A mathematical method for calculating black-hole properties from gravitational-wave data

black hole
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

Sean McWilliams, an assistant professor at West Virginia University, has developed a mathematical method for calculating black hole properties from gravitational wave data. He has written a paper describing his method and posted it on the arXiv preprint server. The paper has been accepted for publication in Physical Review Letters.

It has been two years since a team working with the LIGO detector made worldwide headlines by announcing that they had detected gravity waves. Since that time, workers there and elsewhere have continued the work, looking to better understand black holes, merging neutron stars, and ultimately, gravity itself. But such work has been hindered in one respect—the source of the gravity waves, merging black holes, is so complicated that it was thought the signals they generate could not be interpreted mathematically. Instead, scientists have been interpreting the signals by comparing them to signals generated using computer simulations.

In this new effort, McWilliams (who was a LIGO Scientific Collaboration Council member) claims to have developed mathematical formulas that can be used to calculate the signal. His calculations involve using the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO), an area around a black hole that is approximately three times the distance of the event horizon, where an object can orbit the black hole without falling in. ISCO has historically been challenging for astrophysicists seeking a mathematical solution to the problem.

McWilliams explains that he sidestepped the problem by simply leaving out the final state of the merged black holes. He instead used to calculate what would happen to a small mass as it spun into, and ultimately perturbed, the final black hole that resulted. That, he notes, allowed him to calculate the signal from the ISCO and inward. His analytical method uses two formulas that he created to study the waves that emerge from colliding . He claims that the results are as accurate as those provided by simulations. He also suggests they might be used in future tests of general relativity and for analyzing data from LIGO as researchers observe more black hole collisions. More work by others in the field is required before the claims McWilliams has made can be verified.


Explore further

Black holes: picturing the heart of darkness

More information: Sean T. McWilliams. Analytical Black-Hole Binary Merger Waveforms, arXiv:1810.00040 [gr-qc]. arxiv.org/abs/1810.00040
Journal information: arXiv , Physical Review Letters

© 2019 Science X Network

Citation: A mathematical method for calculating black-hole properties from gravitational-wave data (2019, May 10) retrieved 21 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-05-mathematical-method-black-hole-properties-gravitational-wave.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
1684 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

May 10, 2019
Blackhole properties from gravitational wave data

We present a highly accurate
fully analytical model
for the late inspiral
merger and ringdown of black-hole binaries
with arbitrary mass ratios and spin vectors
including the contributions of harmonics beyond the fundamental mode.
This model assumes only that nonlinear effects remain small throughout the entire coalescence
and is developed based on a physical understanding
of the dynamics of late stage binary evolution
in particular on the tendency of the dynamical binary spacetime
to behave like a linear perturbation
of the static merger-remnant spacetime
even at times before the merger has occurred

Interesting inspirational astronomical jargonal terms
in particular, the tendency of the dynamical binary spacetime
it will be interesting to unravel the meaning of "dynamical binary spacetime"
as to "binary spacetime"?
Is a new term here
If anyone can elaborate on "binary spacetime"?
Feel free to elaborate

May 10, 2019
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

May 10, 2019
These cosmologists should first take up some mathematical modeling applying the Inverse Square Law for Gravity to their BH theories. Maybe they can explain why such an immutable Law of Physics should be replaced by an immutable fantasy that there is infinite gravity at the center of a stellar body when easy calculations prove there is zero gravity at that point of the so-called singularity.

Yeah, the guy came up with his own equations, which is what he'd need to do so as to conveniently duck applying the Inverse Square Law to his favorite immutable fantasy.

May 10, 2019
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.
https://www.acade...ilky_Way

May 10, 2019
Good job; analytic methods are always superior to matching data to simulations since it indicates a full understanding of the process. Not only that but this may open the door to other analytical solutions to GRT in other regimes.

May 10, 2019
Good job; analytic methods are always superior to matching data to simulations since it indicates a full understanding of the process. Not only that but this may open the door to other analytical solutions to GRT in other regimes.
.......he could start by first learning what the Inverse Square Law for Gravity is, if he did that he'd better understand why Singularities do not exist.

May 10, 2019
Good job; analytic methods are always superior to matching data to simulations since it indicates a full understanding of the process. Not only that but this may open the door to other analytical solutions to GRT in other regimes.
.......he could start by first learning what the Inverse Square Law for Gravity is, if he did that he'd better understand why Singularities do not exist.

I read nothing about singularity in the article...
Nor of any "mis-application" of the ISL...

May 10, 2019
@Benni just makes shit up. The ISL is implicit in the equations, which @Benni can't understand any better than PDEs or 2 + 2 / 2.

May 11, 2019
TrollianDaSchneib, you're such a party pooper
Da Schneib> @Benni just makes shit up. The ISL is implicit in the equations, which @Benni can't understand any better than PDEs or 2 + 2 / 2.

The gravitational field increase to its maximum at its light radius, the event horizon
then decreases to zero at its centre of mass
simple, straight forward down to earth Sir Isaac Newton's Law of Gravity
as gravity travels at light speed its escape velocity is the speed of light
this light radius, means this event horizons escape velocity is the speed of light
where upon the escape velocity falls to zero at its centre of mass
gravities surface gravity g, is inversely portioned to its square of its radius
these simple rules apply no matter how massive a star grows
any star that is the lucky one to boast an event horizon
Follows this gravitational formula R = 2GM/C²

May 11, 2019
The reason this doesn't work is because you don't know what the mass density conditions are inside a black hole.

Nobody does.

You've been told this repeatedly, @granny, and you still don't get it.

May 11, 2019
A Gravitational Wave of Gravitons

Benni, for gravity to be inversely proportional to its radius
implies that gravity consists of particles, gravitons
for the force to diminish inversely requires particles emanating from a central point
for these are gravitons, if they are ejected in an increased numbers due to a collision
this will, like cars clumping approaching a road block create a wave of gravitons
where in this wave these increased number of gravitons will increase the gravitational force
in the region of these increased number of gravitons
Effectively Benni, a gravitational wave of gravitons

May 11, 2019
TrollianDaSchneib, concerning this mass density
The reason this doesn't work is because you don't know what the mass density conditions are inside a black hole.

Nobody does.

You've been told this repeatedly, @granny, and you still don't get it.

Gravity cannot exert a force greater than the speed of light
this means, when mass accumulates, when the escape velocity the speed of light is reached
gravity cannot crush this star any smaller
this is explained in this formula R = 2GM/C²
TrollianDaSchneib, this was explained on PW, that that gravity reaches its limit at the speed of light

May 11, 2019
Gravity cannot exert a force greater than the speed of light
This is like saying "gravel can't have a scent other than purple." What's the speed of light got to do with a force?

This is why you need math.

May 11, 2019
When density of mass increases with depth
the force creating this increased density is gravity
TrollianDaSchneib, when this force ceases, this force and density ceases
without gravity, no matter how dense matter was previously it no longer has any density
density is proportional to gravity
TrollianDaSchneib, this means when gravity reaches its light radius, density ceases to increase
because gravitys force remains constant and the atoms cannot exert a force greater that the speed of light
atoms exert force by the speed of light when the force reachs this speed of light
atoms no longer can exert any greater force so their density remains constant
where gravity fall to zero at the centre of mass
TrollianDaSchneib, just for the purpose of getting your mind round this gravitational problem
put aside your arguments with Benni for a mo
And think only of the consequences of this force travelling at this speed of light


May 11, 2019
To give an example, TrollianDaSchneib

If you link arms with 10 people
and all push each other in a long line
the force going through one arm to the next
this force is not addition
This force is only as great as the weakest arm in this link
This weakest arm in the link is the speed of light

May 11, 2019
When density of mass increases with depth
How do you know that happens in a black hole?
It might all be in a single shell, just under the EH.

It might all be at a point at the center.

It might be randomly distributed over the entire area inside the EH.

Relativity can't tell which.

But we know what everything outside the EH looks like. In all three cases I gave, it looks the same.

Again, you've been told this over and over and still don't get it.

May 11, 2019
@Benni
he could start by first learning what the Inverse Square Law for Gravity is
That's 8th grade stuff, Benni. Read the paper to see just how far beyond the level of banging rocks together the authors are at: https://arxiv.org...0040.pdf

There are some PDE's in there, so you should feel right at home. NOT.

May 11, 2019
@Benni
he could start by first learning what the Inverse Square Law for Gravity is
That's 8th grade stuff, Benni. .
........then why is it still so far beyond your comprehension that there is ZERO gravity at the center of your BH fantasy? Don't tell me? You still haven't reached that 8th grade level thinking that's a very high plateau in science education?

So, if you think gravity is NOT MASS dependent, explain it from your 8th grade level of education......waiting.

May 11, 2019
@Benni just makes shit up. The ISL is implicit in the equations, which @Benni can't understand any better than PDEs or 2 + 2 / 2.
.......then show us?

Or maybe you can explain why gravity is not MASS DEPENDENT? Uh,oh, I expect more psycho-babble math fantasy from the Pop-Cosmology crowd living here.

May 11, 2019
Good job; analytic methods are always superior to matching data to simulations since it indicates a full understanding of the process. Not only that but this may open the door to other analytical solutions to GRT in other regimes.


......he could start by first learning what the Inverse Square Law for Gravity is, if he did that he'd better understand why Singularities do not exist.

I read nothing about singularity in the article...
Nor of any "mis-application" of the ISL...
.......what mis-application? Oh, you mean NOT APPLYING Pop-Cosmology's favorite math fantasy like schneibo does, you know, that 19th Century TUGMath in which the speed of light particles is determined by the strength of the gravity field light is traveling through?

May 11, 2019
gravity is not MASS DEPENDENT
Pure gibberish. Of course gravity is mass dependent, but that's not the only thing it's dependent upon.

Maybe you can tell us what the other things are.

May 11, 2019
@Benni just makes shit up. The ISL is implicit in the equations, which @Benni can't understand any better than PDEs or 2 + 2 / 2.
.......then show us?

Or maybe you can explain why gravity is not MASS DEPENDENT? Uh,oh, I expect more psycho-babble math fantasy from the Pop-Cosmology crowd living here.


Jesus, there are some thickos on here, but this clown has got to be close to the top of the list!

May 11, 2019
This must be very profitable snake oil. Everyone wants a piece of the pie!

May 11, 2019
granny or benni, hard to decide which is more stupid?

You guys demolished their childish ranting with careful outlining of correct facts.

So I needn't bother cast my pearls before these grunting bores.

These looneyticks reminded me of an old joke.

Young gut buys himself a farm. Realizes he needs to get a a mule for the plowing.

So the new farmer walks around to the neighboring farms. Introduces himself & asks for advice about what he should look for in a mule.

Finally he finds an old farmer willing to sell him one of his mules.

Next day, the young guy stakes out the lines of furrows he wanted.
Next morning, he is up early to prepare the mule for work & get it harnessed ip to the plow.

Dtanding between the first pair of stakes. The proud, new farmer takes a deep breath of morning air.
Cracks the reigns, yells gee-yup & clutches the plow-handle as he steps forward.

& damn near fell over the handles when the mule didn't move.
- cont'd -

May 11, 2019
Good job; analytic methods are always superior to matching data to simulations since it indicates a full understanding of the process. Not only that but this may open the door to other analytical solutions to GRT in other regimes.


Yes, it was. It is an amazingly simple perturbation methods that works even in the near field of the gravitational source and by extrapolating back from the merger black hole system result; the figure 1 comparison tells how good it is!

And both you and the author is likely correct, this will continue to make waves [pun intended]. He notes a 2005 numerical breakthrough that relies on the same in practice suppression of general relativity possible nonlinearities that enables near field, strong effects and end state extrapolation. Nature is kind, at least outside a black hole event horizon.

May 11, 2019
- cont'd -
Guy tried again, with the snapping & yelling gee-yup louder. Still the mule just stands there, ignoring him.

About an hour later of nothing getting accomplished.
Especially the plowing!
But loud curses that only impressed the watching crows.

Unhitching the stubborn mule New Guy drags the recalcitrant beast back to the Old Farmer.
Guy loudly complains that he'd been swindled.
Old Farmer listens patiently, spits out some chaw, nodding his grizzled head as he went over to a pile of lumber.

Picking out a solid 2by4.
He takes that piece of wood over to the mule.

Who was just idly paying them both never mind.

Suddenly, the Old Farmer rears up with the board & violently lams it between the mule's two big ears!

The mule's knees buckle & the beast staggers around a bit, While the Old Farmer casually tosses the board back onto the woodpile.

He turns to Guy & says
"Son. First you gotta get the mule's attention!"

Yep, granny ^ benni both need that "Board of Education"!

May 11, 2019
Guy tried again, with the snapping & yelling gee-yup louder. Still the mule just stands there, ignoring him.
nothing getting accomplished.
Especially the plowing!
But loud curses that only impressed the watching crows.

Unhitching the stubborn mule New Guy drags the recalcitrant beast back to the Old Farmer.
Guy loudly complains that he'd been swindled.
Old Farmer listens patiently, spits out some chaw, nodding his grizzled head as he went to a pile of lumber.
Picking out a solid 2by4.
He takes that piece of wood over to the mule.
Who was just idly paying them both never mind.
the Old Farmer rears up with the board & violently lams it between the mule's two big ears!
The mule's knees buckle & the beast staggers around a bit, While the Old Farmer casually tosses the board back onto the woodpile.
He turns to Guy & says
"Son. First you gotta get the mule's attention!


Explanation: A mathematical method for calculating black-hole properties from gravitational-wave data.

May 11, 2019
What are the properties of fake science?....

May 11, 2019
What are the properties of fake science?....


It usually involves people who haven't got a clue about science. It often involves Benni, SEU, Granny and CD, and a bunch of other wooists, with no idea about the subject.

May 11, 2019
What are the properties of fake science?....
says rodkeh

Glad you inquired, so I will give you one of those properties that make up the irrational and illogical in science.

Time is not an entity or object that can start or stop at will. Neither is it a mechanism within itself. It is a figment of the human mind/imagination that has been mistaken for something tangible. Events/Actions and Durations of the so-called Time are only measured by clocks/timepieces. Distances are measured by such as rulers.
In Black Holes and Event Horizons Time cannot stop or stand still or slow down when there is any motion/movement/momentum within the Black Hole and Event Horizon. Any motion/movement or momentum of Matter/Energy indicates that there is a forward movement of that Matter/Energy that cannot be stopped. If the Matter/Energy has slowed, that is only the result of Matter slowing down in response to an influence. The concept of Time continues on.

May 11, 2019
well rod, since you were nice enough to ask?
Woomongering the cults of the pseudo-sciences are determined by their complete lack of invention & failure of moral character.

The properties of fraudulent beliefs are properties stolen from the original creators.

An excellent example is the denial of NP/GR/SR/QN/BB/EH/BH & SpaceTime. Denunciations from thees hypocrites communicating their ignorance, using the very technology based on the very Physics they are denouncing.

The loomeyticks cannot admit they are completely wrong, about everything.
Too self-dumbfounded to realize that if any of the Modern Physics fails to work?
It all Falls apart, nothing would work!
No Nukes! Yay?

Fine by me, I'd prefer a
Stochastic Universe.
That in a few trillion years it all falls apart.
Leaving only gravitrons.

That phlegmatic cynical pragmatism?
Seems to upset the monkeys. Who have convinced themselves, if they wildly wave magic wands & screech loudly enough?
Reality will bow to their hubris.

May 11, 2019
An excellent example is the denial of NP/GR/SR/QN/BB/EH/BH & SpaceTime. Denunciations from thees hypocrites communicating their ignorance, using the very technology based on the very Physics they are denouncing.
......you mean like the immutable fantasy that infinite gravity can exist on a finite stellar mass Pop-Cosmology has labeled a black hole? No, you don't mean that? Oh, I know, you believe in the............?

May 11, 2019
@torbjorn, I didn't read closely enough. To get perturbative results for near-field strong gravity without the renormalization procedures needed with EM is potentially an enormous leap forward; it also indicates some things about how EM and gravity are different at the quantum level. This may be the big thing we've been looking for!

I'll be watching with great interest to see how this paper is received.

May 11, 2019
What are the properties of fake science?....
says rodkeh
Part 2:

The article above is in regard to the "CLAIMS" of one Sean McWilliams of having concluded that certain gravitational wave 'signals' may be translated mathematically, in addition to computer simulations.

"..developed a mathematical method for calculating black hole properties from gravitational wave data. "

@rodkeh
I am trying to find a good reason for translating the signals into math equations, when those equations eventually will still have to be translated into plain old scientific English that most anyone can understand. Is this an opportunity for McWilliams to show off his mathematical prowess and be published in a prestigious 'zine?
His Claims must still be verified and confirmed before being fully accepted, regardless.

The point is that any honest Scientist/Researcher should welcome reviews and criticism from the public as well as their peers...and be grateful for the constructive criticism

May 11, 2019
The physicists will consider their job done when they have a complete and consistent mathematical explanation. Putting it in colloquial English will be left for the journalists. If you're content to settle for a colloquial English explanation, you'll wait many years after the discovery is made, and you still won't understand it.

Math is the language of physics. Colloquial English isn't. It's really that simple.

May 11, 2019
The physicists will consider their job done when they have a complete and consistent mathematical explanation. Putting it in colloquial English will be left for the journalists. If you're content to settle for a colloquial English explanation, you'll wait many years after the discovery is made, and you still won't understand it.

Math is the language of physics. Colloquial English isn't. It's really that simple.


Still projecting your own opinions about others, I see. I could project right back at you, but you wouldn't like it.
Exactly HOW do you know what I understand? Have I ever discussed what I understand with you?
No, I haven't because I consider you to be a 'mighty mouth mental midget' in spite of the impression of yourself that you try hard to get across to all the readers of physorg.
You are tiring and a complete bore.
I will wait for the English version where there will be few errors in print, hopefully.

May 11, 2019
It ain't an opinion. That math is the language of physics has been clear for centuries. Galileo and Newton proved this in the seventeenth century. It's now the twenty-first century. Maybe you forgot.

Bridges are designed using this math. Generally they don't fall down. Maybe you forgot that too.

Then there's the computer you're typing this on, using this same math. Get your head out of your ass and start paying attention, unless you're just another troll trying to dis science because you think Darwin is Satan.

May 11, 2019
It ain't an opinion. That math is the language of physics has been clear for centuries. Galileo and Newton proved this in the seventeenth century. It's now the twenty-first century. Maybe you forgot.

Bridges are designed using this math. Generally they don't fall down. Maybe you forgot that too.

Then there's the computer you're typing this on, using this same math. Get your head out of your ass and start paying attention, unless you're just another troll trying to dis science.


I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes. We Brits are a tight bunch. He was a genius, in my opinion. And yes. I am aware that it was long ago. And YOU ARE NO ISAAC NEWTON, by the way.
Honest scientific researchers have no problem with constructive criticism, and quite often, they find that someone who is not a scientist has come up with a great idea that they can use in their research. It happens. And they don't put on 'airs' as you are doing. You are no scientist.

May 12, 2019
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes.
No, you didn't, and you're lying again like the bullshit about being a mind-reading alien.

If you want evidence, the Principia is about five or six inches thick and filled with math, and you deny math. You wouldn't know or recognize Newton if he jumped up and bit you on the ass. In fact, you have denied his discoveries on this very thread. You know, the whole time denying thing. You're an idiot.

May 12, 2019
I want to thank all of you for your candid replies. Of course I was unable to get beyond the second sentence of any of them. What a bunch of hot air balloons! None of you idiots have ever had an original thought in your entire lives...

But go ahead, jabber on, It's an open forum....

May 12, 2019
TrollianDaSchneib, in this Universe the Speed of Light Rules

When you were, a lad, sparking clogs
rolling a hoop with a stick
you will recall
You cannot push the hoop faster than the stick pushes the hoop

This fact of life applies to the speed of light
Gravity cannot accelerate matter faster than the speed of light
because gravity travels at the speed of light
This means TrollianDaSchneib, the escape velocity of any star cannot be greater than the speed of light

May 12, 2019
TrollianDaSchneib, this absolute velocity, the speed of light

When you were a lad, pushing this hoop with a stick
when this hoop was rolling along the flagstones
the same speed as the stick was pushing it
TrollianDaSchneib, you will recall from your Physics Master
That stick no longer exerts a force on the hoop

This fact of life applies to the speed of light
when a star attains a escape velocity of the speed of light
when matter is falling at the speed of light
Gravity no longer exerts a force on this matter
this is why TrollianDaSchneib, gravity, magnetic, electric and nuclear fields cannot propel matter faster than the speed of light
because all these forces travel at the speed of light
when matter travels at the speed of light these force carriers are also travelling at the speed of light and consequently no longer exert a force

This is why TrollianDaSchneib, when a star achieves an event horizon
Gravity can no longer exert a greater force, irrespective of mass

May 12, 2019
TrollianDaSchneib, when a star achieves an event horizon

According to this formula R = 2GM/C²
an event horizon requires a star with a minimum mass
that mass is our star, our Sun 2x10+30kg
TrollianDaSchneib, you can now calculate the maximum force gravity exerts for a blackhole of the absolute minimum mass that will form an eventhorizon
Where this escape velocity falls to zero at this blackholes centre of mass

TrollianDaSchneib, not only is gravity exerting its greatest force at 3km
At this Blackholes Centre of Mass Gravities Force is Zero

May 12, 2019
@rod, being able to make up a plausible story without math is not an indication of good science. Peer review is the smell test. And no one will bother the peer reviewers unless there's math.

May 12, 2019
@torbjorn, I didn't read closely enough. To get perturbative results for near-field strong gravity without the renormalization procedures needed with EM is potentially an enormous leap forward; it also indicates some things about how EM and gravity are different at the quantum level. This may be the big thing we've been looking for!
........and according to Pop-Cosmology fantasy, gravity is also different at the macro-level, you know, INFINITE GRAVITY can be found on a FINITE BH stellar mass & they can't explain that either...........hey, schneibo, maybe you can?

May 12, 2019
#crankscantcount

May 12, 2019
It ain't an opinion. That math is the language of physics has been clear for centuries. Galileo and Newton proved this in the seventeenth century. It's now the twenty-first century. Maybe you forgot.
.......and it was using their TUGMath calculations in the 19th Century PROVING that the speed of LIGHT PARTICLES was subject to the strength of the gravity field through which the particles were traveling, hence the mathematical derivation of ESCAPE VELOCITY of light theory as proof there can exist a DARK STAR with gravity so intense that light cannot escape from it.

May 12, 2019
@Benni is being boring again. Lying about what people said is an Old Meme.

May 12, 2019
@Benni is being boring again. Lying about what people said is an Old Meme.
#crankscantcount

May 12, 2019
It doesn't matter what you say, @Benni. You still can't count, you're still a crank, and you're still boring. Fun to troll, though.

May 12, 2019
It doesn't matter what you say, @Benni. You still can't count, you're still a crank, and you're still boring. Fun to troll, though.


#crankscantcount.......they apply 19th Century Cosmology to prove their math.

May 12, 2019
@Benni is being boring again. Lying about what people said is an Old Meme.


Hey, you're the one who believes in the Escape Velocity of LIGHT PARTICLE theory from 19th Century Cosmology. Problem with you remains as it always has, #crankscantcount from 19 to 21.

May 12, 2019
Math is math, @Benni. We can still prove math from 500 BC. And it's still used today.

May 12, 2019
Math is math, @Benni. We can still prove math from 500 BC. And it's still used today.


........"from 500"? Hell's bells schneibo the #crankscantcount, you can't even comprehend a transition from 19-21 much less from 500.

May 12, 2019
It's called the Pythagorean Theorem, @Benni. You'd know what it is if you knew any math. They teach it in gradeschool.

But you don't because #crankscantcount.

So were you homeschooled by your mommy and she wasn't good at math, @Benni?

May 12, 2019
So did you get your "physics degree" from mommy, @Benni? That would explain a lot.

May 12, 2019
It's called the Pythagorean Theorem, @Benni. You'd know what it is if you knew any math. They teach it in gradeschool.So were you homeschooled by your mommy and she wasn't good at math, @Benni?
.
So did you get your "physics degree" from mommy, @Benni? That would explain a lot.
It's obvious I didn't learn physics from you, I know better than you not to apply the Particle Light Theory of 19th Century TUGMath to come up with Escape Velocity equations for an electro-magnetic wave.

Hey, #crankscantcount, ever hear of Special Relativity? It proves the speed of an electro-magnetic wave is not subject to the Kinetic Energy concept of Escape Velocity. Of course I realize I'm now way over your head because you've never known that Escape Velocity calculations are derived from the concept of Kinetic Energy & not Electro-Magnetic Energy.

You should be thankful that Benni has been here all these years giving you basic physics lessons minus the name calling rants.

May 12, 2019
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes. We Brits are a tight bunch. He was a genius, in my opinion. And yes. I am aware that it was long ago.
@SEU So what exactly are you claiming to be? An immortal, a time traveler or merely a complete imbecile?

May 12, 2019
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes.
No, you didn't, and you're lying again like the bullshit about being a mind-reading alien.

If you want evidence, the Principia is about five or six inches thick and filled with math, and you deny math. You wouldn't know or recognize Newton if he jumped up and bit you on the ass. In fact, you have denied his discoveries on this very thread. You know, the whole time denying thing. You're an idiot.
says the stupid alien lizard, Da Schniebo

Yes I did know Isaac Newton. Jealous, are you? He was a true gentleman and had a quiet demeanor that showed the rare gift of genius. As I am far older than you can imagine, it is not surprising that you would think of me as being somewhere in YOUR age bracket. Heaven forbid the thought.
I had no time to delve deep into Newton's mathematical works as I had more important missions to accomplish. But I greatly admired the man and his talent. We all did.

May 12, 2019
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes. We Brits are a tight bunch. He was a genius, in my opinion. And yes. I am aware that it was long ago.
@SEU So what exactly are you claiming to be? An immortal, a time traveler or merely a complete imbecile?
says Sahstar

I am not claiming to be, as it is none of your concern. Why do you even ask? HOW will my presence here in physorg affect YOUR life in any way, Sahstar?
Take care that YOU don't come off as an imbecile as Da Schneibo does on a daily basis. He talks about mind-reading aliens as though he is one of them. I have no knowledge of aliens who read minds. It is a foreign topic. And yet, DS talks about such aliens, possibly hoping to find one of them in physorg. Are YOU a mind-reading alien, Sahstar. If you are, introduce yourself to Da Schneibo ASAP.

May 12, 2019
LOL

Is this like the alien mind-reading thing?

What a nutjob.

May 12, 2019
There aren't any 500-year-old mind-reading aliens wandering around on Earth posting on the Internet.

These are, however, common psychotic delusions.

May 12, 2019
There aren't any 500-year-old mind-reading aliens wandering around on Earth posting on the Internet.

These are, however, common psychotic delusions.
says the self-described alien lizard, Da Schneibo

Then that is a clear indication that Da Schneibo is suffering from psychotic delusions in physorg on a daily basis since all he does is refer to his family of mind-reading aliens.
I haven't met one yet except for Da Schneibo, who brags about his seemingly vast knowledge of them. Perhaps Da Schneibo could favour us with a snapshot of himself in his profile. I would like to examine his eyeballs to see if they are vertically angled.

May 12, 2019
There aren't any 500-year-old mind-reading aliens wandering around on Earth posting on the Internet.

These are, however, common psychotic delusions.
.......and with so much of the groupie Pop-Cosmology psycho-babble that goes on around here there's not much science either.

When is the last time you as an embedded Physorg Moderator took the lead to steer this chatroom out of the 19th Century into the 21st Century science? What with all your TUGMath dark star crap not found anywhere within the Immutable Laws of Physics.

You can't even talk about ENTROPY, ever, it's a forbidden discussion with those of you in the Pop-Cosmology crowd living here, including the McWilliams who wrote this psycho-babble article that you think is such a gem.

May 13, 2019
I'm sorry, I don't believe in 500-year-old mind-reading space aliens.

Here's you:
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes.... And yes. I am aware that it was long ago.
You said it. Right here on this thread. This will be another one of those threads I keep a link to.

May 13, 2019
Yes I did know Isaac Newton. Jealous, are you? He was a true gentleman and had a quiet demeanor


Newton was a Jerk

https://www.forbe...99266e20


May 13, 2019
@SEU,

I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes. We Brits are a tight bunch. He was a genius, in my opinion. And yes. I am aware that it was long ago. And YOU ARE NO ISAAC NEWTON, by the way.
Honest scientific researchers have no problem with constructive criticism, and quite often, they find that someone who is not a scientist has come up with a great idea that they can use in their research. It happens.


I know a guy who claims to be Newton -- why don't you come around and verify his identity for me? He has as much evidence for his claim as you do for yours -- none. How's your Latin, by the way?

Asking people like you to comment on a scientific theory is like asking a person who can hear absolutely nothing to comment on a musical performance.

Mathematics is the language of science for the same reason musical notation is the language of music -- it's the simplest way of expressing it.

May 13, 2019
Yes I did know Isaac Newton. Jealous, are you? He was a true gentleman and had a quiet demeanor


Newton was a Jerk
Everything I know of says you're right. Being a genius doesn't absolve him from being a dick.

May 13, 2019
Newton was also an alchemist.

May 13, 2019
I'm sorry, I don't believe in 500-year-old mind-reading space aliens.

Here's you:
I knew Isaac Newton way back and read some of his notes.... And yes. I am aware that it was long ago.
You said it. Right here on this thread. This will be another one of those threads I keep a link to.
says Da Schleezbo

As I have NEVER told you my age in Earth years, it is evident that YOU are suffering from psychotic delusions, forcing you to ascribe an age to those such as I. And I repeat = yes I did know Newton and read a few of his notes. But I did not find his ideas very interesting and I still don't.
WHERE and HOW did you come up with this 500 year old number?
And WHY do you spread your lies into so many other physorg phorums? Are you intent on grabbing as much ATTENTION FOR YOURSELF as possible?
YOU are a SICKO @Da SCHNIEBO

May 13, 2019
@torbjorn, I didn't read closely enough. To get perturbative results for near-field strong gravity without the renormalization procedures needed with EM is potentially an enormous leap forward


I don't think you need renormalization to handle EM emitters (antennas) near-field. This is simply adding a linear perturbation, and it works. By the way, I did not read closely enough, the inner stable orbit (ISCO) (so the inner edge of the accretion disk) is not the event horizon (EH) in general. But it is for orbits co-rotating with a spinning (Kerr) extremal (maximum spin) black hole (sez Wikipedia).

So presumably the nonlinearities outside the EH is not severe, give or take the ergosphere frame dragging. This reminds of how Hawking derived his radiation by similar perturbation of the EM field against flat space outside the EH.

Two things:
- I am more assured that quantum gravity field theory works outside the EH.
- It looks like spacetime can be trivially extended through the EH.

May 13, 2019
Newton was also an alchemist.


Newton was a lot of things besides being a genius and starting to straddle the Dark Age and the Enlightenment (first to abstract away space, say). He was a revolutionary religionist - had a non-traditional make belief, was "a heretic" - and a public servant. His aggression is legendary, IIRC people has gone so far to suggest he was mercury poisoned by his alchemistry rituals.

May 13, 2019
Back to the Topic of the Article

So Sean McWilliams has this desire to translate his scientific ideas into mathematical numbers and symbols. All well and good. Perhaps there are certain scientists/researchers who can only READ Math numbers and symbols and who consider plain old Scientific English as common and vulgar and not of good standing for peer review/confirmation.
Well, the truth of the matter is that the vast majority of humans are not proficient in Math language and have no idea what all those math symbols mean, so that McWilliams may or may not be very popular in scientific research and publishing circles, and even LESS popular amongst such humans who are interested in science, but IN PLAIN OLD ENGLISH THAT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND.
"..a mathematical method for calculating black hole properties from gravitational wave data. "
IF 'merging black holes' are now the only source for gravity waves, I would suggest for McWilliams and his colleagues to keep searching for others.

May 13, 2019
And, chances are, in "plain old English," it won't be understandable at all. That's why mathematics is the language of science -- it's the only language in which a great many concepts can be expressed and make any sense. Natural languages have no words to describe the concepts and interactions. Mathematics can express them without the need of words that make no sense when trying to discuss things for which no words exist. Mathematics can express concepts for which there are no words.

The instructions on how to play a symphony can be written down in words, but it'll be damn near impossible to play until it's rendered in musical notation. There is a very similar relationship between mathematics and physics. Musical notation is the simplest way to describe how to play music; mathematics is the simplest way to describe physical interactions. Describing it in English doesn't make it simpler; it makes it vastly more complicated.

May 13, 2019
And, chances are, in "plain old English," it won't be understandable at all. That's why mathematics is the language of science -- it's the only language in which a great many concepts can be expressed and make any sense. Natural languages have no words to describe the concepts and interactions. Mathematics can express them without the need of words that make no sense when trying to discuss things for which no words exist. Mathematics can express concepts for which there are no words.
says obs

Funny thing about the English language - it incorporates many other languages/dialects/idioms to describe some things better than in the mother tongue (as the need arises). I speak/write in English rather than in mathematical symbols/numbers when I want to get my point across, re 'Mirror Dark Matter', Concept of Time, and other topics that I wish to expound on to make my case.
Have you had a hard time understanding what I've been saying when I speak in the English vernacular?

May 13, 2019
-contd-
@obs

And what if there are no Math SYMBOLS available that will reflect/explain a certain meaning for a NEW CONCEPT that may never have been submitted for perusal before. Will scientists reject the hypothesis 'out-of-hand' for the reason that it's written in English rather than in math?

If you or I came into physorg one day and only spoke in mathematical numbers and symbols to the exclusion of English verbiage, where instead of nouns, verbs, adverbs, etc. we spoke/typed in nothing but numbers and symbols. Do you imagine that everyone would understand what we were saying? Would they follow suit and also speak/type in mathematical 'verbiage' to the exclusion of English? Would everyone who wandered into physorg be able to comprehend and converse in such a melange of symbolic linguistics?

May 13, 2019
Speaking mathematics

For if you speak mathematics with a Scottish accent
you converse in mathematics
we have an example of a calamitous calamity speaking mathematics
Bennies little cupeth of joyeth
this infamous selfie
thateth if all hath noticed
is such an awful selfie
it has been quietly hidden from sight
for this selfie is a prime example of speaking mathematics
this mathematical selfie is a prime example of speaking mathematics
as
we our back to our artists simulation
who speak the language of art and poetry
in our mothers tongue
This universal worldly language, English

May 14, 2019
@SEU,

Please explain what the units of the gravitational constant mean.

May 15, 2019
@SEU,

Please explain what the units of the gravitational constant mean.
obs

It means just what you think it means.
And it looks like my rating is now -1201 and climbing. It is a pity that physorg had decided to forgo the naming of the down voters so that one could see who is doing it. The last two names that I saw down voting me was Da Schneibo and CaptainDumpy which was just before the changeover where the names no longer showed up. So I would imagine that both are still giving me minus votes.
Not that it matters. It's not like a beauty contest where you are eliminated. LOL

May 15, 2019
F = G M 1 M 2 d 2 , where F is the gravitational force between two point masses, M1 and M2; d is the distance between M1 and M2; G is the universal gravitational constant, usually taken as 6.670 × 1011 m3/(kg)(s2) or 6.670 × 10−8 in centimeter–gram–second units. a = F M 1 = G M 2 r 2

May 15, 2019
@Satan forgot the /

F= GMm/r^2

No big deal, it doesn't understand math anyway.

May 15, 2019
@Satan forgot the /

F= GMm/r^2

No big deal, it doesn't understand math anyway.


Da Schnieb REPORTED for off-topic RELIGIOUS REFERENCE TO HIS MASTER, SATAN

May 15, 2019
Snicker.

You don't know the math and don't even comprehend why leaving out the / means anything.

What a troll.

I cannot imagine taking anyone seriously who doesn't know what division means.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more