Steve Willner wrote:

In article ,
Yousuf Khan writes:

Attribution line, not attribution novel.

The first event seemed to happen quicker, while the second one
seems more drawn out. I wonder if this tells us something about the
masses of the two new blackholes? Specifically will the fact that
it happened much slower for the second set of black holes, would
that mean that they were smaller black holes than the first set
from the September detection/February announcement?

Yes. See item 2 in the press release at
https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/news/ligo20160615

IIUC, the event was that two black holes merged. If that is so, it cannot
“happen quicker” or be “drawn out” or “happen slower”. The article says
that the *signal* was *detected* earlier which would be a different fact.

Second, why is it a valid conclusion that because the bodies’ orbital speeds
were faster they *have to be* smaller i.e. for black holes that they have to
have smaller masses? (I realize that was so in this case.)

F'up2 sci.astro

--
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.