Speed of Gravity
- Thread starter Trithinium
- Start date
Wolfshadw
Moderator
-Wolf sends
Edit: Wikipedia says 9.807 meters per second squared.
Fun 3 minute video in post #2 by Wolfshadw. The Newtonian formula for gravity acceleration is a = f/m = -G(mass earth)/r^2. This shows Newton's 2nd law of motion with surface gravity on Earth and distance from the center of Earth as r^2 (The Physics Problem Solver, 1987, p. 121, problem question 137.) Given the formula, the gravity acceleration will be different on Mars surface, the Moon surface compared to Earth's surface.
The question in post #1 should ask about the speed of gravity operating in the universe using LIGO gravity waves as an example. How fast do gravity waves propagate through space? Faster than light, light speed, slower than light speed?
The question in post #1 should ask about the speed of gravity operating in the universe using LIGO gravity waves as an example. How fast do gravity waves propagate through space? Faster than light, light speed, slower than light speed?
Perfect, reading the thread I wanted to speak about it, thanks. All of you wrote of acceleration or other thing, in my opinion, has nothing to do with it. The speed of gravity is the speed of the gravitational waves, and I recently discovered that the speed of light and of gravitational waves are the same.
IG2007
"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Yes. Some neutron binaries have an optical component that arrive here at the same time as their gravity waves, thus both travel at c.
Yes, just it! And there is also somethig to say about it...We know that light isn't made of matter, light is made of photons, and it is very important. Seen that situation, we have light made both matter and wave, and all the objects in the universe that are made of waves travell at the speed of light.
I really don't know what are these objects, though, I managed to understand your thought and I agree!
IG2007
"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Definition of matter according to every Physics book I have read in school: Anything that has mass and occupies space is called matter. Photons occupy space but have no mass. Light is represented as both a particle and wave, not both matter and wave. No object with any amount of rest energy can travel at the speed of light, but as gravitational waves are not actual objects but just waves like light, they can do so.
IMO the speed of gravity is the wake it leaves behind on quantum fluctuation.
Quantum fluctuation is both distance and time of distance so gravity has a wake of C.
Gravity is also just a compression of quantum fluctuation so gravity can be felt at instant speed across the universe since gravity doesn't really move.
Or gravity travels in the void space between fluctuation and is instant speed since fluctuation is space and time and void space has neither.
Travels at C speed and instant speed, but might not move at all.
We orbit the sun at it's now location not at it's C speed location so gravity is showing it is instant speed or at least instant speed results.
It may also help to add that the particle behavior of light does act like it has mass, for a simple view of it. But, as you say, it doesn't have rest mass, but it does have momentum, often associated with mass.
This is why light sales can be pushed by photons hitting it.
The correct equation for the energy of a particle is:
E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
where p is the momentum of the particle. For light it is h/lambda (wavelength). The m goes to zero for a photon since this is the rest mass.
In post #10 we read "We orbit the sun at it's now location not at it's C speed location so gravity is showing it is instant speed or at least instant speed results."
The Sun's *now location* in astronomy is defined by its U, V, W speed and motion relative to Sgr A* in the galaxy. Currently reported at 227 km/s, *C speed* ~ 300,000 km/s. 'Earth faster, closer to black hole in new map of galaxy', https://phys.org/news/2020-11-earth-faster-closer-black-hole.html
Another comment in post #10 I feel needs some definition. "IMO the speed of gravity is the wake it leaves behind on quantum fluctuation"
What are the constraints defining *quantum fluctuation* relative to the Planck time interval and Planck length in physics? Example does the *quantum fluctuation* occur in 10^-50 second or a larger unit of time? Is the size of the *quantum fluctuation* smaller than 10^-50 meter or larger size?
The Sun's *now location* in astronomy is defined by its U, V, W speed and motion relative to Sgr A* in the galaxy. Currently reported at 227 km/s, *C speed* ~ 300,000 km/s. 'Earth faster, closer to black hole in new map of galaxy', https://phys.org/news/2020-11-earth-faster-closer-black-hole.html
Another comment in post #10 I feel needs some definition. "IMO the speed of gravity is the wake it leaves behind on quantum fluctuation"
What are the constraints defining *quantum fluctuation* relative to the Planck time interval and Planck length in physics? Example does the *quantum fluctuation* occur in 10^-50 second or a larger unit of time? Is the size of the *quantum fluctuation* smaller than 10^-50 meter or larger size?
Last edited:
Neutron "stars", when they combine with one another, or with a black hole, produce enormous gravity waves. Some of them have accretion disks, apparently, so that when the stars collapse into one another, it heats the debris disk and it glows brightly. So, if both the intense light and huge gravity wave arrive at Earth simultaneously, then since the light travels at c then the gravity wave must also travel at c.
Somewhat similar story. When the supernova (1987A) collapsed, neutrino detectors lit-up first then came the flood of light. This allowed us to learn the speed of those neutrinos, and I assume a little more about SN explosions. The first instant of the SN collapse generates neutrinos before the huge increase in brightness, so the neutrinos had a head start in coming to us. The distance is established at about 160,000 lyrs. to the SN location, thus the math is straightforward as to what speed those neutrinos had in reaching us.
Helio, in your post #13 the example of neutrinos and light-time for SN1987A is well documented in astronomy. You mention gravity waves arriving at Earth concurrent with light rays, "So, if both the intense light and huge gravity wave arrive at Earth simultaneously, then since the light travels at c then the gravity wave must also travel at c"
Do you have a specific reference citing this? thanks---Rod
Do you have a specific reference citing this? thanks---Rod
FYI. I may have found the answer to post #14 question. 'Short Duration Gamma-Ray Bursts and Their Outflows in Light of GW170817', https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020FrASS...7...78L/abstract, November 2020. The arXiv paper says "2.1 The time delay Besides the identification of the progenitor, a very important piece of information that GW170817 provided is the merger time, which allowed for the measuring of the time delay between the GWs and the gamma-ray signals."
The arXiv paper is 18 pages and may provide a smoking gun that points to gamma rays traveling at c velocity as well as the gravity waves detected. Interesting paper. arXiv paper, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.01773.pdf
The arXiv paper is 18 pages and may provide a smoking gun that points to gamma rays traveling at c velocity as well as the gravity waves detected. Interesting paper. arXiv paper, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.01773.pdf
Ah...Many thanks, I didn't understand at first. Now I remember what are these kind of stars. They have a very strong magnetic field and a very strong gravity if I don't wrong. These stars are very heavy!
Yeah obviously!
We can guess at the size of quantum fluctuation with the minimum orbit of a hydrogen atom, the quantum leap distance of the electron to the next orbit Helium is probably the minimum distance of fluctuation.
Distance and time a measure of the same thing with void space inbetween the orbit leap space.
Could be why light travels at C, neutrino seems to encounter nothing and why gravity seems to leave a wake at C but interact at infinite speed.
All just locations of the quantum entry point.
Light at peak (everything exists here) encounters with anything.
Neutrino at base (nothing exists here) so only freak encounters
Gravity inbetween (no time or space here) spooky action answer.
Or Gravity just a compression and no movement at all, just a wake on Fluctuation at C because of the properties of quantum leaps distance.
( also answers spooky action, just a compression effect everywhere instant speed)
JMO but it does answer the bazar properties of a neutrino and how we can orbit the true location of the sun and yet have gravity leave waves at C, why C speed is C speed and how it all self regulates.
A deeper though experiment about what fluctuation is and how it balances energy gives pretty good results on how nothing became everything, how a big bang happens and what is beyond the visible universe.
Last edited:
Our best theory of gravity to date, general relativity, is a field theory: that is, gravity itself is a field, and two objects do not interact with each other gravitationally "at a distance" but rather, both objects interact with the field. (The objects shape the field; in return, the field shapes the objects' orbits.) The same equations that tell us this also tell us that any change in the gravitational field propagates at the speed of light. This is also consistent with what we know about relativistic field theories in general. Changes in the field cannot propagate faster than the speed of light. If they propagated slower than the speed of light, this would amount to the field having mass; and a field that has mass would result in a force that does not obey the inverse-square law (like gravity does) but rather, beyond a certain distance, it would diminish exponentially.
I don’t believe there is a speed of gravity… I absolutely believe it is instantaneous… Or rather that it doesn’t move at all.., that it is, with scientific proof and logic, a static charge that persists throughout the cosmos in real-time and that any changes in any part of the cosmos are instantly felt in every other part of the cosmos. It does everything the ancient Greeks knew Aether was needed for… As a medium to carry information and to bind the universe together…
Static and binding so that everything instantly knows how to react to stay in balance with everything else… Everything simply moves a bit here and there to accommodate the difference… It’s done automatically as it is of course a balanced electromagnet attraction. As the earth wobbles because of it’s moon rotating around it. Or that we can detect gravity variations from binary stars as they rotate around each other. We go to big-time effort to isolate those differences in gravity strengths, but the atoms in our earth know they’re there. For as little as it may matter in the case of binary star rotations, but they are still felt and known… Along with all the other pulls and attractions, there are from all directions at once.
Post #19 says "I don’t believe there is a speed of gravity… I absolutely believe it is instantaneous… Or rather that it doesn’t move at all.., that it is, with scientific proof and logic, a static charge that persists throughout the cosmos in real-time and that any changes in any part of the cosmos are instantly felt in every other part of the cosmos. It does everything the ancient Greeks knew Aether was needed for… As a medium to carry information and to bind the universe together…Static and binding so that everything instantly knows how to react to stay in balance with everything else…"
FYI. This is quite a concept. LIGO reports gravity waves detected from various black hole mergers, neutron star mergers dated to some 100 million or more than one billion years ago, e.g. http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...observatory-finds-more-colliding-black-holes/, "The second confirmation of ripples in spacetime is announced by astronomers at LIGO"…"The newfound gravitational waves began about 1.4 billion years ago in the merger of two black holes—one about 14 times and the other about eight times the mass of the sun—that had gradually circled closer and closer to each other and eventually smashed together, according to scientists’ calculations."
My observation. If gravity waves propagate through space at *instantaneous* speed, such events never happened billions or millions of years ago. LIGO is recording recent events and that would be true for all events seen now according to this post (*instantly felt in every...*). The explanation overthrows the 13.8 billion years old universe in the BB model. There would be no light-time either in Special Relativity. What does this suggest? A very young universe concept is likely presented in post #19 vs. BB cosmology model age for the universe.
FYI. This is quite a concept. LIGO reports gravity waves detected from various black hole mergers, neutron star mergers dated to some 100 million or more than one billion years ago, e.g. http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...observatory-finds-more-colliding-black-holes/, "The second confirmation of ripples in spacetime is announced by astronomers at LIGO"…"The newfound gravitational waves began about 1.4 billion years ago in the merger of two black holes—one about 14 times and the other about eight times the mass of the sun—that had gradually circled closer and closer to each other and eventually smashed together, according to scientists’ calculations."
My observation. If gravity waves propagate through space at *instantaneous* speed, such events never happened billions or millions of years ago. LIGO is recording recent events and that would be true for all events seen now according to this post (*instantly felt in every...*). The explanation overthrows the 13.8 billion years old universe in the BB model. There would be no light-time either in Special Relativity. What does this suggest? A very young universe concept is likely presented in post #19 vs. BB cosmology model age for the universe.
IG2007
"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Well, you know, I used to hate Science when I was a boy for this same reason. It doesn't matter what you believe, Science doesn't care for what you believe. It cares for truth only. Absolute truth is what Science is all about. I am going to second @rod 's statement on #20. I do quite agree with the fact that there's gravitational pulls and waves everywhere. But the thing is that, some waves are farther and some waves are near. Some waves are bigger and others are smaller. And, only to detect those small waves (which were extremely large initially) was the LIGO built. So, sorry that gravity is not static. As, that would make every model to define universe collapse. Extremely sorry.
I'm the third to reply to you, and i'll be brief. I only wanted to add that no one in the universe is instantaneous, only this!
There cannot be *waves* of gravity moving through the cosmos because they would do as any other multiple waves would do.. They would mix and cause interference patterns… That random building of peaks and deepening of valleys would not serve any possible good and they would instead totally disrupt the basic calm of the cosmos…
They may even come together in the right frequency multiples to build a square wave that would absolutely destroy the cosmos… What I call the ultimate rock concert…
Gravity which includes centrifugal, centripetal, inertia, and ‘center seeking’ gravity are all one in the same… Just seen and thought to be different by humans from their particular pov… Gravity is an electromagnetic attraction. And it is not just iron that possesses this ability. Everything does., even wood and paper… Everything. Because everything is made of atoms which produce it…
So we go past Einstein’s ‘equivalency’ status, which he gave gravity and magnetism because he didn’t have enough information at that time, to make them one in the same too… And voila..! We have Aether. Which is the needed medium for sending light across the cosmos and everything else that goes on out there… It supplies the ‘stay relative to each other’ support for what is in space… And we all are in space…
Gravity is static… It is the Aether… It is the cosmos’s conscious… It controls everything it does.., and what happens in it…
They may even come together in the right frequency multiples to build a square wave that would absolutely destroy the cosmos… What I call the ultimate rock concert…
Gravity which includes centrifugal, centripetal, inertia, and ‘center seeking’ gravity are all one in the same… Just seen and thought to be different by humans from their particular pov… Gravity is an electromagnetic attraction. And it is not just iron that possesses this ability. Everything does., even wood and paper… Everything. Because everything is made of atoms which produce it…
So we go past Einstein’s ‘equivalency’ status, which he gave gravity and magnetism because he didn’t have enough information at that time, to make them one in the same too… And voila..! We have Aether. Which is the needed medium for sending light across the cosmos and everything else that goes on out there… It supplies the ‘stay relative to each other’ support for what is in space… And we all are in space…
Gravity is static… It is the Aether… It is the cosmos’s conscious… It controls everything it does.., and what happens in it…
IG2007
"Don't criticize what you can't understand..."
Sorry, that's pretty false. If it were true, then things wouldn't have ever attracted to magnets. Earth is pretty powerful...
Let's say that these waves are expecial. I really don't know many things about this topic, but there are some things whose I'm almost sure. Gravity and magnetic forces are very strange, both of them act without the touch and aren't made of particles. The light and the other particles that you know are made of particles and for this reason there is this problem.
A square wave? I know that I'm not a master in this field, but I have never heard this.
Obviously I disagree with this thought.
I really hope to have been at the required level even if I don't think that all the thing that I heve written are correct. If there are any thing that according to you aren't correct, please say these to me.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 171
-
-
Long ago, Voyager 2 might have caught Uranus at a bad time- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
James Webb Space Telescope finds galaxies pointing toward a dark matter alternative
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 3
-
Again and Again, Space Colonization and Settlement!
- Started by Atlan0001
- Replies: 0
-
The US is now at risk of losing to China in the race to send people back to the Moon’s surface
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 5
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram