interested

8 hours ago, Mordred said:

Tranformation equation in positive x direction.

t´=γ(t−vxc2)

x´=γx−vt

y´=y

z´=z

CAN time be regarded as having inertia, and therefore is affected by the acceleration of gravity or acceleration in space? How is the aging process affected in zero gravity?

The equations presented so far do not incorporate both acceleration and deceleration.?

Does a decelerating clock read time at the same speed as an accelerating clock assuming they are changing speed at the same rate?

How does acceleration affect time. How fast does time tick in space in a zero gravity environment, and how fast does it tick in a black hole ?

At the Big bang what was happening with time, in a big black hole crunch what happens with time at the crunch point, in the singularity.

If time measurements could be teleported to other points in the universe via entanglement would that constitute a standard clock, to which other time measurements could be calibrated. What would happen to such readings inside a BH as the readings are accelerated to the crunch point. ?

Happy New Year

21 hours ago, Strange said:

One of your better posts.

 

Yes but I suspected it was bit too subtle for some to grasp.  

1 hour ago, Unified Field said:

And because there's no better way to call a force, which is opposing the gravity, as anti-gravity, I will keep calling it this way, until you won't figure out a better name...

Why say anti gravity, if you created a BH above you as you were falling towards the sun, you may fall towards the BH not the sun. This would not be antigravity. Alternatively if dark energy can accelerate galaxies apart, it could be maybe possibly be described as anti gravity. 

What is your Plasma made up from in your microwave, is it ionized hot air particles which are less dense than the surrounding air and would float. Or are you talking quarks and gluons, what is the make up of your plasma. I guess from the picture your plasma is giving off photons as electrons recombine with atoms. The focus of the microwave energy on the hot air in the microwave will more likely localize the ionization effect.

6 hours ago, swansont said:

46 minutes ago, Strange said:

Correct. (Well, strictly speaking, the mass is converted to the energy in the waves. But that probably isn't a significant distinction as you can't have waves without energy.)

I found this link which I am still reading, but it gives a lot more detail on the merger.

https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0122/P1500218/014/PhysRevLett.116.241102.pdf

It came from the following thread

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/262924/what-is-the-uncertainty-in-the-one-solar-mass-radiated-away-as-pure-energy-gra

Both the above links will take me some time to absorb, and i am being taken out for a walk.

Mass is defined by the acceleration of inertia. Inside a black hole does the acceleration or spin of the BHs change, giving the appearance of a reduced mass. ?

OR Is the reduction of mass inside the BH due to a conversion of matter made from Quarks and gluons etc being converted into a Gravitational wave. 

21 hours ago, swansont said:

Nothing there indulges your fantasy about quantum fluctuations. 

"Actual mass" implies that there is some distinction here, which is not apparent to me. Something that is rotating has more mass than an otherwise identical body which is not.

Gravitons are virtual particles as are quantum fluctuations. Neither Gravitons or Quantum fluctuations are something I have cooked up.

So three solar masses went missing. The mass is determined by the strength of the gravitational field or the acceleration of an object against another, perhaps like two BH's orbting each other. A solar mass is the mass of something like the sun the mass of the sun used as a unit of mass, equal to 1.989 × 10³⁰ kg. Mass is measured in kg, it has an equivalent energy, which can be released as radiation. As the BH's merged they accelerated this would this increase the apparent mass, which on merger they lost as they were no longer being accelerated in each others gravitational field?

It appears to me you are claiming the mass was converted to a gravitational wave in space time. What known process allows the mass to be converted to a gravitational wave? 

The apparent loss in mass according to Strange was lost before the merger?  

Did the mass exist in the first place, could it be that the matter was dark matter, which according to quantum gravity mostly does not exist? 

Has any one used Quantum gravity(which is based on quantum fluctuations) to predict the mass of the BH's before and after the merger.

1 minute ago, swansont said:

The mass decreases. Absorbing mass would increase it.

Absorbing quantum fluctuations does not increase the mass. But I get your point. I suspect the popular science web sites that stated 3 solar masses of energy were radiated away during the BH merger, were slightly misleading, it might have been better to state 3 solar masses of kinetic energy were radiated away during the merger, as gravitational waves. I originally took it to mean actual mass escaped the BH merger or vanished as gravity waves, which when thinking about it, is most likely wrong. Kinetic energy converted to gravity waves makes sense.

49 minutes ago, Strange said:

Is it being suggested that at the merger of the 2 BH's 3 solar masses were absorbed by the BH as Quantum fluctuations and sent out of existence.Perhaps like the absorbtion of virtual particles gravitons. 

I think my question arises from a misunderstanding, to which I now may have the answer. 

The " 3 solar masses that went missing after the BH merger" was nothing to do with mass. It was the equivalent energy of 3 solar masses like kinetic energy. The gravitational waves radiated away kinetic energy of the black holes merger as the BH's came together. The BH's did not convert mass into gravity waves. No mass was lost in the merger. 

3 hours ago, interested said:

Why should space time not be still evolving?

The concept of a Big bounce is interesting in Quantum loop gravity, a white hole could develop inside a black hole.

https://www.nature.com/news/quantum-bounce-could-make-black-holes-explode-1.15573 

16 hours ago, beecee said:

 

Big difference being that the BB was the evolution of spacetime as we know it, while a BH occurs in spacetime.

Why should space time not be still evolving?

The concept of a Big bounce is interesting in Quantum loop gravity, a white hole could develop inside a black hole.

https://www.nature.com/news/quantum-bounce-could-make-black-holes-explode-1.15573 

On 12/22/2017 at 8:49 PM, MigL said:

The mass, angular momentum, charge ( and entropy ) are encoded on the size/surface of the event horizon.
Anything within the event horizon should be considered 'empty', at least until quantum gravity tells us otherwise.

So much for a singularity, and spaghettified Quantum excitations. What happens to the Quantum fluctuations, which might be the cause of gravity? 

If the graviton is a virtual particle (Quantum fluctuation), how would it be affected inside a black hole, would it be absorbed and destroyed as soon as it disappears over the event horizon creating a gravitational vacuum? If quantum fluctuations can not exist inside a black hole is gravity the same everywhere inside the event horizon? Does time accelerate inside a black hole, could the concept of a white hole exist in the black holes future? Is space time even relevant inside a BH? I suspect the answers lie in quantum gravity, and big bounces.

20 hours ago, MigL said:

And why would they be short-lived, in the order of hundreds of seconds; should they not last as long as BHs do since the event horizons are 'related' ?

Could a Black Hole and a Big Bang be related across time a few billion years apart, not in the hear and now? and could they just be a part of a continual evolution of space time? 

On 12/22/2017 at 8:06 PM, beecee said:

The gravitational radiation is being created as the BHs/NSs orbit each other cuminating in a final merger as detailed in the following two videos, one an excellent description by Brian Greene

Nice video I understand the concept of gravitational waves. My question was what happened to the 3 solar masses that apparently were decomposed via some transition into  gravitational waves. I understand that as matter is compressed it gets hot, it will become ionized, it may further break down into quarks and gluons, and then into radiation.

Is it being suggested that at the merger of the 2 BH's 3 solar masses were absorbed by the BH as Quantum fluctuations and sent out of existence.Perhaps like the absorbtion of virtual particles gravitons. 

20 hours ago, Strange said:

But it has, as the article points out, eliminated many (most) alternative gravity models and some forms of dark matter.

many most is not all, it is therefore not the only theory in play.

20 hours ago, Strange said:

If it helps (?) gravity would be mediated by virtual gravitons which are not particles and hence don't need to escape from the black hole.

They would like other particles be absorbed by the blackhole. This is the first I have heard that the graviton is a virtual particle, just goes to show it is a quantum fluctuation after all.

20 hours ago, Strange said:

The energy is dissipated in the gravitational waves which are (largely) generated before the merger.

OH I see! the energy E (mc^2+pv ) is converted from matter, into radiation, into gravitational waves before the two black holes merged, amazing. What decomposition process can do this, when the matter existed inside 2 separate black holes which merged, which nothing gets out of once it has entered the event horizon not even 3 solar masses or a photon. Please explain the decomposition process that allows 3 solar masses to be radiated away as gravitational waves. Is a gravitational wave virtual particles (Quantum fluctuations) are you saying the mass (Quantum excitations ) is converted into Quantum fluctuations during the merger. Maybe you are saying dark matter is Quantum fluctuations and not Quantum excitations? please clarify.

Seasons greetings  the days are getting longer already.

21 minutes ago, Octavian said:

I don't get yet what a gyroscope has to do with this.

But for your comment to make sense, you have to +1 to each of your dimension.  Entanglement is a 5-D property which links particles not through positional space, nor space-time, but traversing spacetimes.  The plurlism there is the key to understanding all the spooky stuff.  And would also explain the collapsing the probability function.

I know plenty about gyros and dont get how they explain entanglement in any way either, someone else posted on the subject, not me.

Can you explain more re your 5 D world? Are you talking x,y,z, and time + another dimension, traversing all the other dimensions.  Do you have any links explaining this 5D world of yours?

6 hours ago, DrP said:

But the majority of voting Americans seem to back him (according to the vote count)

I was under the impression that Hillary Clinton according to the BBC had 2 million more votes than Trump. Trump won more states but had less votes. A huge number of Americans never exercised their right to vote, perhaps because they couldnt be bothered or considered neither candidate from either party worth voting for.

5 hours ago, Strange said:

: https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/dark-matter-winners-and-losers-in-the-aftermath-of-ligo-f34ffab04fcb

Quoting from your link 

"It’s still too early to say exactly what dark matter is (and what it isn’t), but it’s very easy to see what’s looking better and what requires even more special pleading in the aftermath of the past two years. General Relativity has passed another, very stringent test with flying colors: gravitational waves are real, carry energy, have the properties (amplitude, frequency, redshift, polarization, etc.) they were predicted to have, and move precisely at the speed of light. Modified gravity theories where photons and gravitational waves follow different rules are highly constrained, and primordial black holes and WIMPs, particularly supersymmetric WIMPs, are looking less and less likely."

It seems that many types of dark matter have been ruled out, which we already new, it also suggests neutrinos might be a form of cold dark matter, which I think from the earlier thread on dark matter you and others ruled out, except perhaps Mordred. 

The main thing LIGO has been able to confirm is that gravitational waves definitely exist and travel at the speed of light. LIGO has not confirmed the existence of dark matter in any way. The fact that Einsteins theories predicted gravitational waves, does not by default confirm dark matter.  

The really interesting thing about the black hole mergers is the apparent loss of huge amounts of energy from inside the black holes ie 3 solar masses.

You previously stated nothing escapes from a black hole not even light, if this is true and Gravity is caused by the theoretical graviton (Quantum excitation ) a 2 spin boson, which must flow into the black hole, never to be seen again, or it is caused by Quantum fluctuations of some form or other that is absorbed by the black hole, both being spaghettified as they disappear over the event horizon. Depending on what idea you go for, gravity at the quantum level operates by absorption. For LIGO to detect a gravitation reduction in strength after the merger of two BH's by 3 solar masses, either the mass was destroyed or it never existed in the first place, (perhaps like dark matter). As the two BH's spiral together the Gravitational waves will peak at the merger and then as they collide 3 solar masses vanish. This causes a reduction in the gravitational strength of the BH, and LIGO detects a fluctuation in the gravity field in space, which travels at light speed away from the black hole, like a ripple in a pond. Prior to the LIGO results observing the neutron star merger, the speed of gravitational waves was uncertain, after this observation there can be no argument on the result. Gravitational waves travel at light speed.

6 hours ago, Strange said:

As long as it can explain the patterns in the CMB, the separation of dark matter and normal matter in the Bullet Custer (and others), and so on.

The Jury is out, and the verdict is definitely not clear, worse still there is a lot of popular science claims that things have been proven conclusively, when in actual fact they have not. 

1 hour ago, Strange said:

But if the Universe consisted partially of dark matter in addition to normal matter, that pattern would be affected dramatically. The existence of dark matter leaves a characteristic imprint on CMB observations, as it clumps into dense regions and contributes to the gravitational collapse of matter, but is unaffected by the pressure from photons."

You may be right

But If gravity works as mentioned in the links above then dark matter may not be required,( or at least not as much dark matter). Matter causes Gravity which causes more matter to collapse into dense regions of matter, photons are affected by gravity and are diffracted by it causing gravitational lensing.

Dark Matter if it does not exist will not effect gravity, not even photons. If it does not exist and cant be detected, then  Verlindes theory might be correct. Or at least more correct than the existing theories.

Am I correct in thinking that there are legal ways for getting around the Biological weapons ban? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Convention

Or is the USA just leading the world initiating another weapons race, which the rest of the world may feel they have to follow as a deterrent. ?

Clearly if North Korea can develop a nuclear missile program as a deterrent, they than can also like any other nation develop their own biological weapons, and may feel they have a right too if threatened. If a small group of dedicated scientists can easily develop a biological weapon for research purposes, then so could a small group of malicious scientists with intentions to use it for malicious intentions. 

From the second link

importantly, viruses mutate all by themselves in nature, which is how avian flu occasionally jumps into humans already. It’s just a matter of time before the next deadly pandemic emerges.

If we wait long enough Nature will generate its own Pandemic, but then human beings are a part of nature and may just be accelerating the inevitable?  

The united nations have some information on this subject, but is a little legalistic https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/bio/ and seems a little toothless in light of the links above. 

It seems there may be legal loop holes to do research, for humanitarian purposes. Population control maybe?

Who will Police this research?

23 hours ago, Ten oz said:

He appears to have malignant narcissism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism and a series of other mental issues that are not deemed good in a political leader of any country. I guess he and his supporters may consider being called a moron a complement compared with what some professional shrinks are saying about him. 

Does this not concern any one that Trump might not be a balanced individual. His supporters seem to like him. What do the Majority of Americans who did not vote for him think of their new representative for America in the world. Do any of the majority of Americans recognize that the Trump effect may affect Americas reputation globally, perhaps in a bad way.

14 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Post 9/11 people rallied around the President. Bush had overwhelming support for about a year. 

People have a habit of supporting political leaders who appear to defend their own country, its normal human behavior, and repeats throughout history. Politicians like to appear strong in the face of external pressure. Hitler had wide spread support from Germans prior to WW2, and was considered by many to be a little unstable.

On 12/20/2017 at 9:33 AM, Strange said:

 

More detail here, for example: https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/five-reasons-we-think-dark-matter-exists-a122bd606ba8

The link does not appear to work, my internet is slow this morning so the problem could be at my end.

On 12/20/2017 at 9:33 AM, Strange said:

The cosmic microwave background contains patterns that can be explained by the presence of dark matter in the early universe

How does dark matter influence cosmic back ground radiation when it only affects gravity? are you saying it is the cause of CMB? 

I understand CMB is pretty uniform everywhere. Does the bullet cluster have more or less CMB because of separation from dark matter?

On 12/20/2017 at 9:33 AM, Strange said:

Simulations of the formation of the large scale structure of the universe require dark matter to produce results consistent with the real universe; would these work equally well with his modified gravity theory

Adding random amounts of Dark Matter to make large scale Simulations agree with what is observed, implies the model used in the simulation of larger scale structures may be wrong not that dark matter must exist.

On 12/20/2017 at 9:33 AM, Strange said:

Does his theory predict the movements of galaxy clusters correctly, as well as speeds within galaxies

I do not know what the limitations of his theory are yet, and do understand it is in the early days. He claims his theory successfully explains many affects currently attributed to dark matter and is based on purely observable effects, without the need for a random fudge factor, or dark matter to make it work. 

The theory is also based mainly on quantum theory, not relativity, quantum theory has proved to be extremely accurate on the small scale, why should it not ultimately be more accurate on the larger scale. Perhaps relativity has had its day and the universe is not mainly dark matter, but is in fact made up from Quantum effects or as Mordreds Mantra suggests"Quantum fluctuations and or excitations" 

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

Yes, but nothing about that being tested against 30,000 galaxies

If you watch the Verlinde video given by the lady with glasses she mentions the 30000+ galaxies and gravitational lensing effects having been explained.

6 minutes ago, Strange said:

The next test is to see if it can also explain all the other evidence for dark matter.

gravitational lensing is one of the corner stones of the support for dark matter. What other evidence are you talking about?

21 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

What is spooky about a gyroscope? Everything is local.

Do you view entanglement as being local? If so how? Do you envisage an extra 4th spacial dimension connecting separated entangled particles in 3 dimensional space? and how the does entanglement apply to gyroscopes?

10 hours ago, Strange said:

Neither of your links say that, as far as I can tell. They both mention tests of gravitational lensing on a similar number of galaxies.

Quoting  from the second link

"Importantly, the theory also explains (without invoking the existence of dark matter and its accompanying math featuring new free parameters that are tweaked to obtain the desired outcome) why galactic rotation curves differ from the profile expected with visible matter.

The theory of entropic gravity posits that what has been interpreted as unobserved dark matter is actually the product of quantum effects that can be regarded as a form of positive dark energy that lifts the vacuum energy of space from its ground state value

"

Gravity is caused by Quantum effects, ie Quantum fluctuations and or excitations like everything else in the known universe. It may be a long way from being confirmed but like you say it may be a step in the right direction, and does not need a random amount of never detected dark matter(new free parameters) to make the theory work and explains gravitational lensing. 

On 12/17/2017 at 3:51 PM, Strange said:

I don’t know. But I was going to say that s better question would be: how are black holes represented in string theory, LQG, CDT, etc? (I don’t know the answer.)

I stumbled across these links whilst trying to find out what entanglement had to do gyroscopes and thought of your question. Perhaps Verlinde is getting close to being able to answer your questions, he does not need dark matter to explain the movement of 30000+  galaxies. 

https://phys.org/news/2016-12-verlinde-theory-gravity.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity

On 12/17/2017 at 9:26 PM, iNow said:

It is also a far cry from how we should be referring to the President of the United States 

I am not a shrink, but did note that a number of American shrinks are stating publicly that Donald Trump is not altogether a balanced individual or suitable for office. He appears to have malignant narcissism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism and a series of other mental issues that are not deemed good in a political leader of any country. I guess he and his supporters may consider being called a moron a complement compared with what some professional shrinks are saying about him. 

21 hours ago, studiot said:

Edit, the gyroscope is interesting because it breaks some mathematical boundaries, and maybe points the way to(wards) the resolution of spooky action/entanglement/hidden forces if you would like to discuss this.

I was waiting and hoping someone else might ask this question. How does a gyroscope point the way to resolution of entanglement?

17 hours ago, StringJunky said:

You are conflating space and spacetime. Space itself is just volume.

17 hours ago, Mordred said:

bingo

17 hours ago, Strange said:

Yes. The previous post was about space (not space-time).

My reference was from a thread I posted on Quantum entanglement where I mentioned x,y,z as being dimensions with a 4th possible spacial dimension perhaps explaining some of the effects related to quantum entanglement. Some one posted the 4th dimension was time x,y,z,t space time. I was being pedantic here for light amusement. Apologies 

Max speed is c in space x,y,z, in quantum entanglement instantaneous information transfer can take place between particles, It was suggested the particles connected via another dimension, enabling them to operate as one particle even though separated by a large distance. I am off topic and speculating and should shut up. 

12 minutes ago, Dalo said:

It is obvious you are not addressing the issue. The point is non-locality. Polarization is here an illustration of the problem. A mere example. It is often presented not with polarization but, for instance the spin of a particle. Limiting the discussion to polarization is meaningless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality

What level do you wish to pitch at, you expressed previously you wanted a none mathematical explanation of why 50% on none polarized light could pass the first filter. I gave you an explanation in as simple terms as is possible.

Here is a rather long drawn out link on non locality from utube the other links down the side are amusing and none mathematical also.

, the or