# Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals (split)

## Recommended Posts

Please show your calculations that there is a "a considerable amount of DM" around a black hole.

Stop shifting the burden of proof. YOU claimed it is important. It is up to YOU to show that is the case.

But, if it will shut you up and help you focus on your responsibilities, read this: http://cdms.berkeley.edu/Education/DMpages/FAQ/question36.html

Dark matter is not distributed uniformly in space. The galaxy is embedded in a large cloud of dark matter, and gravity makes this cloud denser in the center than at the edges.

It is similar to what I wrote.

You keep hand-waving Anyway, I'll keep my promise and show you how exactly the postulates included DM/E.

By the way if one can explain the "things" in the postulates instead of just ... postulate them, the math would be the same, that's why I always offered GR as my calculations. In order to understand that, consider the tax you pay in one year. In situation A, you are informed that you have to pay $1000, without any explanations (as in a postulate). In B, you receive a calculation for it, but the amount is the same. In both cases you pay$1000, so your budget, your live is the same. The only difference is that in B you understand things and may act to reduce the tax for the next year. The same is valid for relativity, the explanation of what was postulated will not change the subsequent math. Only the understanding is changed.

I said enough for this thread. I'm out.

Please change the title:

Please change the title from "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals" to "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay explanation for GW150914".

because the thread was opened in my behalf ... and the title does not reflect what I meant.

• Replies 144
• Created

#### Popular Days

If you were even close to being right one might expect that there was a significant amount of DM in our solar system. But there isn't. We see no effect on orbits of the planets that we should see.

Please change the title:

because the thread was opened in my behalf ... and the title does not reflect what I meant.

There is no Shapiro delay as you have described, so I'm not going to re-word the title to subsidize your "alternative" physics.

##### Share on other sites

It is similar to what I wrote.

You keep hand-waving

This is grossly dishonest cherry picking. The page also says:

"The radius of the sun's orbit is about 2.5x1017 km, so the total mass of dark matter within that orbit is 6x1040 kg. This is the mass of 3x1010 (30 billion) stars like the sun! The entire galaxy only contains ~100 billion stars"

So the mass of dark matter is about one third of the mass of stars. There is also a large amount of other matter.

##### Share on other sites

There is no Shapiro delay as you have described, so I'm not going to re-word the title to subsidize your "alternative" physics.

It is in Speculations forum, under my name. Please change it. I was never talking about "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals", so it is wrong.

Why are you so afraid of "alternative" physics?

##### Share on other sites

It is in Speculations forum, under my name. Please change it. I was never talking about "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals", so it is wrong.

You said:

Black holes (BHs) are surrounded by "gravity wells". If gravity "travels" with the speed of light, then close to a BH, we should have/see a delay, as in Shapiro time delay.

Why are you so afraid of "alternative" physics?

Why on Earth would anyone be afraid of your ignorant nonsense?

##### Share on other sites

So the mass of dark matter is about one third of the mass of stars. There is also a large amount of other matter.

If Wikipedia is wrong, you should tell them!

##### Share on other sites

If Wikipedia is wrong, you should tell them!

Where is Wikipedia wrong?

And I wouldn't tell them (whoever "they" are) I would correct it.

##### Share on other sites

Why would you even think there would be a Significant difference of Dark matter from one star/BH in a binary system.

Do you not know the meaning of the term HALO?

As you stated Dark matter doesn't clump. (No strong force) (no electromagnetic force)

It's average distribution around ANY binary system is roughly uniform. It would be too miniscule to cause a Significant time dilation than the other object.

##### Share on other sites

You said:

Why on Earth would anyone be afraid of your ignorant nonsense?

I said gravity, not GWs.

Than relax and wait for my "nonsense".

Where is Wikipedia wrong?

And I wouldn't tell them (whoever "they" are) I would correct it.

The Milky Way is estimated to have roughly 10 times as much dark matter as ordinary matter.

Edited by DanMP
##### Share on other sites

We've been waiting.

You've yet to show a single calculation

So what if there is 10* the amount of Dark matter than baryonic matter.

The mass distribution is FAR MORE UNIFORM.

Edited by Mordred
##### Share on other sites

The Milky Way is estimated to have roughly 10 times as much dark matter as ordinary matter.

Where is that from?

##### Share on other sites

I said gravity, not GWs.

"This alternance of apparent mass produces the waves, the signal we detected."

Bzzt. Thanks for playing.

##### Share on other sites

Where is that from?

##### Share on other sites

OK. The difference is that my source was talking about the mass of dark matter inside the orbit of the Sun. The Wikipedia page (wouldn't it have been easier to just provide the link?) is talking about the total amount of dark matter. This shows that most of the dark matter is spread throughout and beyond the visible part of the galaxy. Which doesn't seem consistent with your claim that the amount of dark matter around black holes is "important".

Please provide some data or calculations to support this claim. (Or withdraw it.)

##### Share on other sites

It is in Speculations forum, under my name. Please change it. I was never talking about "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals", so it is wrong.

I was talking about how gravitational information / pull is Shapiro delayed, creating gravitational fluctuations (waves) in LIGO observers:

In swansont's link you can see:

• In Newtonian gravity, you can have instantaneous action at a distance. If I suddenly

replace the Sun with a 10, 000M! black hole, the Earth’s orbit should instantly repsond in

accordance with Kepler’s Third Law. But special relativity forbids this!

• The idea that gravitational information can propagate is a consequence of special relativity:

nothing can travel faster than the ultimate speed limit, c.

Why 100ms and not 300ms, or even 10s?

Let's consider t = the time needed for gravitational information from BH1 and BH2, when side by side, to reach the Earth observer (EO), and T = the orbital period for the last orbit before BH1 and BH2 merged.

1. At aprox. t + T/4 , gravitational information from BH1 is received by EO, while the one from BH2 (behind BH1) is Shapiro delayed with more than T, so it's on its way towards EO.

2. At t +T/2 we receive gravitational information from BH1 and BH2 (again side by side). The one from BH2 in step 1 is still on its way.

3. At aprox. t + 3T/4 , gravitational information from BH2 (now in front of BH1) is received by EO, while the one from BH1 (now behind BH2) is Shapiro delayed with more than T.

4. At t + T the merge is complete and the gravitational information from BH2 in step 1 and BH1 in step 3 are still on their way to EO.

Of course, things are not that simple (we still need GR for the full solution), but it is a good way to see how gravitational information (and gravitational pull) fluctuate at EO with 2 times the orbital frequency, due to Shapiro delay.

##### Share on other sites

I was talking about how gravitational information / pull is Shapiro delayed, creating gravitational fluctuations (waves) in LIGO observers:

So you are talking about how Shapiro delay allegedly creates gravitational waves. That what the title indicates.

Maybe you should focus more on some science than on this window dressing.

##### Share on other sites

OK. The difference is that my source was talking about the mass of dark matter inside the orbit of the Sun. The Wikipedia page (wouldn't it have been easier to just provide the link?) is talking about the total amount of dark matter. This shows that most of the dark matter is spread throughout and beyond the visible part of the galaxy. Which doesn't seem consistent with your claim that the amount of dark matter around black holes is "important".

Please provide some data or calculations to support this claim. (Or withdraw it.)

I sent you to the post on purpose, because I'm tired to write again and again the same things just because you (almost all of you) choose to ignore/forget them. And wouldn't it have been easier to just search "10 times" in the thread? I even mentioned wikipedia and dark mater and you answered: "Where is Wikipedia wrong? And I wouldn't tell them (whoever "they" are) I would correct it." ...

And about supporting the claim, I also wrote:

I can and will show you that "dark matter and/or dark energy" were already included in GR. Where? In the postulates. So GR is based on "them".

(this implies that DM is very important for GR, in any amount)

and

To show you how exactly the postulates included DM/E, I have to open a new thread, "Dark ... relativity". Until than I have to ...

There you'll see that around BHs is always a lot of DM.

So, if you really want answers from me, don't make me re-post again and again what I wrote, just because you are to lazy to search (or think?). Wait for the theory.

So you are talking about how Shapiro delay allegedly creates gravitational waves. That what the title indicates.

Maybe you should focus more on some science than on this window dressing.

I can understand and accept hostility, as long as you are correct, but here you are not. "Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals" implies that it's about the delay of the GW signal from BBH by a third massive object. I never discussed such an idea because is irelevant. If you add incorrectness to hostility and laziness I may decide to end my dialog with you.

##### Share on other sites

"Shapiro (or Shapiro-like) delay of GW signals" implies that it's about the delay of the GW signal from BBH by a third massive object. I never discussed such an idea because is irelevant.

Since I was not considering a third massive object at all, I disagree.

##### Share on other sites

Since I was not considering a third massive object at all, I disagree.

... no single BH generates the wave signal.

so the "GW signal" is from the BBH as a whole. Where you, swansont, considered a Shapiro delay than?

I remind you for the last time: I was talking about how gravitational information / pull is Shapiro delayed, creating gravitational fluctuations (waves) in LIGO observers:

In swansont's link you can see:

• In Newtonian gravity, you can have instantaneous action at a distance. If I suddenly

replace the Sun with a 10, 000M! black hole, the Earth’s orbit should instantly repsond in

accordance with Kepler’s Third Law. But special relativity forbids this!

• The idea that gravitational information can propagate is a consequence of special relativity:

nothing can travel faster than the ultimate speed limit, c.

Why 100ms and not 300ms, or even 10s?

Let's consider t = the time needed for gravitational information from BH1 and BH2, when side by side, to reach the Earth observer (EO), and T = the orbital period for the last orbit before BH1 and BH2 merged.

1. At aprox. t + T/4 , gravitational information from BH1 is received by EO, while the one from BH2 (behind BH1) is Shapiro delayed with more than T, so it's on its way towards EO.

2. At t +T/2 we receive gravitational information from BH1 and BH2 (again side by side). The one from BH2 in step 1 is still on its way.

3. At aprox. t + 3T/4 , gravitational information from BH2 (now in front of BH1) is received by EO, while the one from BH1 (now behind BH2) is Shapiro delayed with more than T.

4. At t + T the merge is complete and the gravitational information from BH2 in step 1 and BH1 in step 3 are still on their way to EO.

Of course, things are not that simple (we still need GR for the full solution), but it is a good way to see how gravitational information (and gravitational pull) fluctuate at EO with 2 times the orbital frequency, due to Shapiro delay.

##### Share on other sites

So, if you really want answers from me, don't make me re-post again and again what I wrote, just because you are to lazy to search (or think?). Wait for the theory.

!

Moderator Note

Waiting for the "theory". No more wasting people's time for you.

##### Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

×