reerer Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 How can a sound wave propagate in the near vacuum of celestial space? -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordief Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 1 minute ago, reerer said: How can a sound wave propagate in the near vacuum of celestial space? The Ligo Gravity Waves are not sound waves . What did you mean to ask? How do Gravity waves travel through the vacuum of space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 22, 2017 Author Share Posted October 22, 2017 (edited) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "On September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC the two detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory simultaneously observed a transient gravitational-wave signal. The signal sweeps upwards in frequency from 35 to 250 Hz with a peak gravitational-wave strain of 1.0×10−21." (Abstract). Abbott, B. P. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Physical Review Letters. 116, 061102. 2016 Edited October 22, 2017 by reerer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, reerer said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? They may have frequencies which are within the audible range but they are not sound waves. Sound waves, as you rightly say, are propagated through a medium such as air. Neither are they gravity waves. They are gravitational waves; waves in space-time. So they don't need a medium. Edited October 22, 2017 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted October 22, 2017 Share Posted October 22, 2017 19 minutes ago, reerer said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? Gravitational waves, not gravity waves, are ripples/undulations in spacetime just as predicted by GR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 25, 2017 Author Share Posted October 25, 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "On September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC the two detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory simultaneously observed a transient gravitational-wave signal. The signal sweeps upwards in frequency from 35 to 250 Hz with a peak gravitational-wave strain of 1.0×10^−21." (Abstract). Abbott, B. P. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Physical Review Letters. 116, 061102. 2016 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Can you explain how electromagnetic stellar gravity waves (GR) form the effects of sound waves at the LIGO observatory? -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 Frequency is in cycles per second. As such you can have the same frequency in sound waves, electromagnetic waves, gravitational waves , or even sea waves. That does not mean they are all the same thing ! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordief Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 (edited) On another forum someone (Janus I think) explained that the movements of stars within our galaxies could be interpreted as extremely long wavelength ,extremely low frequency "sound waves" Perhaps he referred to "density waves" Unless I misinterpreted... Edited October 25, 2017 by geordief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 7 hours ago, reerer said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? Can you explain how electromagnetic stellar gravity waves (GR) form the effects of sound waves at the LIGO observatory? They are not sound waves. And they are not electromagnetic waves. They are not even gravity waves. They are gravitational waves. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrP Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 8 hours ago, reerer said: Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? They can't... they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 10 hours ago, reerer said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? The diagram clearly shows an interferometer with a laser, splitter and two mirrors. Is this a sensible way to detect "sound waves"? No. And the first sentence of the of the Wikipedia page you reference says: "The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) is a large-scale physicsexperiment and observatory to detect cosmic gravitational waves and to develop gravitational-wave observations as an astronomical tool.[1] " So, not sound waves. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 25, 2017 Share Posted October 25, 2017 11 hours ago, reerer said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO#/media/File:Simplified_diagram_of_an_Advanced_LIGO_detector.png The axis on the bottom of the graph depicts frequencies between 20-1000 Hz which are sound waves. Again, how can a sound wave (gravity waves) propagate in the near vacuum of stellar space that is vacuum? The frequency of a wave does not tell you the type of wave. That's not going to change, even if you ask the question a third time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 (edited) 'They may have frequencies which are within the audible range but they are not sound waves." Strange "The frequency of a wave does not tell you the type of wave." Swansont "Frequency is not a physical quantity, and Hertz is not a unit, that is tied to sound (waves)" Lahn. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Stellar universe is stationary which includes black holes. How do explain how stellar gravity waves are formed? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Weber experimentally detected gravitational waves that have the frequency of sound (1662 Hz). "Further advances are necessary in order to generate and detect gravitational waves in the laboratory." (Weber, Conclusion, 1960). "A description is given of the gravitational radiation experiments involving detectors at opposite ends of a 1000 kilometer baseline, at Argonne National Laboratory and the University of Maryland. Sudden increases in detector output are observed roughly once in several days, coincident within the resolution time of 0.25 seconds. The statistics rule out an accidental origin and experiments rule out seismic and electromagnetic effects. It is reasonable to conclude that gravitational radiation is being observed." (Weber, Abstract, 1970). "EXPERIMENTS AT 1662 HERTZ" (Weber, Intro, 1970). Weber detected gravity waves with the frequency of 1662 Hz using the acoustical vibration of a 750 lb aluminum beam but sound cannot propagate in the vacuum of stellar space. Edited October 26, 2017 by reerer -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 49 minutes ago, reerer said: Stellar universe is stationary which includes black holes. How do explain how stellar gravity waves are formed? Weber detected gravity waves with the frequency of 1662 Hz using the acoustical vibration of a 750 lb aluminum beam but sound cannot propagate in the vacuum of stellar spac The stellar universe is most definitely not stationary. Star have relative velocities relative to each other that range from 10's to 1000's of km/sec. Gravitational waves are produced anytime you have two masses orbiting each other. The gravitational waves detected were produced by a pair of very massive black holes coming together in ever tightening orbits. Most recently they were able to detect the same thing with two neutron stars. As the objects orbit they emit gravitational waves at the expense of orbital energy, which causes the orbits to shorter and a faster orbit. The faster they orbit, the faster they emit gravitational waves, which speeds up the shortening of the orbit, and so on. Early on, the gravitational waves are such low frequency and long wavelength that they are not detectable by our equipment. They only become so during those last moments before the Black holes or Neutron stars come together. Again, just because the resulting vibration of the beam was in a frequency range that would have produced an audible tone, the gravitational waves that were claimed to have caused that vibration would not have been sound waves. Besides, Weber's claim to have detected gravitational waves has been discredited. The recent LIGO detection is the first accepted detection of gravitational waves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 The stellar universe is most definitely not stationary. ___________________________________________________________ How does a planisphere work? https://www.google.com/search?q=planisphere&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVsKvFwY3XAhUC2mMKHZ4lBUwQ_AUICygC&biw=1600&bih=783#imgrc=xHK_5xlkX7s8SM:&spf=1508994250690 If the stars are moving around, like you say? Huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 27 minutes ago, reerer said: The stellar universe is most definitely not stationary. ___________________________________________________________ How does a planisphere work? https://www.google.com/search?q=planisphere&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVsKvFwY3XAhUC2mMKHZ4lBUwQ_AUICygC&biw=1600&bih=783#imgrc=xHK_5xlkX7s8SM:&spf=1508994250690 If the stars are moving around, like you say? Huh? Even though fairly nearby stars can be moving at 10's of km/sec, they are still very far away and the farther away something is the smaller its apparent motion will be. 61 Cygni, a fairly close star has the highest proper motion of the stars visible by the unaided eye. But at 11 light years away (1x10^14 km), its proper motion is only in the range of 5 arc seconds per year (an arc second is 1/3600 of a degree), at that rate, it would take 360 years to move the width of the Full moon. The vast majority of the unaided eye visible stars in the sky are much further away, and even with a similar relative velocity to us as 61 Cygni would show a much smaller proper motion. A planisphere made today would be accurate enough to use for many decades before it would need to be updated. There is probably more inaccuracy inherent in the manufacture of your typical planisphere than would result from the accumulated proper motion of the stars over a long period of time, 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, reerer said: ' 4 hours ago, reerer said: Stellar universe is stationary which includes black holes. How do explain how stellar gravity waves are formed? I'm fairly sure that you are not interested in scientific answers, and probably have an agenda of some sort. But anyway for others out there that may not recognise the ignorance you are posting, they are gravitational waves, not gravity waves as you have already been told. And stars are certainly in motion, as will be evidenced in a few thousand years when Barnard's Star takes the title of closet star to Earth, displacing Proxima Centauri. And of course galaxies are also revolving around a central mass that is most likely a BH, which also most likely revolve and are called Kerr BHs. And in case you are a Earth centered universe soul, our solar system is situated in the outskirts of one of the spiral arms around 23,000 L/years from the center of the Milky way. In other words just a hum drum solar system with 8/9 planets orbiting an average hum drum yellow dwarf star. The nucleosynthesis of elements that take place in stars are spread throughout the universe and comprise of all that goes to make up planets, and you and I. Simply put, besides orbiting an average hum drum star in the outskirts of a average spiral galaxy, we are also nothing more then regurgitated star stuff. Edited October 26, 2017 by beecee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrP Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 2 hours ago, Janus said: Even though fairly nearby stars can be moving at 10's of km/sec, they are still very far away and the farther away something is the smaller its apparent motion will be. I am sorry, but when I first read this I was reminded of Father Ted explaining the size of cows to Father Dougal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 5 hours ago, reerer said: The stellar universe is most definitely not stationary. ___________________________________________________________ How does a planisphere work? https://www.google.com/search?q=planisphere&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVsKvFwY3XAhUC2mMKHZ4lBUwQ_AUICygC&biw=1600&bih=783#imgrc=xHK_5xlkX7s8SM:&spf=1508994250690 If the stars are moving around, like you say? Huh? They will eventually be obsolete. Star charts are continually updated. Small changes in position are not so important for naked-eye viewing, but for navigation and astronomy, they are more significant. 7 hours ago, reerer said: Weber experimentally detected gravitational waves that have the frequency of sound (1662 Hz). "EXPERIMENTS AT 1662 HERTZ" (Weber, Intro, 1970). Weber detected gravity waves with the frequency of 1662 Hz using the acoustical vibration of a 750 lb aluminum beam but sound cannot propagate in the vacuum of stellar space. You need to look up what a transducer is. Optical and electrical modulation happens at acoustic frequencies, too. We can convert them to sound using a speaker, but that does not mean a CD or computer file being read are transmitting sound waves anywhere, until they are converted at the speaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 (edited) 'They may have frequencies which are within the audible range but they are not sound waves." Strange "The frequency of a wave does not tell you the type of wave." Swansont "Frequency is not a physical quantity, and Hertz is not a unit, that is tied to sound (waves)" Lahn. "You need to look up what a transducer is. Optical and electrical modulation happens at acoustic frequencies, too." Swansontian "Sound waves which are audible to us have frequencies from about 20-20,000 Hz, but other waves exist with these frequencies which are not sound waves. For example, EM waves at this frequency are used for communications." Drakkith ___________________________________________________________________________ Dradkkith has not been informed of the eminent Swansonian transducer theory of celestial EM gravity waves. Edited October 26, 2017 by reerer -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 Your first post was amusingly stupid. Your later ones are just stupid. Maybe it is time to stop now, and move on. (But what on Earth is a Dradkkith / Drakkith?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 Name calling is not conducive to a healthy relationship and loving companionship and camaraderie. reerer -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 What name calling? You seem to have problems understanding what you read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted October 26, 2017 Share Posted October 26, 2017 33 minutes ago, reerer said: Name calling is not conducive to a healthy relationship and loving companionship and camaraderie. reerer And neither is posting unsupported gobblydook and nonsense in a science forum...not that I saw any name calling anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reerer Posted October 26, 2017 Author Share Posted October 26, 2017 And neither is posting unsupported gobblydook and nonsense in a science forum...not that I saw any name calling anyway. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ There is absolutely nothing that I post that is unsupported. Please if you have nothing constructive to add, you do not have to read my posts. Thank you. -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts