[vice] Scientists Are 99% Sure They Just Detected a Black Hole Eating a Neutron Star - Page 5 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[vice] Scientists Are 99% Sure They Just Detected a Black Hole Eating a Neutron Star

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #41 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-13-2019, 10:37 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
DNMock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 3,466
Rep: 171 (Unique: 125)
Quote: Originally Posted by Avonosac View Post
Sigh, blame me I guess for burying the lead as it were. I put the operative word at the end of the sentence; the Observer Frame. Light is of course constantly traveling at C, however its frame is being dragged by gravity, which leads to the change in wavelength as in the observer frame the dragged spacetime "slows" the photon down, once free of the relativistic effects of the gravity well the observer frame and the photons frame match. This is quite literally why an observer watching something fall in to a black hole would basically see them stop, because the light they emitted as they fell towards the event horizon is held up by the gravity well. They have long since crossed the event horizon and made their way to the eventuality of the singularity, but the light they emitted is still stuck in the well's gravity, slowly being released as it makes its way out of the influence of gravity where its frame can once again propagate at C.



What is the maximum level of calculus based physics you have studied? I'll assume you actually have gone through at least a "modern physics" level with derived general relativity and perhaps some quantum mechanics for good measure, and just fell victim to my burying the lead on the which frame I was talking about.

If you don't understand what the observer frame means or impacts the system then...

I'm just going to ignore most of what you said until you can answer, at what point did I suggest anything was going faster than C?

You said gravity was "pulling" on the light slowing it down. implying that the gravitational waves would come out ahead which is patently false. They arrive at the same time, travelling the same speed and have their directions altered by gravity wells in the exact same proportions...

If you aren't going to bother reading my entire post to see I literally described the observer relative to an action (train analogy), then I would suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote.


DNMock is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-16-2019, 07:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Avonosac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 2,957
Rep: 158 (Unique: 114)
Quote: Originally Posted by DNMock View Post
You said gravity was "pulling" on the light slowing it down. implying that the gravitational waves would come out ahead which is patently false. They arrive at the same time, travelling the same speed and have their directions altered by gravity wells in the exact same proportions...

If you aren't going to bother reading my entire post to see I literally described the observer relative to an action (train analogy), then I would suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote.
Lies you tell to children. AKA Newtonian physics AKA high school physics AKA some people don't understand calculus so I used more familiar words.

It's also not far from the actual truth. Also, when you're wrong you should learn how to stop talking. Sit down, shut up, you could obviously learn something.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw.../#1a908b0875d4

Quote:
These two possibilities both contain the caveat that the true answer could be a combination of both factors or an unlikely alternative involving exotic physics (like a slightly different speed for gravitational waves and electromagnetic waves). Let's examine how both scenarios could play out.
Now, a lot of time things like that can be explained by relatively simple physics like the slowing of light passing through matter, however your claims of "patently false" need to get checked because as the PhD Astrophysicist confirmed, there are situations where that is actually a thing.

Now I took the trouble to google a reference for you but I'm not going to bother looking for another more appropriate example after finding this in the FIRST record. One can easily explain the reason WHY there wasn't such a large discrepancy requiring exotic physics is because the neutron star merger was relatively low mass. Sadly, the real fun with gravity comes with much larger super massive black hole physics.

BTW, You STILL didn't show me where I suggested anything was moving FASTER than C. I'm waiting.


Avonosac is offline  
post #43 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-23-2019, 01:02 PM
Frog Blast The Vent Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,035
Rep: 371 (Unique: 184)
Quote: Originally Posted by Avonosac View Post
Lies you tell to children. AKA Newtonian physics AKA high school physics AKA some people don't understand calculus so I used more familiar words.

It's also not far from the actual truth. Also, when you're wrong you should learn how to stop talking. Sit down, shut up, you could obviously learn something.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw.../#1a908b0875d4



Now, a lot of time things like that can be explained by relatively simple physics like the slowing of light passing through matter, however your claims of "patently false" need to get checked because as the PhD Astrophysicist confirmed, there are situations where that is actually a thing.

Now I took the trouble to google a reference for you but I'm not going to bother looking for another more appropriate example after finding this in the FIRST record. One can easily explain the reason WHY there wasn't such a large discrepancy requiring exotic physics is because the neutron star merger was relatively low mass. Sadly, the real fun with gravity comes with much larger super massive black hole physics.

BTW, You STILL didn't show me where I suggested anything was moving FASTER than C. I'm waiting.

Maybe you should have kept reading the article:

Quote:
Exotic ideas, like a different speed for gravity and light, are completely unnecessary to explain this observation.
For reference, this is what you said earlier in the thread:

Quote: Originally Posted by Avonosac View Post
The final photon emitted from the edge of the mass, still has a tremendous amount of gravity pulling on it and slowing it down, while the gravity waves are emitted at the speed of light. As the photon distances itself from the mass, and or the mass distances itself from the photon, the effect of gravity on the photon falls off. This feedback loop rather quickly allows the photon "accelerate" to the speed of light in a vacuum from our observer frame, and the net result is the gravity wave arrives before the light/em from the same event.
"Patently false" applies to this entire section. Gravity does not slow down photons. A large gravitational gradient does not accelerate photons. Matter can slow down photons, due to absorption and re-emission as part of light-matter wave mechanics interactions, but that's not what you said that prompted this whole discussion.

Relativistic effects cannot change c.

Pro tip: don't be such a jerk about it, either, especially when you're the one saying wrong things.

Last edited by Mand12; 09-23-2019 at 01:09 PM.
Mand12 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #44 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-23-2019, 01:42 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
DNMock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 3,466
Rep: 171 (Unique: 125)
Quote: Originally Posted by Avonosac View Post
Lies you tell to children. AKA Newtonian physics AKA high school physics AKA some people don't understand calculus so I used more familiar words.

It's also not far from the actual truth. Also, when you're wrong you should learn how to stop talking. Sit down, shut up, you could obviously learn something.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw.../#1a908b0875d4



Now, a lot of time things like that can be explained by relatively simple physics like the slowing of light passing through matter, however your claims of "patently false" need to get checked because as the PhD Astrophysicist confirmed, there are situations where that is actually a thing.

Now I took the trouble to google a reference for you but I'm not going to bother looking for another more appropriate example after finding this in the FIRST record. One can easily explain the reason WHY there wasn't such a large discrepancy requiring exotic physics is because the neutron star merger was relatively low mass. Sadly, the real fun with gravity comes with much larger super massive black hole physics.

BTW, You STILL didn't show me where I suggested anything was moving FASTER than C. I'm waiting.
Do yourself a favor and go back to the basic and fundamental laws of physics (thermodynamics mostly) and learn to apply those very basic principles in full to more advanced stuff. Like seriously, I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything here. It was doing just that, that allowed me to actually get a better handle on how things in more advanced physics work (which is still pretty little tbh).

Once you do that you will understand why a gravity wave and a photon must travel the same speed.


DNMock is offline  
post #45 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-23-2019, 06:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Avonosac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 2,957
Rep: 158 (Unique: 114)
Quote: Originally Posted by Mand12 View Post
Spoiler!
I literally said why I wasn't going to bother searching for a truly applicable article when the first one in google acknowledged the exotic physics which supports the point I was alluding to.

I'm not being a jerk about it, he/she/they've been wrong from the beginning, I'm still waiting for the quote where I said anything about C changing or something going faster or whatever it is they claim. That point was the entire basis of their argument, they haven't substantiated it. First time I'm annoyed 3rd time I swat off an annoying gnat.

Quote: Originally Posted by DNMock View Post
I STILL HAVEN'T SHOWN WHERE YOU SUGGESTED SOMETHING MOVED FASTER THAN C.
That's great, thanks for mentioning it. How about you actually show where you believe that happened instead of yell your confession? We could get back to a civil discussion.


Avonosac is offline  
post #46 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-24-2019, 07:28 AM
Frog Blast The Vent Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,035
Rep: 371 (Unique: 184)
Quote: Originally Posted by Avonosac View Post
I literally said why I wasn't going to bother searching for a truly applicable article when the first one in google acknowledged the exotic physics which supports the point I was alluding to.
Which is why I mentioned that you clearly hadn't bothered to actually read the article in question.

It explicitly does NOT support your claim, and your claim is patently false. I also quoted the post where you said that light was slowed down by gravity, which is patently false.

Why you're doubling down this I have no idea, but you're just making yourself look worse at this point.

Now you're deliberately faking quotes to distort what was said? Grow the hell up, and stop gaslighting.

Last edited by Mand12; 09-24-2019 at 07:32 AM.
Mand12 is offline  
post #47 of 47 (permalink) Old 09-25-2019, 09:40 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Caffinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 198
Rep: 2 (Unique: 2)
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
I'm pretty sure he knows what "too little; detail resourcefully" means.
cack
Caffinator is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off