Black hole?

[interested]

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. 

[Strange]

2 hours ago, interested said:

Why should space time not be still evolving?

It is. As described by the Big Bang theory.

But you are missing the point. The Big Bang describes the entire universe expanding and becoming less dense. A black hole describes a small amount of matter within space become compact.

These are very different things. 

2 hours ago, interested said:

My question was what happened to the 3 solar masses that apparently were decomposed via some transition into  gravitational waves.

I'm not sure what you mean by "what happened". It is in the energy of the gravitational waves. As the black holes orbit, they distort the space-time around and between them, this causes the waves, which carry away the energy.

2 hours ago, interested 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. 

No. Because GR is a classical theory and so gravitons and quantum fluctuations are not involved.

[interested]

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 

 

Edited December 24, 2017 by interested

[swansont]

3 hours ago, interested said:

 Is it being suggested that at the merger of the 2 BH's 3 solar masses were absorbed by the BH 

The mass decreases. Absorbing mass would increase it.

[interested]

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.

[Strange]

2 hours ago, interested said:

The " 3 solar masses that went missing after the BH merger" was nothing to do with mass.

Most of it was radiated before the merger.

Quote

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.

Exactly.

2 hours ago, interested said:

The BH's did not convert mass into gravity waves. No mass was lost in the merger.

Yes it was. The mass of the final black hole was smaller than the sum of the initial black holes (by 3 solar masses). The energy had to come from somewhere.

2 hours ago, interested said:

it might have been better to state 3 solar masses of kinetic energy were radiated away during the merger, as gravitational waves.

It was not kinetic energy, it was gravitational wave energy.

[swansont]

21 hours ago, interested said:

Absorbing quantum fluctuations does not increase the mass.

I said nothing about quantum fluctuations. You made a statement about the BH merger absorbing mass. It did not absorb mass, it radiated energy away, decreasing mass. I was pointing iout a sign error on your part. Nothing there indulges your fantasy about quantum fluctuations. 

21 hours ago, interested said:

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.

"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.

[interested]

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.

 

[Strange]

14 minutes ago, interested said:

It appears to me you are claiming the mass was converted to a gravitational wave in space time.

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.)

Quote

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?

1. The mass did exist. The mass of the two initial black holes was larger (by 3 solar masses) than the final black hole.

2. So no, it was not dark matter.

3. If a theory of quantum gravity is consistent with GR (and so far I see no good evidence it won't be, despite some speculative ideas like Verlinde's) then it will have exactly the same amount of dark matter.

 

25 minutes ago, interested said:

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.

As far as I know, we don't yet have any theory of quantum gravity that is capable of doing that. (In other words, we don't have any theory of quantum gravity.)

[interested]

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. 

 

Edited December 26, 2017 by interested
last line

[swansont]

1 hour ago, interested said:

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

And GR, which predicts all of the observed behavior, is not a quantum theory.

1 hour ago, interested said:

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?

It's part of GR.

1 hour ago, interested said:

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

A lot was lost during the in-spiral.

1 hour ago, interested said:

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? 

The before and after masses were cited in all cases. Yes the mass existed beforehand.

Dark matter is a non-sequitur.

1 hour ago, interested said:

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.

Nobody has used a nonexistent theory.

[interested]

6 hours ago, swansont said:

 

 

 

 

[Strange]

1 hour ago, interested said:

 

 

 

 

One of your better posts.

 

[MigL]

Mass is a property of the EVENT HORIZON, as we don't really know what's inside.
( we have GR theory that makes some predictions, but no observational evidence )

Since it has this property, it obviously has a gravitational field, and just like other massive object, can convert some of its mass to that other property, energy.
The two merging BHs did exactly that. The merged event horizons did not increase linearly as the sum of the two original event horizons, but since three solar masses were converted to energy ( of the gravitational wave ), the combined event horizon was smaller than it would have otherwise been.

This has nothing to do with anything inside the event horizon ( particles, quarks, quantum fluctuations or any other fancy names you can come up with.

[Strange]

9 hours ago, interested said:

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

This web site has a good overview of all the papers published at the time, with a summary of each and like to each paper: https://cplberry.com/2016/02/23/gw150914-the-papers/

[interested]

21 hours ago, Strange said:

One of your better posts.

 

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

[interested]

On 12/26/2017 at 8:11 PM, MigL said:

anything inside the event horizon ( particles, quarks, quantum fluctuations or any other fancy names you can come up with.

I have just had a bit of an education on relativity and was laboring under a misconception that time speeds up inside a BH, it does not, it slows down and may stop.

As you are aware things travelling at light speed do not age according to observers, photons for instance, do not age. Inside a BH time may also stop.

Muon life time is extended for the observer as it approaches the earth at near light speed, although from the Muons point of view it sees the earths clock ticking faster, and distances shortened. This is going to be similar inside a BH

Do Quantum fluctuations/virtual particles which only have a short life times in free space have longer lifetimes inside a BH. Can they add to the mass inside a BH, like a photon might. Could they even accumalate energy and become stable Quantum excitations/particles of one form or another.

[swansont]

17 minutes ago, interested said:

 Muon life time is extended for the observer as it approaches the earth at near light speed, although from the Muons point of view it sees the earths clock ticking faster, and distances shortened. 

A muon would also "see" the earth's clock as ticking slow. 

[Janus]

4 hours ago, interested said:

I have just had a bit of an education on relativity and was laboring under a misconception that time speeds up inside a BH, it does not, it slows down and may stop.

As you are aware things travelling at light speed do not age according to observers, photons for instance, do not age. Inside a BH time may also stop.

Muon life time is extended for the observer as it approaches the earth at near light speed, although from the Muons point of view it sees the earths clock ticking faster, and distances shortened. This is going to be similar inside a BH

Do Quantum fluctuations/virtual particles which only have a short life times in free space have longer lifetimes inside a BH. Can they add to the mass inside a BH, like a photon might. Could they even accumalate energy and become stable Quantum excitations/particles of one form or another.

As I already stated in my reply to you in another thread, for the muon, from the moment of its creation until it reaches the ground, It will "see" the Earth clock as running slower.  It's just that the Earth clock already reads a later time when the muon first finds itself having come into existence.

On 12/26/2017 at 2:14 AM, interested said:

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?

 

The apparent mass of the pair does not increase as the BHs converge.  While they gain kinetic energy, they do so at the expense of losing gravitational potential energy.  It is the the sum of the kinetic and potential energy (or total orbital energy) that contributes to the the apparent mass. For two orbiting objects the orbital energy is related to the distance between them.  The greater the distance, the more orbital energy.  So as the BH's converge, they must shed orbital energy to compensate, and this is done in the form of gravitational waves.

The actual mechanics is the other way around however.    The orbiting black holes are under a acceleration just by maintaining a fixed orbit.  Accelerating masses emit gravitational waves, the energy of which comes at the cost of orbital energy, which in turn causes the BH's to converge.  As they converge, their orbital periods decrease, which increases the frequency and energy of the gravitational waves, which increases the loss of orbital energy and the rate of convergence.   During the last few moments, the gravitational wave output ramps up quickly and becomes very intense. ( which is why we were able to detect it).

This emission of gravitational waves happens with any orbiting object.   The Earth itself does it.  But because the Sun-Earth pair masses and the distance between them are what they are, the loss of orbital energy through gravitational waves emission is minutely small; well below the threshold of being detectable.  So small, that this energy loss would have only altered the Earth's orbit by 1 part in a hundred trillion since the birth of the Solar system.   

The BH's who's final convergence we detected spent eons orbiting each other. Converging slowly at first, but at an ever increasing rate until the final spectacular joining.

[interested]

18 hours ago, Janus said:

As I already stated in my reply to you in another thread, for the muon, from the moment of its creation until it reaches the ground, It will "see" the Earth clock as running slower.  It's just that the Earth clock already reads a later time when the muon first finds itself having come into existence.

got it. Thanks again.

[Strange]

On 18/11/2017 at 1:26 PM, interested said:

A blackhole is formed when a very massive star after converting all of its hydrogen to higher elements , collapses under its own weight.

This thread has gone all over the place, but I thought you might be interested in this: https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/direct-collapse-black-holes-may-explain-our-universe-s-mysterious-quasars-5b90c21a8bd4