Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Plazma Inferno!, Feb 10, 2016.
As far as I know, no, just one.....a combination of both singularities.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Tom and Dick....just waiting for Harry. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Possibly because they started out closer together, and of course much stronger gravitational attraction then the Earth and Sun.
Gravity/spacetime is non linear: plus the gravitational field of a stellar BH is a fossil field from the original star.
A theoretical prediction held in high regard by most cosmologists and in conjunction with quantum field theory a logical assertion.
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.
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.
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.
I do not know about any Tom, Dick or Harry....but you are a misfit in the list. It cannot come from you.
The origin of Pseudoscience, and still plaguing..
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. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
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.................
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.
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 fact was verified a while back when another called rajesh was preaching anti science nonsense and denial.
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 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! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
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.
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...
Separate names with a comma.