 million kilometres from Earth quietly released two metal cubes – and in doing so, passed a major milestone in the mission to pick up gravitational waves from space.

The European Space Agency’s LISA Pathfinder, which launched on 3 December 2015 from the Guiana Space Centre and slotted into orbit on 22 January, is a proof-of-concept mission to prove that two masses – in this case, a pair of identical 46-millimetre gold-platinum cubes – can fly through space, untouched but shielded within the spacecraft, and be “linked” by a network of lasers.
 
Gravity/spacetime is non linear: plus the gravitational field of a stellar BH is a fossil field from the original star.


http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/BlackHoles/black_gravity.html

Purely in terms of general relativity, there is no problem here. The gravity doesn't have to get out of the black hole. General relativity is a local theory, which means that the field at a certain point in spacetime is determined entirely by things going on at places that can communicate with it at speeds less than or equal to c. If a star collapses into a black hole, the gravitational field outside the black hole may be calculated entirely from the properties of the star and its external gravitational field before it becomes a black hole. Just as the light registering late stages in my fall takes longer and longer to get out to you at a large distance, the gravitational consequences of events late in the star's collapse take longer and longer to ripple out to the world at large. In this sense the black hole is a kind of "frozen star": the gravitational field is a fossil field. The same is true of the electromagnetic field that a black hole may possess.
 
Gravity/spacetime is non linear: plus the gravitational field of a stellar BH is a fossil field from the original star.
This fact was verified a while back when another called rajesh was preaching anti science nonsense and denial.
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity
The gravity of gravity
One reason why the physics of general relativity is much more difficult than that of Newton's theory of gravity or the theory of electrodynamicsis a property called non-linearity. In short, gravity can beget further gravity - where gravitational systems are concerned, the whole is not the sum of its parts.
 
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/BlackHoles/black_gravity.html

Purely in terms of general relativity, there is no problem here. The gravity doesn't have to get out of the black hole. General relativity is a local theory, which means that the field at a certain point in spacetime is determined entirely by things going on at places that can communicate with it at speeds less than or equal to c. If a star collapses into a black hole, the gravitational field outside the black hole may be calculated entirely from the properties of the star and its external gravitational field before it becomes a black hole. Just as the light registering late stages in my fall takes longer and longer to get out to you at a large distance, the gravitational consequences of events late in the star's collapse take longer and longer to ripple out to the world at large. In this sense the black hole is a kind of "frozen star": the gravitational field is a fossil field. The same is true of the electromagnetic field that a black hole may possess.

This is to accommodate our inability to do anything beyond EH, do you get it ? This is another classic example of continued pseudoscience. Its like, park your shoes and even characteristic properties outside, and then enter the premises (read EH). Paddoboy, can't you rightfully ask a simple question that how the mass falls to singularity once it crosses EH if Gravity is parked outside EH ? You talk so fondly that for a large BH it will be spaghettified (whatever) as it nears the singularity, but where is the Gravity inside EH, why the inside of spacetime be so curved, when the field is fossiled outside EH itself ?
 
Last edited:
This fact was verified a while back when another called rajesh was preaching anti science nonsense and denial.
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/gravity_of_gravity
The gravity of gravity
One reason why the physics of general relativity is much more difficult than that of Newton's theory of gravity or the theory of electrodynamicsis a property called non-linearity. In short, gravity can beget further gravity - where gravitational systems are concerned, the whole is not the sum of its parts.

This is maths.....this non-linearity and non superimposition of solution is due to complex equations. Try solving x = km and x = km^2...You will get the idea. In case # 1 you can simply add x1 and x2 as derived from m1 and m2 to get x3 for m1+m2, but in case of # 2 you cannot add x1 and x2 to get x3 for (m1+m2). You are pushing something which you do not understand. The probability that you have understood my example also is very very low..
 
This is to accommodate our inability to do anything beyond EH, do you get it ? This is another classic example of continued pseudoscience. Its like, park your shoes and even characteristic properties outside, and then enter the premises (read EH). Paddoboy, can't you rightfully ask a simple question that how the mass falls to singularity once it crosses EH if Gravity is parked outside EH ? You talk so fondly that for a large BH it will be spaghettified (whatever) as it nears the singularity, but where is the Gravity inside EH, why the inside of spacetime be so curved, when the field is fossiled outside EH itself ?

This is maths.....this non-linearity and non superimposition of solution is due to complex equations. Try solving x = km and x = km^2...You will get the idea. In case # 1 you can simply add x1 and x2 as derived from m1 and m2 to get x3 for m1+m2, but in case of # 2 you cannot add x1 and x2 to get x3 for (m1+m2). You are pushing something which you do not understand. The probability that you have understood my example also is very very low..


I'm not arguing or debating with you my friend...Obviously your anti science, pro pseudoscience stance is beyond redemption, suffice to say if you have any evidence for your stuff then present it for peer review...because guess what?you aint gonna change anything baby! :)
 
I'm not arguing or debating with you my friend...Obviously your anti science, pro pseudoscience stance is beyond redemption, suffice to say if you have any evidence for your stuff then present it for peer review...because guess what?you aint gonna change anything baby! :)

Because you have no argument......My approach is pro science, one part of which has been taken over by bulls and mauled badly.
 
Incredible money being undertaken to further validation of Einstein's Universe, gravitational waves, BH's and GR in particular, but all worth it I suggest.....
GP-B, LIGO, and LISA to come.Coupling all those with the ISS, the HST, and LHC and it has taken a pretty penny to achieve what we already have.
 
Incredible money being undertaken to further validation of Einstein's Universe, gravitational waves, BH's and GR in particular, but all worth it I suggest.....
GP-B, LIGO, and LISA to come.Coupling all those with the ISS, the HST, and LHC and it has taken a pretty penny to achieve what we already have.

Mamma mia.....need we say anything else ?

Just one conclusion against GR and money dries up; wait till, long live SH, decides to leave this Earth...
 
Back
Top