2020: Physics Nobel Prize:

Not really. While the score is a general indication, I am also pretty well used to individuals coming along claiming to have re-written modern physics and surpassed the greats of the past.
If they were [including yourself] and if you really had something of a concrete nature to offer, you would write up a scientific paper for peer review and publication.
I don't think that will happen.


ps: Please don't start with the unsupported conspiracy notions about mainstream science blocking such potential "discoveries" and/or approaching it with a built in recalcitrance to any new stuff. That's just wishful thinking on the part of many with delusions of grandeur.
You wouldn't know breakthrough physics if you saw it.
 
Why does it seem like you are the last person on this forum?
So they are giving you a deserved hard time over there? Thought so.


If you are so certain you have over ridden established science, and accept unscientific myths like magical spaghetti monsters, why do you come to a science forum.
I'm sure there are religious forums to cater for your type and nonsense.
 
So they are giving you a deserved hard time over there? Thought so.


If you are so certain you have over ridden established science, and accept unscientific myths like magical spaghetti monsters, why do you come to a science forum.
I'm sure there are religious forums to cater for your type and nonsense.

You're weird.
 
As mentioned earlier, and the Physics Nobel with regards to BH's, here is an excellent description of the well know photo, before the photo was taken...good stuff
 
Black holes are at the center of every galaxy, and smaller ones are dotted around the universe. Just their existence is mind-bending, taking what people experience every day on Earth—light and time—and warping them in such a way that seems unreal. Time slows and even stops in black holes.
more at link.....................
For anyone that would like more info on these scientifically verified enigmatic objects, this is a great site.
https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/index.html
by professor J.S. Hamilton:
 
I didn't miss it. There are just too many things to include and I can only type so fast.
Code:
[latex]c = \lambda \nu[/latex]
is such a foundational equation.
Well no, it's just the bog standard v=fλ for any wave, applied to light. Utterly trivial.
 
Trivial? Obviously you've never learned physics.
:D
pot-calling-kettle-black-600w-256802410.jpg
 
It's trivial the same way v=u +at is trivial. Anyone calling that "foundational" would be considered a halfwit. :D
You're a bad influence.

And we should be talking about how it's a stretch to call the mathematics of black holes: empirical science.
 
Two interesting news items with regards to the BH subject and recipient subject of the Nobel.......
https://www.ligo.org/news.php#:~:text=Now, scientists from LIGO and,the LIGO and Virgo detectors.
BEST CONSTRAINTS YET ON THE SIZE OF "MOUNTAINS" ON MILLISECOND PULSARS
29 Jul 2020 -- The LIGO and Virgo collaborations report the most stringent constraints yet on the size of deformations on millisecond pulsars in a new paper submitted to the ArXiv. Based on our analysis, the strong gravity of these rapidly spinning neutron stars constrains such deformations to be no bigger than the width of a human hair. While we have not detected gravitational-waves from millisecond pulsars, we have for the first time probed possible gravitational-wave emission mechanisms for these stars, and shown that only very small deformations would be necessary to produce observable gravitational waves.
the paper:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.14251
Gravitational-wave constraints on the equatorial ellipticity of millisecond pulsars
Abstract:

We present a search for continuous gravitational waves from five radio pulsars, comprising three recycled pulsars (PSR J0437-4715, PSR J0711-6830, and PSR J0737-3039A) and two young pulsars: the Crab pulsar (J0534+2200) and the Vela pulsar (J0835-4510). We use data from the third observing run of Advanced LIGO and Virgo combined with data from their first and second observing runs. For the first time we are able to match (for PSR J0437-4715) or surpass (for PSR J0711-6830) the indirect limits on gravitational-wave emission from recycled pulsars inferred from their observed spin-downs, and constrain their equatorial ellipticities to be less than 10−8. For each of the five pulsars, we perform targeted searches that assume a tight coupling between the gravitational-wave and electromagnetic signal phase evolution. We also present constraints on PSR J0711-6830, the Crab pulsar and the Vela pulsar from a search that relaxes this assumption, allowing the gravitational-wave signal to vary from the electromagnetic expectation within a narrow band of frequencies and frequency derivatives.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and the most recent discovery.....
LIGO-VIRGO FINDS MYSTERY OBJECT IN THE 'MASS GAP'
23 Jun 2020 -- When the most massive stars die, they collapse under their own gravity and leave behind black holes; when stars that are a bit less massive die, they explode in supernovas and leave behind dense, dead remnants of stars called neutron stars. For decades, astronomers have been puzzled by a gap that lies between neutron stars and black holes: the heaviest known neutron star is no more than 2.5 times the mass of our sun, or 2.5 solar masses, and the lightest known black hole is about 5 solar masses. Now, scientists from LIGO and Virgo have announced the discovery of an object of 2.6 solar masses, placing it firmly in the mass gap. The object was found on August 14, 2019, as it merged with a black hole of 23 solar masses, generating gravitational waves that were detected by the LIGO and Virgo detectors.

For more details, read the full press release and see the GW190814 detection page.
 
And we should be talking about how it's a stretch to call the mathematics of black holes: empirical science.
Perhaps you need start a thread about your hypothesis and silly denial of BH's as validated science.
We have an alternative section for such hopeful hypotheticals.
It should be interesting.
 
Perhaps you need start a thread about your hypothesis and silly denial of BH's as validated science.
We have an alternative section for such hopeful hypotheticals.
It should be interesting.
Where is the closest black hole? Maybe we should work on the interstellar drive so that we can visit it and perform some experiments.
 
You're a bad influence.

And we should be talking about how it's a stretch to call the mathematics of black holes: empirical science.
Nobody calls the mathematics of black holes empirical science. The mathematics are used to predict the empirical observations and to model them. The mark of a successful theory in science is that it predicts what empirical observations can be expected.

I see Markus is having to explain to you what a wave function is, now. You're not doing very well.

But this is all off-topic anyway.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top