|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
... A bit out of your tree, perhaps. But you're certainly not alone. The mainstream does not grasp the clear distinction between gravity and 'gravity waves'. The latter should more correctly be defined as _spatial acoustic pressure waves_ in the fabric of space, analogous to sound waves in air (jb's protestations notwithstanding). To any following this thread ... If you have any inclination of discussing such matters outside of the wild and wacky world of "alt.astronomy" (read - "with sane people") you would be best served to disregard BS's (OH, I like that! ... it works on so may different levels!) fantasies in their entirety. There is NO longitudinal component to Gravitational Waves. And these mis-named 'gravity waves' DO propagate at c. They are _related_ to gravity, and are generated by massive gravitational events (such as a supernova detonation or a binary BH coalescence), but they are NOT gravity. The mainstream's void-space paradigm(VSP) precludes the understanding of gravity as the FLOW of the spatial medium into a gravitating mass. Whether the mass is a normal star or a black hole is irrelevant. The VSP precludes understanding that gravity's influence is _instantaneous irrespective of distance_ just as Newton originally observed. And it's instantaneous with or without an intervening event horizon. While this may be at odds with the interpretation of GR on the "speed of gravity", it is a fact. A fact, is it??? If it's not, and space is a "void", then we're stuck with "fossil fields", 'virtual gravitons', virtual photons, angels, imps, and Sky Pixies. oc |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
... A bit out of your tree, perhaps. But you're certainly not alone. The mainstream does not grasp the clear distinction between gravity and 'gravity waves'. The latter should more correctly be defined as _spatial acoustic pressure waves_ in the fabric of space, analogous to sound waves in air (jb's protestations notwithstanding). To any following this thread ... If you have any inclination of discussing such matters outside of the wild and wacky world of "alt.astronomy" (read - "with sane people") you would be best served to disregard BS's (OH, I like that! ... it works on so may different levels!) fantasies in their entirety. There is NO longitudinal component to Gravitational Waves. And these mis-named 'gravity waves' DO propagate at c. They are _related_ to gravity, and are generated by massive gravitational events (such as a supernova detonation or a binary BH coalescence), but they are NOT gravity. The mainstream's void-space paradigm(VSP) precludes the understanding of gravity as the FLOW of the spatial medium into a gravitating mass. Whether the mass is a normal star or a black hole is irrelevant. The VSP precludes understanding that gravity's influence is _instantaneous irrespective of distance_ just as Newton originally observed. And it's instantaneous with or without an intervening event horizon. While this may be at odds with the interpretation of GR on the "speed of gravity", it is a fact. A fact, is it??? If it's not, and space is a "void", then we're stuck with "fossil fields", 'virtual gravitons', virtual photons, angels, imps, and Sky Pixies. oc |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
From jb, right on cue:
There is NO longitudinal component to Gravitational Waves. ...An ad hoc ancillary tacked onto GR to keep it in conformity with the 'no medium' premise. Same with the 'speed of gravity' being c. A fact, is it??? Yeah. And if it ain't, and space is a "void", then we're stuck with "fossil fields", 'virtual gravitons', virtual photons, angels, imps, and Sky Pixies. oc |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
From jb, right on cue:
There is NO longitudinal component to Gravitational Waves. ...An ad hoc ancillary tacked onto GR to keep it in conformity with the 'no medium' premise. Same with the 'speed of gravity' being c. A fact, is it??? Yeah. And if it ain't, and space is a "void", then we're stuck with "fossil fields", 'virtual gravitons', virtual photons, angels, imps, and Sky Pixies. oc |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Look at me...I'm out on a limb...here goes.
Assuming the earlier comment about a black holes gravity being "past gravity". Then the gravity up to the point of BH formation would be "same" after its formation. Any new matter entering(e.g. mercury falling into an imaginary BH located where SOL is) would, presumably, add to the BH gravity (when felt by body outside e.g. Earth) until the new matter enters the event horizon - and then we again talk about time dilation. Just a thought experiment made literate...ok. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... Now how can the black hole, and objects that are supposedly suspended in almost infinitely slow time on its event horizon, be at the same time moving and changing direction in seemingly real time as the black hole moves through space on its orbit? Double-A And, how come a stellar mass black hole will still express exactly the same gravity as it did prior to the collapse? That is to say, any planets orbiting the star will be unaffected in their orbits after the collapse... how coom ??? oc |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Look at me...I'm out on a limb...here goes.
Assuming the earlier comment about a black holes gravity being "past gravity". Then the gravity up to the point of BH formation would be "same" after its formation. Any new matter entering(e.g. mercury falling into an imaginary BH located where SOL is) would, presumably, add to the BH gravity (when felt by body outside e.g. Earth) until the new matter enters the event horizon - and then we again talk about time dilation. Just a thought experiment made literate...ok. "Bill Sheppard" wrote in message ... Now how can the black hole, and objects that are supposedly suspended in almost infinitely slow time on its event horizon, be at the same time moving and changing direction in seemingly real time as the black hole moves through space on its orbit? Double-A And, how come a stellar mass black hole will still express exactly the same gravity as it did prior to the collapse? That is to say, any planets orbiting the star will be unaffected in their orbits after the collapse... how coom ??? oc |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Is this a description of 2 universes, in identical locations per particle, interacting at the lowest level? vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vvvvvvvv vvv v "Double-A" wrote in message om... "Aunt Buffy" wrote in message ... How can black holes have gravity when nothing can get out because escape speed is greater than the speed of light? One answer might be that because gravitons are virtual particles, like their cousins the virtual photons that mediate the electrostatic force, they might not be affected by the gravitational field they create. The thing that I wonder about is since time slows to a near stop at the event horizon of a black hole, how is it that the black hole itself can move through space and change directions as it interacts with other objects. In many cases black holes are in orbits with stars or neutron stars. If the companion star is massive, the black hole must move and change direction constantly as it reacts to its companion and traces out an elliptical orbit. Now how can the black hole, and objects that are supposedly suspended in almost infinitely slow time on its event horizon, be at the same time moving and changing direction in seemingly real time as the black hole moves through space on its orbit? Double-A |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Is this a description of 2 universes, in identical locations per particle, interacting at the lowest level? vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vvvvvvvv vvv v "Double-A" wrote in message om... "Aunt Buffy" wrote in message ... How can black holes have gravity when nothing can get out because escape speed is greater than the speed of light? One answer might be that because gravitons are virtual particles, like their cousins the virtual photons that mediate the electrostatic force, they might not be affected by the gravitational field they create. The thing that I wonder about is since time slows to a near stop at the event horizon of a black hole, how is it that the black hole itself can move through space and change directions as it interacts with other objects. In many cases black holes are in orbits with stars or neutron stars. If the companion star is massive, the black hole must move and change direction constantly as it reacts to its companion and traces out an elliptical orbit. Now how can the black hole, and objects that are supposedly suspended in almost infinitely slow time on its event horizon, be at the same time moving and changing direction in seemingly real time as the black hole moves through space on its orbit? Double-A |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Aunt Buffy" wrote in message news:5xnAc.1608$eX3.1217@newsfe5-win...
Is this a description of 2 universes, in identical locations per particle, interacting at the lowest level? vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vvvvvvvv vvv v ????? Double-A |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Information to Can Leave A Black Hole | flamestar | Science | 2 | December 12th 03 11:12 PM |
information can leave a black hole | James Briggs | Science | 0 | December 6th 03 01:15 AM |
Chandra 'Hears' A Black Hole | Ron Baalke | Misc | 30 | October 4th 03 06:22 PM |
Black hole mass-sigma correlation | Hans Aberg | Research | 44 | October 1st 03 11:39 PM |
Universe Born in Black Hole Explosion? | Klaatu | Amateur Astronomy | 12 | September 21st 03 12:12 AM |