Scientists detect a black hole swallowing a neutron star

Scientists detect a black hole swallowing a neutron star
Artist’s depiction of a black hole about to swallow a neutron star. Credit: Carl Knox, OzGrav ARC Centre of Excellence.

Scientists, including from The Australian National University (ANU), say they have detected a black hole swallowing a neutron star for the first time.

Neutron stars and black holes are the super-dense remains of dead stars.

On Wednesday 14 August 2019, gravitational-wave discovery machines in the United States and Italy detected ripples in space and time from a cataclysmic event that happened about 8,550 million trillion kilometres away from Earth.

Professor Susan Scott, from the ANU Research School of Physics, said the achievement completed the team's trifecta of observations on their original wish list, which included the merger of two black holes and the collision of two neutron stars.

"About 900 million years ago, this black hole ate a very dense star, known as a neutron star, like Pac-man—possibly snuffing out the star instantly," said Professor Scott, Leader of the General Relativity Theory and Data Analysis Group at ANU and a Chief Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (OzGrav).

"The ANU SkyMapper Telescope responded to the detection alert and scanned the entire likely region of space where the event occurred, but we've not found any visual confirmation."

Scientists are still analysing the data to confirm the exact size of the two objects, but initial findings indicate the very strong likelihood of a black hole enveloping a neutron star. The final results are expected to be published in scientific journals.

"Scientists have never detected a black hole smaller than five solar masses or a neutron star larger than about 2.5 times the mass of our Sun," Professor Scott said.

"Based on this experience, we're very confident that we've just detected a black hole gobbling up a neutron star.

"However, there is the slight but intriguing possibility that the swallowed object was a very light black hole—much lighter than any other black hole we know about in the Universe. That would be a truly awesome consolation prize."

ANU plays a lead role in Australia's partnership with the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO), which is the most sensitive scientific instrument ever built and comprises twin detectors in the US.

The European Gravitational Observatory has a gravitational-wave detector in Italy called Virgo.


Explore further

Scientists detect biggest known black-hole collision

More information: gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/S190814bv/

gcn.gsfc.nasa.gov/gcn3/25333.gcn3

Citation: Scientists detect a black hole swallowing a neutron star (2019, August 19) retrieved 22 October 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-08-scientists-black-hole-swallowing-neutron.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.
4635 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Aug 19, 2019
"The ANU SkyMapper Telescope responded to the detection alert and scanned the entire likely region of space where the event occurred, but we've not found any visual confirmation."

Looks like nobody could find it.

"However, there is the slight but intriguing possibility that the swallowed object was a very light black hole—much lighter than any other black hole we know about in the Universe. That would be a truly awesome consolation prize."

I guess that would provide a good excuse for why nobody could find it, if so.

Aug 19, 2019
Pretty surprising not to see any electromagnetic signal at all if it was a neutron star, but neutron stars are as compact and dense as an atomic nucleus, but still you'd think it would certainly come unglued at the event horizon, evidently not before, though, pretty amazing...

Aug 19, 2019
considering that the neutron star is held together by gravity that is so strong that the only thing stronger is a black hole, it would make sense that tidal tearing and stripped of the star wouldn't occur until passing the event horizon. Any EM emissions happening just outside of the event horizon would be severely red-shifted. So on top of the red shift already undergoing due to the distance making it likely our galaxies are moving part and not toward eachother and that low frequency light gets blocked by all kinds of gasses and dust between us. Not surprising to not see anything other than gravity waves.

Aug 19, 2019
considering that the neutron star is held together by gravity that is so strong that the only thing stronger is a black hole, it would make sense that tidal tearing and stripped of the star wouldn't occur until passing the event horizon. Any EM emissions happening just outside of the event horizon would be severely red-shifted. So on top of the red shift already undergoing due to the distance making it likely our galaxies are moving part and not toward eachother and that low frequency light gets blocked by all kinds of gasses and dust between us. Not surprising to not see anything other than gravity waves.
Good points all. Was hoping to gain some additional insight into the high energy physics, it looks like gravity wins.

Aug 19, 2019
Keep in mind that observation data is still being analyzed at this time and that the weather conditions at major observatories were not necessarily perfect these last few nights. Also, it's been stated that some models predict peak light from such a merger occurring 3-6 days later.

Aug 19, 2019
Keep in mind that observation data is still being analyzed at this time and that the weather conditions at major observatories were not necessarily perfect these last few nights. Also, it's been stated that some models predict peak light from such a merger occurring 3-6 days later.


Thanks, I did not know the details of this type or merger but sounds likely. It would be nice to have more distance/redshift beacons to add to the neutron star binary merger re Hubble expansion rate!

it would make sense that tidal tearing and stripped of the star wouldn't occur until passing the event horizon.


That would not make any sense at all!? Black hole and neutron star jets comes from accretion disks. And added to that the simulations of black hole mergers - even more cohesive - are heavily distorted by mutual tidal forces in simulations. Black hole mergers lose ~ 20 % of mass outside event horizons that goes to GW, and similar mass loss is naively likely here.

Aug 19, 2019
The problem with EM signatures would be numerous, starting from BH jets are randomly directed to dust smothering weaker emissions. We got lucky the first time with the neutron star binary, a jet was visible - it is a statistical game. But the sooner we see them, the better observation rate can be expected (give or take the bias from the first lucky/unlucky GW events).

Aug 19, 2019
Good points also from Torbjorn. You'd think at least a good burst of neutrinos would've been squashed out too...

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.


Lol. Eejit.

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.


Lol. Eejit.


You spelled legit wrong.

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.


Lol. Eejit.


You spelled legit wrong.


Nope;

https://www.urban...rm=eejit

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.


Lol. Eejit.


You spelled legit wrong.


Nope;

https://www.urban...rm=eejit

Got me. I certainly must not have the intellectual capacity of Gastro. You GR and QM people are like flat earthers. Some of you think very deeply, yet not sanely.

Aug 19, 2019
You GR and QM people are like flat earthers. Some of you think very deeply, yet not sanely.
The appreciation of truth is pretty much directly proportional to the knowledge of it ... it's as sane as it gets in a crazy world...

Aug 19, 2019
You GR and QM people are like flat earthers. Some of you think very deeply, yet not sanely.
The appreciation of truth is pretty much directly proportional to the knowledge of it ... it's as sane as it gets in a crazy world...

See.

Aug 19, 2019
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Aug 19, 2019
Reifying a privation like space will get you nowhere. And time is a measure of magnitude. Put the two together(spacetime) and you have bad science for 100 years and going. They should call gravitational wave detectors waves of money creators. Good luck with your junk science.


Lol. Eejit.


You spelled legit wrong.


Nope;

https://www.urban...rm=eejit

Got me. I certainly must not have the intellectual capacity of Gastro. You GR and QM people are like flat earthers. Some of you think very deeply, yet not sanely.


And let me guess - you have never studied science beyond high school, and believe in some ridiculous crankery. Correct?

Aug 19, 2019
Sure. Then you must still be in high school. GR and QM are quackery. You believe that garbage. So you are the uneducated one. Or worse, you learned a bunch of garbage that you took as gospel, That is not science.

Aug 19, 2019
Very interesting. I note the points by Protoplasmix, torbjorn_b_g_larsson and Darth Ender who made points covering BH jets, N stars and the magnetic fields of both. Thank you.
What an event to watch, a BH and N star...that is if we could...a magnificent powerful (and dangerous) universe we live in eh?

Aug 19, 2019
Very interesting. I note the points by Protoplasmix, torbjorn_b_g_larsson and Darth Ender who made points covering BH jets, N stars and the magnetic fields of both. Thank you.
........you forgot one: Castrogiovanni. Or was that deliberate?

Aug 19, 2019
Seems like the spins would tend to line up at right angles to the binary orbit plane, whether together or opposed, and it seems gravitational waves would be clearest along the orbit plane while high energy jets would be clearest along the poles. GR people will say the gravitational wave energy falls off inversely with distance however it seems they never say the energy is confined to a plane. With seemingly a different take, a very recent web publication from Princeton implied (apparently getting it sideways, if you ask me) gravitational waves are strongest when viewed at a right angle to the orbit plane.

Aug 19, 2019
Here's the part I thought seemed sideways:

"The gravitational wave burst from a neutron star merger makes a distinctive pattern known as a "standard siren."" … "The gravitational wave data can't distinguish between mergers that were nearby and edge-on, distant and face-on, or something in between."

https://www.princ...constant

Looks like right now they are maybe saying face-on is clearer, not really obvious how to take it.

Aug 19, 2019
"... gravitational wave data can't distinguish between mergers that were nearby and edge-on, distant and face-on, or something in between."

Seems to me the face-on view has no real push+pull going though it. It's an oval symmetry that rotates, not a circle that gets alternately stretched and compressed into ovals. Face on it's a spin-wave, edge-on it's an orthogonal pair of oscillating deformations. None of that seems to agree with the 1/r intensity fall-off (versus conventional 1/r-squared fall-off) general relativity people always like to mention.

Aug 20, 2019
With seemingly a different take, a very recent web publication from Princeton implied (apparently getting it sideways, if you ask me) gravitational waves are strongest when viewed at a right angle to the orbit plane... None of that seems to agree with the 1/r intensity fall-off (versus conventional 1/r-squared fall-off) general relativity people always like to mention.
I think the intensity (energy density) falls off as r^(-2) and it's the amplitude that falls off as r^(-1). As for viewing angle,
For a binary system, the strain amplitude when it is viewed perpendicular to the orbital plane ("face-on") is twice the amplitude of the binary seen "edge on".
--quoted from an answer at the Physics Stack Exchange which also provides the relevant formulas for reference, see: In what shape do gravitational waves radiate?

Aug 20, 2019
Proto - I've read that before, about amplitude versus intensity. Thanks for reminding me. Still some questions on that and I will attempt to clarify when I have time. Right now I'd just suggest there doesn't seem any way available to show it experimentally. Beyond that the issue seems to involve a single coherent sinusoidal signal versus combining a collection of sinusoids slightly spread out over time and space.

The idea that the angle generates a factor of two is something I can't recall seeing elsewhere. Thanks for that too. The notion of relating the two by the square root of two seemed to make a little more sense, but that's just me right now. It still seems a change in viewing angle produces a change involving more than just a change in amplitude

Aug 20, 2019
I think the intensity (energy density) falls off as r^(-2) and it's the amplitude that falls off as r^(-1).
This makes perfect sense. Here it is explained by Ethan Siegel https://www.forbe...8d602f58
and here is the related mathematics from Caltech (thanks to Proto sub link):http://www.tapir....ave.html
As for viewing angle,
it does not matter. Don't forget that that those events happen in very curved space time and as Ethan wrote; it does "spread out over space (in roughly a sphere) as you move farther away".

Aug 20, 2019
I think the intensity (energy density) falls off as r^(-2) and it's the amplitude that falls off as r^(-1).
This makes perfect sense. Here it is explained by Ethan Siegel https://www.forbe...8d602f58 and here is the related mathematics from Caltech (thanks to Proto sub link):http://www.tapir....ave.html
As for viewing angle,
it does not matter. Don't forget that that those events happen in very curved space time and as Ethan wrote; it does "spread out over space (in roughly a sphere) as you move farther away".

Aug 20, 2019
Sorry for the double posting

Aug 20, 2019
"it does not matter"

The Princeton quote seems to disagree with Ethan by suggesting distant face-on views have the same signal strength as closer edge-on views.

Aug 20, 2019
I could be wrong but it seems Ethan is saying gravity bends itself the same way it bends light, which seems a little goofy at the moment especially when applied to light from the accretion ring, while maybe others are saying the gravity has no off-axis competition worth mentioning and is thus heading straight outward? I've noticed Ethan says a lot of things about dark matter that he ends up retracting.

Aug 20, 2019
"it does not matter"

The Princeton quote seems to disagree with Ethan by suggesting distant face-on views have the same signal strength as closer edge-on views.
The link do not go into the details of relativistic equations related to warped space time.

Aug 20, 2019
"The link do not go into the details of relativistic equations related to warped space time."

I was imagining earlier that gravitational wave energy could maybe "hitch" a ride on light, but for the most part I just imagined gravity waves do not have to bend themselves. That's just me though. Anyway, maybe Ethan is using advanced Einsteinian Russian physics they don't have at Princeton. Sorry, something strikes me as amusing in all this.

Aug 20, 2019
"The link do not go into the details of relativistic equations related to warped space time."

I was imagining earlier that gravitational wave energy could maybe "hitch" a ride on light, but for the most part I just imagined gravity waves do not have to bend themselves. That's just me though. Anyway, maybe Ethan is using advanced Einsteinian Russian physics they don't have at Princeton. Sorry, something strikes me as amusing in all this.
In case you do not know who you are trying to discredit.https://en.wikipe...n_Siegel

Aug 20, 2019
TC, there is no "trying" going on here on that point. He discredits himself on dark matter. He's kind of a joke. Too bad you can't appreciate the humor. Are Russians bad people?

Aug 20, 2019
Ethan is the planet's foremost cheerleader for the dynamic duo of Einstein's gravity and Dark Matter, both concepts being pretty much married at the hip. It's kind of further embarrassing, but nonetheless quite effective for exposure, that his main media outlet for that public programming is Forbes.

Aug 20, 2019
Ethan is the planet's foremost cheerleader for the dynamic duo of Einstein's gravity and Dark Matter, both concepts being pretty much married at the hip. It's kind of further embarrassing, but nonetheless quite effective for exposure, that his main media outlet for that public programming is Forbes.
Concerning cosmological mechanics, Newton is sufficient; Einstein is only needed in proximity to massive objects.
Dark matter came much later and was introduced by Fred Zwicky to explain the observations of Edwin Hubble.

In other words, you obviously do not know what you are talking about. It is not sufficient to put you on "ignore", but your disregard for Einstein irritates me. To discuss with you in this context would only get on our nerves.

Good buy and good luck

Aug 20, 2019
TC, the simple fact is General Relativity fails exactly where Dark Matter picks up, and it's hilarious, cynical and just plain stupid to suggest one predating the other means they must be independent.
Thanks for ignoring me in the future, clown.

Aug 20, 2019
Anyone who's tried to translate highly technical subjects into words that everyone can understand knows it isn't easy -- they ran out of Greek letters pretty quickly just on the basics. Not all scientists have the time, desire, and patience to do it. Ethan's a good writer, world needs more knowledgeable writers like him, to bring everyone up to speed in short order in terms of embracing science and truth instead of fake news, faux economics, propaganda, ancient dogma, etc., and if we're lucky maybe we can avoid killing ourselves and the planet ...

Aug 20, 2019
In my opinion Ethan's Einstein-worshipping approaches science from a never-to-be-admitted strongly messianic angle. His strongly messianic angle is ultimately a strategic rejection of logic that by design resonates with only a small portion of the population. It embraces virtue-signaling, that's the best thing about it.

I'm not sure exactly what to think of the idea that gravity waves "spread out over space (in roughly a sphere) as you move farther away." It seems pretty goofy if the waves are weaker seen edge-on but of course the speed of gravity should be uniform at all angles and that's maybe all he meant.

Aug 20, 2019
Gravitational-wave discovery machines in time and space

On Wednesday 14 August 2019
Gravitational-wave discovery machines
Detected ripples in time and space
Of an event that happened 900 million years ago
A black hole eating a neutron star

p.s. little did we know Gravitational-wave discovery machines discover objects that existed 900 million years ago in time and space, fore are these Gravitational-wave discovery machines, Time-Machines?

Aug 20, 2019
It seems pretty goofy if the waves are weaker seen edge-on but of course the speed of gravity should be uniform at all angles and that's maybe all he meant.
One of the differences between EM waves and GWs is polarization -- GWs have two types, h_+ and h_x (read as "h_plus" and "h_cross") and EM waves are only polarized in one direction. Since they're added in quadrature the signal's "brighter" when both are visible (edge-on in the plane of rotation only the h_+ polarization is there)... not easy to illustrate graphically or visualize in 3d, all the examples i've seen do it edge-on ...

Aug 20, 2019
TC, the simple fact is General Relativity fails exactly where Dark Matter picks up, and it's hilarious, cynical and just plain stupid to suggest one predating the other means they must be independent.

GR with DM and QM will eventually need to be replaced with a GUT/UFT/TOE but they explain pretty much everything nicely at the scales they are used in right now. MOND seems to be blatantly wrong so what is your explanation for all of our observations showing the need for DM?

Aug 20, 2019
fore are these Gravitational-wave discovery machines, Time-Machines?
Pretty cool seeing something "now" that happened long, long ago. Don't tell SEU, he hates temporal reality

Aug 20, 2019
Sure. Then you must still be in high school. GR and QM are quackery. You believe that garbage. So you are the uneducated one. Or worse, you learned a bunch of garbage that you took as gospel, That is not science.


Lol. Another uneducated crank. Show me where either have been found to be wrong when tested? You can't.

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
Pretty cool seeing something "now" that happened long, long ago. Don't tell SEU,...
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'; since if you (detector) and the event (process) you detected were located at the same place, there would be no abstract/analytical 'timing' considerations at all. Eg: if you 'see' an axeman's axe hit the tree, and then 'hear' the sound later because the two signals (light/sound) travelled at different rate towards you across a spatial distance...whereas if you WERE that AXEMAN, then YOU would see/hear your axe hit that tree practically simultaneously.

Only SPATIAL DISTANCE TRAVEL DIMENSION is involved in reality; and 'time travel dimension' is a concept/tool ONLY in OUR ABSTRACT ANALYTICAL CONSTRUCTS.

Sure, you are free to 'correct' S_E_U according to your view, but you need to take greater care not to leave yourself open to being the one needing 'correction', as in this case. Good luck mate. :)

Aug 20, 2019
It seems pretty goofy if the waves are weaker seen edge-on but of course the speed of gravity should be uniform at all angles and that's maybe all he meant.
One of the differences between EM waves and GWs is polarization -- GWs have two types, h_+ and h_x (read as "h_plus" and "h_cross") and EM waves are only polarized in one direction. Since they're added in quadrature the signal's "brighter" when both are visible (edge-on in the plane of rotation only the h_+ polarization is there)... not easy to illustrate graphically or visualize in 3d, all the examples i've seen do it edge-on ...
correction - 'when both are visible' > when both are orthogonal -- it's from the trig function in the formula, between edge-on and face-on the viewing angle is 0 rad and pi/2 rad, which gives coefficients between 0 and 1 with the trig...

Aug 20, 2019
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'
ugh, why is spacetime so difficult for some? It's just a unit, can't do any physics without it

Aug 20, 2019
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'
ugh, why is spacetime so difficult for some? It's just a unit, can't do any physics without it
....can't do "physics without it"? What a ludicrous statement, sounds like you don't even know it's definition, here:

space-time
/ˈspās ˈˌtīm/
nounPHYSICS
noun: spacetime
the concepts of time and three-dimensional space regarded as fused in a four-dimensional continuum.

.......then you get into Lorentz Contraction Transforms, try explaining that to a total novice, such as yourself.

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'; since if you (detector) and the event (process) you detected were located at the same place, there would be no abstract/analytical 'timing' considerations at all. Eg: if you 'see' an axeman's axe hit the tree, and then 'hear' the sound later because the two signals (light/sound) travelled at different rate towards you across a spatial distance...whereas if you WERE that AXEMAN, then YOU would see/hear your axe hit that tree practically simultaneously.

Only SPATIAL DISTANCE TRAVEL DIMENSION is involved in reality; and 'time travel dimension' is a concept/tool ONLY in OUR ABSTRACT ANALYTICAL CONSTRUCTS.
ugh, why is spacetime so difficult for some? It's just a unit, can't do any physics without it
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding". Hence the need for a reality-based ToE to advance us from the (currently) abstractions-based "doing physics" stage. :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.
The sad little story of the observer looking into a spaceship to see everything moving slower corresponding to how fast the ship is close to c is false. It is merely a THEORY that has never been proved, or can be.

Aug 20, 2019
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding"
only if you give me some time.

Aug 20, 2019
The sad little story of the observer looking into a spaceship to see everything moving slower corresponding to how fast the ship is close to c is false. It is merely a THEORY that has never been proved, or can be
The view's not so good from whatever rock you're living under.

Aug 20, 2019
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'
ugh, why is spacetime so difficult for some? It's just a unit, can't do any physics without it

And it's exactly like a unit of distance...

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding"
only if you give me some time.
You can have all the abstract, non-causal, analytical tools/concepts you like to help you "do physics"; as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking them to be on the same level as the causal spatial dimensions which underpin all phenomena in reality. That way lay madness...and the consequential impasse in the effort to understand and complete the ToE....which has had a century or more of "doing physics" using abstract "spacetime" concept/tool and ignoring the reality from which it was abstracted in the first place. Back to reality, mate...that's the only way forward towards the reality-based ToE....obviously, else mainstream would have had it by now if just "doing abstract physics" was sufficient. :)

ps: @Castro could not address/refute my DM point in thread...

https://phys.org/...kes.html

...can you? :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.

Please define "Duration"...
T

Aug 20, 2019
1. "GW detection Data stream of differential arm strain
Once recorded: Signals and noises are indistinguishable"
https://dcc.ligo....oise.pdf

2. "LIGO plans to monitor magnetic fields because they can affect the interferometer's signals. A magnetic field from a Schumann Resonance can affect both LIGO interferometers in a similar way as a gravitational wave. " https://dcc.ligo....aper.pdf

3."Potential electromagnetic noise sources include lightning, solar events and solar-wind driven noise, as well as RF communication. If electromagnetic noise were strong enough to affect h(t), it would be witnessed with high SNR by radio receivers and magnetometers." http://iopscience...3/134001

4. High SNR ramping critical-coherent magnetic response from North American ground magnetometer data surrounding GW150914:
https://fulguriti...www.html

Aug 20, 2019
Careful, mate, the detection/event is a function of spatial distance, not 'time'
ugh, why is spacetime so difficult for some? It's just a unit, can't do any physics without it

And it's exactly like a unit of distance...
yup, it's an interval...

Aug 20, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding"
only if you give me some time.
You can have all the abstract, non-causal, analytical tools/concepts you like to help you "do physics"; as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking them to be on the same level as the causal spatial dimensions which underpin all phenomena in reality. That way lay madness...and the consequential impasse in the effort to understand and complete the ToE....which has had a century or more of "doing physics" using abstract "spacetime" concept/tool and ignoring the reality from which it was abstracted in the first place. ...

That's funny, considering how long your own "TOE" has been in the works...

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
@S_E_U.
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.

Please define "Duration"...
Didn't he just do that in the above quote?...where he said, in part: "the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds,...". :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
@S_E_U.
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.

Please define "Duration"...
Didn't he just do that in the above quote?...where he said, in part: "the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds,...". :)

Duration of - what?, then...

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
@Protoplasmix.
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding".
only if you give me some time.
You can have all the abstract, non-causal, analytical tools/concepts you like to help you "do physics"; as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking them to be on the same level as the causal spatial dimensions which underpin all phenomena in reality. That way lay madness...and the consequential impasse in the effort to understand and complete the ToE...which has had a century or more of "doing physics" using abstract "spacetime" concept/tool and ignoring the reality from which it was abstracted in the first place.
That's funny, considering how long your own "TOE" has been in the works...
And Linde's ONE idea has been 10 years and no end in sight for his completing it. Meanwhile my SUITE of ideas comprising the reality-based ToE is already complete; and am near finalising the reality-based-axiomatic maths to model it. Where's yours? :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
@Whydening Gyre.
@S_E_U.
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.
Please define "Duration"...
Didn't he just do that in the above quote?...where he said, in part: "the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds,...". :)

Duration of - what?, then...
A CHOSEN REGULAR/REPEATING MOTION across a space/dial etc is used as the 'comparative standard' for 'timing' other motions/changes across space/process. That's why 'time' is a CIRCUITOUS abstract concept/tool for analysis only; and NOT a real, causal, physically effective 'thing/dimension' of any kind. It's subtle. Do you understand? :)

Aug 20, 2019
fore are these Gravitational-wave discovery machines, Time-Machines?
Pretty cool seeing something "now" that happened long, long ago. Don't tell SEU, he hates temporal reality

says Protoplasmix

There is nothing there to hate. The Universe is a very big place with very long distances from A to B. It is the LENGTH of the DISTANCE between 2 places that is measurable, as well as the length of the DURATION of the Event that happened millions of years ago. Mya is also the length measured of an Event from then until now.

Take a yardstick; it measures 36 inches in LENGTH. Then take a snail, put the snail on one end of the yardstick to see how long it takes for it to move IN SPACE to the other side of the yardstick. At that point, you are measuring an EVENT. As the snail moves along, you are measuring BY THE CLOCK ticking off the Seconds. That measurement is the DURATION of the EVENT. When the snail reaches the end, you see how many seconds it took for it to cross the 36

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
@Protoplasmix.
You can BOTH "do physics" AND "do reality understanding".
only if you give me some time.
You can have all the abstract, non-causal, analytical tools/concepts you like to help you "do physics"; as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking them to be on the same level as the causal spatial dimensions which underpin all phenomena in reality. That way lay madness...and the consequential impasse in the effort to understand and complete the ToE...which has had a century or more of "doing physics" using abstract "spacetime" concept/tool and ignoring the reality from which it was abstracted in the first place.
That's funny, considering how long your own "TOE" has been in the works...
And Linde's ONE idea has been 10 years and no end in sight for his completing it.

You mean VERlinde?
Meanwhile my SUITE of ideas comprising the reality-based ToE is already complete; and am near finalising the reality-based-axiomatic maths to model it. Where's yours? :)

Unlike you, I never claimed to be producing one...:-)
And, technically, it ain't complete until those "axiomatics" are "finalized"...

Aug 20, 2019
If you insist that 'time' exists, then continue on with your 'religion of temporal devotion'. Continue to make certain that science keeps 'time' and space together. Don't even bother to consult Clocks, since Clocks are only mechanical objects. :)

Aug 20, 2019
A CHOSEN REGULAR/REPEATING MOTION across a space/dial etc is used as the 'comparative standard' for 'timing' other motions/changes across space/process. That's why 'time' is a CIRCUITOUS abstract concept/tool for analysis only; and NOT a real, causal, physically effective 'thing/dimension' of any kind. It's subtle. Do you understand? :)

Don't understand YOUR version (or SEU's) of it...
It's a descriptive word for measured amount of motion of an arbitrary number of sequential "event" reference frames. If you deny the word/concept "time", you deny duration and motion. Which is about as insane as denying your are human...
I don't see "time" as another dimension. I only see it as a property of any of the first three.
Which, in and of themselves, are also only a product of thought, as well...

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
And Linde's ONE idea has been 10 years and no end in sight for his completing it.
You mean VERlinde?
Yes, thanks. It was a typo (I was also thinking of Linde's even-older multiverse/eternal inflation idea at the time, and opted to go with Verlinde's emergent gravity example but typed Linde instead).
Meanwhile my SUITE of ideas comprising the reality-based ToE is already complete; and am near finalising the reality-based-axiomatic maths to model it. Where's yours? :)
Unlike you, I never claimed to be producing one...:-)
The main point was: the long time taken to complete great works is neither a liability nor a cause for ridicule (like you attempted), @Whyde. The other point was: if just "doing abstract physics" was all that is required, then a century or more of "doing abstract physics" should have produced the ToE. Yes?
it ain't complete until those "axiomatics" are "finalized"...
Conceptually complete; only maths to finalise. :)

Aug 20, 2019
Take a yardstick; it measures 36 inches in LENGTH. Then take a snail, put the snail on one end of the yardstick to see how long it takes for it to move IN SPACE to the other side of the yardstick. At that point, you are measuring an EVENT. As the snail moves along, you are measuring BY THE CLOCK ticking off the Seconds. That measurement is the DURATION of the EVENT.

You could also just count the number of torso undulations it took for that snail to travel that distance...
When the snail reaches the end, you see how many seconds it took for it to cross the 36

Forget seconds or inches. consider how many google trillions of things that happened in this universe during the "time" it took to travel those 3 feet.
Oh - and funny thing is, that snail will just keep on going for while until it dies (when it's own internal "clock" shuts down)...

Aug 20, 2019
The main point was: the long time taken to complete great works is neither a liability nor a cause for ridicule (like you attempted), @Whyde.

Wasn't ridicule. Was observation.
The other point was: if just "doing abstract physics" was all that is required, then a century or more of "doing abstract physics" should have produced the ToE. Yes?

Why are you calling them "abstract"? It's numbers representing physical events.
it ain't complete until those "axiomatics" are "finalized"...
Conceptually complete; only maths to finalise. :)

Then it ain't complete...

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
A CHOSEN REGULAR/REPEATING MOTION across a space/dial etc is used as the 'comparative standard' for 'timing' other motions/changes across space/process. That's why 'time' is a CIRCUITOUS abstract concept/tool for analysis only; and NOT a real, causal, physically effective 'thing/dimension' of any kind. It's subtle. Do you understand? :)

Don't understand YOUR version (or SEU's) of it...
It's a descriptive word for measured amount of motion of an arbitrary number of sequential "event" reference frames. If you deny the word/concept "time", you deny duration and motion. Which is about as insane as denying your are human...
I don't see "time" as another dimension. I only see it as a property of any of the first three.
Which, in and of themselves, are also only a product of thought, as well...
All well and good. So you acknowledge that 'time' is NOT a causal dimension/thing...as some fans of the use of "spacetime" abstraction have claimed? Great; we agree. Cheers. :)

Aug 20, 2019
I don't see "time" as another dimension. I only see it as a property of any of the first three.
Which, in and of themselves, are also only a product of thought, as well...
All well and good. So you acknowledge that 'time' is NOT a causal dimension/thing...as some fans of the use of "spacetime" abstraction have claimed? Great; we agree. Cheers. :)

Oh, but we don't...
"Time", combined with other properties of the Universe (along with the LACK of it occasionally) causes a lot of things to occur. You could say the same thing about "space", too...
The Universe is one GIANT "clock" with every mechanism in it, ticking away at their own periodicity and "duration/speed" ...

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
The main point was: the long time taken to complete great works is neither a liability nor a cause for ridicule (like you attempted), @Whyde.
Wasn't ridicule. Was observation.
So phrasing of your remark thusly...
That's funny, considering how long your own "TOE" has been in the works
...wasn't meant to ridicule? And you agree that time taken to complete a ToE is not a cause for ridicule? That's good to know. :)
The other point was: if just "doing abstract physics" was all that is required, then a century or more of "doing abstract physics" should have produced the ToE. Yes?
Why are you calling them "abstract"? It's numbers representing physical events.
Yes, abstract analytical construct using numbers/calculations etc to "represent" physical quantities/relationships. The abstract "map" is not the reality "territory". :)
Conceptually complete; only maths to finalise. :)
Then it ain't complete...
Way more so than mainstream effort so far. :)

Aug 20, 2019
1. "GW detection Data stream of differential arm strain
Once recorded: Signals and noises are indistinguishable"
https://dcc.ligo....oise.pdf

2. "LIGO plans to monitor magnetic fields because they can affect the interferometer's signals. A magnetic field from a Schumann Resonance can affect both LIGO interferometers in a similar way as a gravitational wave. " https://dcc.ligo....aper.pdf

3."Potential electromagnetic noise sources include lightning, solar events and solar-wind driven noise, as well as RF communication. If electromagnetic noise were strong enough to affect h(t), it would be witnessed with high SNR by radio receivers and magnetometers." http://iopscience...3/134001

4. High SNR ramping critical-coherent magnetic response from North American ground magnetometer data surrounding GW150914:
https://fulguriti...www.html

Shhhh! The gravity acolytes don't want to hear that their beliefs are based on conjecture.


Aug 20, 2019
Watch globally-synchronized cloud-ground lightning burst response to magnetospheric mode around events, a pattern found for every single LIGO-Virgo event window (N=34, plus N=48 currently rejected triggers for all three runs), where the events are crossovers:
S190814bv, 21:11:18 UTC: https://photos.ap...iYc3jh17
S190816i, 13:05:10 UTC: https://photos.ap...Nvn3j1q7
LIGO retracted the trigger S190816i https://gracedb.l...6i/view/ as terrestrial, which had been calculated to be another NS-BH with ALMOST EXACT SAME LUMINOSITY DISTANCE as S190814bv https://gracedb.l...bv/view/ (267 ± 52 Mpc for S190814bv [100% 'mass gap' revised ~12.75 hrs. later to >99% NSBH] and 261 ± 100 Mpc for retracted trigger S190816i, 83% NS-BH, 17% terrestrial). For convenience, here are screenshots from the LVC database: https://twitter.c...23273216

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
All well and good. So you acknowledge that 'time' is NOT a causal dimension/thing...as some fans of the use of "spacetime" abstraction have claimed? Great; we agree. Cheers. :)
"Time", combined with other properties of the Universe (along with the LACK of it occasionally) causes a lot of things to occur. You could say the same thing about "space", too...The Universe is one GIANT "clock" with every mechanism in it, ticking away at their own periodicity and "duration/speed"...
You have put the cart before the horse, mate, in more ways than one. Consider: space exists and you can move/rotate in it and directly feel the physically real effects on your arms as you rotate. At no stage is "time" a requirement for that motion/effect to manifest; as you tacitly confirm by your own observation re the differing rates/kinds of motion/process occurring throughout the universal space from which we DERIVE (abstract) a "time"/"timing" concept/tool for comparative analysis. :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
@S_E_U.
@Protoplasmic
....because obviously the 'time' element that is supposedly in Spacetime is false and nonexistent. Physics is fine without the 'time' phantom inclusion when the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds, minutes and Hours, but most often just Seconds.

Please define "Duration"...
Didn't he just do that in the above quote?...where he said, in part: "the only other reference besides Space is to the Duration of each Increment of a Clock that are expressed as Seconds,...". :)

Duration of - what?, then...
says Whyde

Dumb question, that. I'm surprised that you feign complete ignorance of the meaning of 'Duration'.
Why, it could be mean something as gross as how long you take to defecate and wipe your arse. Or how long it takes you to make love to your wife or girlfriend. Or how long you can sit through a bad movie. Or...or....or....

Aug 20, 2019
I don't see "time" as another dimension. I only see it as a property of any of the first three.
Which, in and of themselves, are also only a product of thought, as well...
All well and good. So you acknowledge that 'time' is NOT a causal dimension/thing...as some fans of the use of "spacetime" abstraction have claimed? Great; we agree. Cheers. :)

Oh, but we don't...
"Time", combined with other properties of the Universe (along with the LACK of it occasionally) causes a lot of things to occur. You could say the same thing about "space", too...
The Universe is one GIANT "clock" with every mechanism in it, ticking away at their own periodicity and "duration/speed" ...
says Whyde

THAT is what I told YOU and to which you decided had to be correct. I also told you that every planet has its own clockwork that is different from Earth's 24 hour cycle of sunrise to sunrise. That if you are on Jupiter, your clock would count a 10 hour cycle, which you agreed.

Aug 20, 2019
LIGO-Virgo are exploiting bandwagon mentality and cultural over-reliance on computation/overspecialization:

GW150914 signal and foreground analysis:
https://fulguriti...ere.html

GW150914 lags and eigenmodes from coherent foreground mode, T-storm spatial paramters and detector network geometry relative to attenuation at coordinate-bound continental horizon:
https://fulguriti...ost.html

Geomagnetic ground response in North America for GW150914
https://fulguriti...www.html

CG lightning response surrounding LIGO-Virgo triggers:
https://fulguriti...ung.html

GW170817
https://fulguriti...bar.html

GW170817A:
https://fulguriti...993.html

false trigger rate:
https://fulguriti...for.html

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde
Perhaps you have forgotten that I referred to the "Clock of the Universe" or Universal Clock where all bodies in the Universe ARE THEIR OWN CLOCK and it is the duration/length of each one's sunrise to sunrise cycle that is its literal timepiece WITHOUT the Minkowski spacetime. This is because the Universe and all that are in it are MECHANICAL. ALL MECHANISMS, nothing but.

Aug 20, 2019
@T_ Gutierrez;

Let us know when you've written it up. In a peer-reviewed journal.

Aug 20, 2019
LIGO relaxed discovery criteria to produce the N=4 (N=5 including LVT151012) O2 catalogue to include events that have a false alarm rate of slightly over 1 event every 30 days., which increased putative LIGO-Virgo signals from N=6[7] to N=11. Magnetospheric sawtooth events [MSEs], which are substorm-like intervals in which quasiperiodic intermittent coupling between ground and solar wind directly drives dipolarization of ground-ionosphere through magnetospheric mode, are accompanied by anomalous particle acceleration, burst-synchronized global CG lightning, and atmospheric ion outflow with plasmoid ejection from Earth's magnetosphere into space. MSEs occur on average approx.. once per 33 days (~11 MSEs/yr; LIGO O1-O2 N=11 total events for almost exactly 1 yr. accumulated quality data for network duty cycle).
https://arxiv.org...2907.pdf

Aug 20, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.
@T_ Gutierrez; Let us know when you've written it up. In a peer-reviewed journal.
Seriously, @Castro? *sighs*...*shakes head*. :)

Aug 20, 2019
LOL We are ALL waiting for Gastro to show how smart he is by writing some science, having it peer reviewed and published, and telling us all about it here in physorg to impress us all with his genius.
Nevah gonna hoppen.

Aug 20, 2019
@T_ Gutierrez; Castrogiovanni

Let us know when you've written it up. In a peer-reviewed journal.


Don't worry, you'll know, and S190814bv is not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Double standards?
LIGO is the only experimental project by which a false consensus of Wikipedia editors has protected prompt reports of non-peer-reviewed GW trigger claims from various primary source/original research prohibitions, even though LIGO has a dedicated website for these reports. LIGO is committing an epistemological coup without having sufficient insight to recognize this, which stems from Harry Collins subjectivist social philosophy, promulgating a fundamental-institutional attack on falsificationism and empricism.

Aug 20, 2019
Take a yardstick; it measures 36 inches in LENGTH. Then take a snail, put the snail on one end of the yardstick to see how long it takes for it to move IN SPACE to the other side of the yardstick. At that point, you are measuring an EVENT. As the snail moves along, you are measuring BY THE CLOCK ticking off the Seconds. That measurement is the DURATION of the EVENT.

You could also just count the number of torso undulations it took for that snail to travel that distance...
When the snail reaches the end, you see how many seconds it took for it to cross the 36

Forget seconds or inches. consider how many google trillions of things that happened in this universe during the "time" it took to travel those 3 feet.
Oh - and funny thing is, that snail will just keep on going for while until it dies (when it's own internal "clock" shuts down)...
says Whyde

The "trillions of things that happened" are ALL SEPARATE INCIDENTS/EVENTS/ACTIONS. They're all measurable

Aug 20, 2019
LIGO is the only experimental project by which a false consensus of Wikipedia editors has protected prompt reports of non-peer-reviewed GW trigger claims
......and they are almost all ANONYMOUS EDITORS, how convenient when it may become necessary for RETRACTION at a later date, there's no one who can be blamed for implementation of spurious data because there are no names connected to identifying the source.

Aug 20, 2019
@T_ Gutierrez; Castrogiovanni

Let us know when you've written it up. In a peer-reviewed journal.


Don't worry, you'll know, and S190814bv is not published in a peer-reviewed journal. Double standards?
LIGO is the only experimental project by which a false consensus of Wikipedia editors has protected prompt reports of non-peer-reviewed GW trigger claims from various primary source/original research prohibitions, even though LIGO has a dedicated website for these reports. LIGO is committing an epistemological coup without having sufficient insight to recognize this, which stems from Harry Collins subjectivist social philosophy, promulgating a fundamental-institutional attack on falsificationism and empricism.


Lol. Another nutter!

Aug 20, 2019
......and they are almost all ANONYMOUS EDITORS, how convenient when it may become necessary for RETRACTION at a later date, there's no one who can be blamed for implementation of spurious data because there are no names connected to identifying the source.


Lies. As usual. Go sweep some floors, janitor boy. If the trigger is retracted it is plainly shown in the data. If it isn't, then you'll just have to wait some considerable time for it to be written up. The idea of immediate notification is so that interested parties can use the data to try to look for associated signals. Such as EM or neutrinos. Not rocket science. And there is most definitely a name on the circulars;

https://gcn.gsfc....4bv.gcn3

FROM: David Cook at IPAC/Caltech


Caught lying again, D-K boy. You need to stop.

Aug 20, 2019
@T_Gutierrez

I googled that designation and got these links. The link from NASA seems to have some doubt as to the objective's identity. That it may not be astrophysical.

https://gcn.gsfc....333.gcn3

and 2 more
https://www.cnet....on-star/

https://www.scien...ron-star

Aug 20, 2019
The tide is turning and the absurdities mount. Stamp collecting isn't astrophysics. These jackasses are all one-trick ponies: https://www.phys....limenko/

Aug 20, 2019
The tide is turning and the absurdities mount. Stamp collecting isn't astrophysics.


Lol. More word salad from the unqualified!

Aug 20, 2019
@T_Gutierrez

I googled that designation and got these links. The link from NASA seems to have some doubt as to the objective's identity. That it may not be astrophysical.


Oh dear. Comprehension not your strong point, is it? Sigh. The circular says it is most definitely likely to be astrophysical. How anybody could read that and come to a different conclusion, is beyond me!

Aug 20, 2019
@T_Gutierrez

I googled that designation and got these links. The link from NASA seems to have some doubt as to the objective's identity. That it may not be astrophysical.


Oh dear. Comprehension not your strong point, is it? Sigh. The circular says it is most definitely likely to be astrophysical. How anybody could read that and come to a different conclusion, is beyond me!
......coming from an Anthropologist who got his degree in 1981 from the University of Auckland, NZ.

Hey mister Anthropologist, I have a huge background in designing electronic circuitry & designed the entirety of our gamma radiation spectroscopy lab. I know the intricacies that go into signal processing & nulling background effects for noise.......you on the other hand couldn't identify a triac from a current transformer.

Aug 20, 2019
@T_Gutierrez

I googled that designation and got these links. The link from NASA seems to have some doubt as to the objective's identity. That it may not be astrophysical.


Oh dear. Comprehension not your strong point, is it? Sigh. The circular says it is most definitely likely to be astrophysical. How anybody could read that and come to a different conclusion, is beyond me!
says Gastritis

Perhaps you failed to comprehend the latter part, where it says:

"The above mentioned probabilities are the preferred classification
results that supersede the ones stated in GCN 25324. The probability
of non-astrophysical origin and the false alarm rate are not being
updated at this time."

meaning that there may be a later update on further probabilities...but not at this time.

Aug 20, 2019
The "trillions of things that happened" are ALL SEPARATE INCIDENTS/EVENTS/ACTIONS. They're all measurable

As is the "duration" of each of those events...

Aug 20, 2019
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Aug 20, 2019
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Hmmm.... kinda sounds like "Space", don't it...
Oh - what is that made of, again?

Aug 20, 2019
Regarding an alleged Black Hole consuming an alleged Black Hole, or consuming a Neutron Star. If you have ever looked into a powerful microscope and watched an Amoeba surrounding a bacterium with its membrane and consuming it, what would that make you think of?

Aug 20, 2019
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Hmmm.... kinda sounds like "Space", don't it...
Oh - what is that made of, again?


You must be referring to the Plasma which it has been decided that Space is made of. Separate, of course, of all the Matter/Energy that resides in Space aka Plasma Universe.

Aug 20, 2019
Well, while you mull over that, Precious has to go out and poop on Schneib's head. It's just a small mound that Precious favours which nobody goes near. All the other dogs have their favourite spots too.

Aug 20, 2019
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Hmmm.... kinda sounds like "Space", don't it...
Oh - what is that made of, again?


You must be referring to the Plasma which it has been decided that Space is made of. Separate, of course, of all the Matter/Energy that resides in Space aka Plasma Universe.
You, know, of course, I am not referring to that.
I wanna hear what the medium of SPACE (that CONTAINS all that energy and matter) is made of.

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Hmmm.... kinda sounds like "Space", don't it...
Oh - what is that made of, again?
You can experience space directly by spinning in situ and feeling the inertial effect on the material of your arms causing them to extend as you spin. NO matter what you do, you can NOT experience "time" directly...only abstractly by reference to a standard motion system for measuring the duration of a process/motion in space that you are interested in observing/comparing via an abstract analytical construct using that 'derived' "time" to examine the behaviour of that motion/process during the same interval of duration which you used as the 'standard' clock for your measurement/comparison. You should stop being silly; and actually think about which is real physically effective causal thing/dimension (space) and which is NOT ("time" abstraction). :)

Aug 20, 2019
ps: @Whyde. Gotta go. Back in a couple of days to see what transpired meanwhile. Bye. :)

Aug 20, 2019
@Whyde.
Of course. And all Measurable with clocks, Atomic Clocks, human evaluation processes, memory, and by recording with instruments.

Hmmm.... kinda sounds like "Space", don't it...
Oh - what is that made of, again?
You can experience space directly by spinning in situ and feeling the inertial effect on the material of your arms causing them to extend as you spin. NO matter what you do, you can NOT experience "time" directly...

I experience time by noting that the faster I spin (speed - a measure of time) the more my arms will extend.

You should stop being silly; and actually think about which is real physically effective causal thing/dimension (space) and which is NOT ("time" abstraction). :)

"Silly" is saying that there is no such thing as "time". (Of which your duration is a measure)
"Space" is not the causal thing The stuff IN it is...
You can't see, touch or manipulate space. Only the stuff IN it...
YOU think about it...

Aug 21, 2019
TC, the simple fact is General Relativity fails exactly where Dark Matter picks up, and it's hilarious, cynical and just plain stupid to suggest one predating the other means they must be independent.

GR with DM and QM will eventually need to be replaced with a GUT/UFT/TOE but they explain pretty much everything nicely at the scales they are used in right now. MOND seems to be blatantly wrong so what is your explanation for all of our observations showing the need for DM?

The ether.

Aug 21, 2019
TC, the simple fact is General Relativity fails exactly where Dark Matter picks up, and it's hilarious, cynical and just plain stupid to suggest one predating the other means they must be independent.

GR with DM and QM will eventually need to be replaced with a GUT/UFT/TOE but they explain pretty much everything nicely at the scales they are used in right now. MOND seems to be blatantly wrong so what is your explanation for all of our observations showing the need for DM?

The ether.

My take? Miscalculation...

Aug 21, 2019
Einstein said spacetime is the aether.

Aug 21, 2019
Gold Fever
Da Schneib> Einstein said spacetime is the Aether.

Saint Mary's College of California
Einstein is generally credited with eliminating the need for the Aether
However
As documented in the book "Einstein and the Ether"
From 1916 until his death he believed in the Aether in some form
In these years
He used the terms "relativistic ether"
And "physical space"
To convey this idea
In 1934 he wrote "Physical space and the ether are different terms for the same thing
Fields are physical states of space

All scientist dabble in alchemy
The lure of alchemist's gold is to strong
Foreth, Da Schneib
Dear old Albert – believed in this Alchemy of Aether

Foreth Da Schneib, this Spirit World is this Aether is this Space is this Vacuum

Relativistic-ether in Albert's book Einstein and the Ether
For if this is true
Dear old Albert has forged chains of his own making
As No One Can Free Albert Einstein from the shackles of the Spirit World

For it is a world of Albert's own making

Aug 21, 2019
Da Schneib

This Aether
Are these protons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons and gravity occupying our vacuum

Simply space is our vacuous vacuum
Where
This Aether is matter - gravity - photons occupying our vacuum
Foreth, Da Schneib
Aether is simply the combination of Matter, Gravity and Photons occupying our Vacuum

p.s. in other words Da Schneib, our universe, our space, our vacuum is not Aether

Aug 21, 2019
AETHER - The Definition
Space is our vacuous vacuum
where
This Aether is matter - gravity - photons occupying our vacuum
for
Our universe, our space, our vacuum is not Aether

Aug 21, 2019
What? Do bots deliberately clog discursive space? Science isn't about wish fulfillment. It is about pain and suffering. It does not substitute critical reflection. It is not a teleological apex from a more primitive form of inquiry.

Einstein would piss on your graves. Dirac would lap it up.

"The aether" is an undifferentiated mess of contradictory closures on infinite regresses that are reified by 19th c. materialists, not a convenience that permits comprehension of SR. The use of the term by Einstein after his turn toward relativistic concepts (which he did not entirely create, as you know) was not an affirmation of the luminiferous aether, but a synonym for the QM vacuum. It's not aether, it's a geometric covariant correlation that is fruitful: a symmetry of causation, a self-optimal energy conservation scheme. The universe propagates through itself as itself.

Aug 21, 2019
Is granville583762 a clutter-bot?

Aug 21, 2019
You've nailed it, T_ Gutierrez
"The aether" is an undifferentiated mess of contradictory closures on infinite regresses that are reified by 19th c. materialists, not a convenience that permits comprehension of SR. The use of the term by Einstein after his turn toward relativistic concepts (which he did not entirely create, as you know) was not an affirmation of the luminiferous aether, but a synonym for the QM vacuum. It's not aether, it's a geometric covariant correlation that is fruitful: a symmetry of causation, a self-optimal energy conservation scheme. The universe propagates through itself as itself.

This amassed multiplicity of terms is this Aetherous's downfall

Aug 21, 2019
T_ Gutierrez
T_ Gutierrez> Is granville583762 a clutter-bot?

Do you describe a clutter-bot
As defining
1, space as vacuum
2, Aether as matter and energy, occupying this vacuum
Foreth, T_ Gutierrez
Two itemisations hardly warrants the descriptive - clutter-bot

Aug 21, 2019
T_ Gutierrez, this is this Mindset

This mindset
Is specifying
This Aether as our vacuum
For as everyone applies physical attributes to this Aether
This reality
Our vacuum has no physical attributes
So is not this Aether
Only protons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons and gravity have physical attributes
Which is why
Our vacuum has no physical attributes of its own
Where only
Protons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons and gravity
Having physical attributes, occupy our vacuum as this Aether

For T_ Gutierrez, when one says gravity waves are the distortion of space
These are, as you should be well aware, generalisations of the English language - common use terms
When the reality, T_ Gutierrez
Gravity waves are not distortion of our vacuum

Aug 21, 2019
"The aether" is an undifferentiated mess of contradictory closures on infinite regresses that are reified by 19th c. materialists, not a convenience that permits comprehension of SR.
.......I'm presuming here you are referring to the consensus belief of that century when LIGHT was presumed to be PARTICLES for which the speed was dependent on the strength of the gravity field through which those PARTICLES were moving, this as opposed to a WAVE FUNCTION for which it's speed is undeterred by gravity?

The use of the term by Einstein after his turn toward relativistic concepts (which he did not entirely create, as you know) was not an affirmation of the luminiferous aether, but a synonym for the QM vacuum. It's not aether
......and it's unfortunate Einstein didn't do better explaining this.

The universe propagates through itself as itself.
........explain this. Do you mean it is not CO-DEPENDENT for it's existence on some other sustaining entity? Self-supporting?

Aug 21, 2019
This Aetherous Anomaly

Is a last ditch effort
To create out of our vacuum
Out of these shackles
These shackles of this Spirit World that bind Albert Einstein to these Spirits of this Spirit World
Foreth
It is observed sound waves travelling on these molecules of air
Even as these molecules of air occupy our vacuum
This State of Mind
Is difficult to break this feeling, electromagnetic waves require a medium called Aether to propagate

And there was light
Then this Aether was created

There is no other ethereal Aetherous substance that stands alone
That stands alone from our protons, electrons, neutrons, neutrinos, photons and gravity
Fore all these six itemisations
As a collective, are the only substances in our vacuum, that can be described as this Aether

Everything that exists
In our universe, our space, our vacuum are contained within each individual star

Tis Time, Benni
To put this conventional view of this Aether back where it belongs – In the nether regions of our minds

Aug 21, 2019

Duration of - what?, then...
says Whyde

Dumb question, that. I'm surprised that you feign complete ignorance of the meaning of
'Duration'.


duration
[d(y)o͝orˈāSH(ə)n]
NOUN
the time during which something continues.
Why, it could be mean something as gross as how long you take to defecate and wipe your arse. Or how long it takes you to make love to your wife or girlfriend. Or how long you can sit through a bad movie. Or...or....or....

Or it could be the extended duration of a bloviating commentator...

duration
[d(y)o͝orˈāSH(ə)n]

NOUN
the time during which something continues.

Aug 21, 2019
...Plasma Universe.


lol

Aug 21, 2019
Calling out a bad experiment isn't a claim for alternative theory. GR is valid, but LIGO utilizes an all-Bayesian methodology, applying computer-generated templates to signals that are indistinguishable from any other log-normal transient, and even Airy cavity solitons/separatrix signals generated by self-coupled system irregularities. Foreground during all LIGO triggers is suitable to produce these known terrestrial false triggers, while Bayesian probability commits cumulative false positive error.

Plasma cosmology has nothing to do with physics. It is an argumentative fetish not unlike LIGO, laughably dependent on that which it denies. Look deeper. We've been hoodwinked by half-ass method and propaganda-like presentation.

Aug 21, 2019
LIGO is a test for our ability to remain objective. Maintain your skepticism: what seems to be deficient falls apart upon even a cursory study of the pattern of its progress. NGC 4993 is no longer being observed after its luminosity enhancement post-GW170817 defied all models and has now led to directly-contradictory reports on the rate of the attenuation of X-ray emission. Distance error of 50% of 41 Mpc understated - X-ray variable stars fit the vague models. The last non-radio observations of Chandra and Hubble were promptly ended at almost exactly a year after the reported LIGO transient, and both satellites shut down a few weeks apart directly after the rather unsettling news hit home. Why aren't we demanding further observation? Ongoing error and foreground analysis:
GW170817 signal and foreground
https://fulguriti...bar.html
AT2017gfo/GRB170817A/NGC 4993
https://fulguriti...993.html

Aug 21, 2019
The language of the Elves
duration
[d(y)o͝orˈāSH(ə)n]
NOUN
the time during which something continues.

d(y)o͝orˈāSH(ə)n - into mythology these elfish words doth go
As though from Tolkien's Elfish languages


Aug 21, 2019
The conspiracy of T_ Gutierrez in time and space

LIGO is a test for our ability to remain objective
Maintain our scepticism
NGC 4993 is no longer being observed
After its luminosity enhancement post-GW170817 defied all models
Has now led to directly-contradictory reports
On the rate of the attenuation of X-ray emission
Distance error of 50% of 41 Mpc understated
X-ray variable stars fit the vague models
The last non-radio observations of Chandra and Hubble
Were promptly ended at almost exactly a year after the reported LIGO transient
Both satellites shut down a few weeks apart
Directly after the rather unsettling news hit home

For how did we miss this conspiracy right here under our noses
We must be losing our grip!

Aug 21, 2019
TC, the simple fact is General Relativity fails exactly where Dark Matter picks up, and it's hilarious, cynical and just plain stupid to suggest one predating the other means they must be independent.
Thanks for ignoring me in the future, clown.

Don't question the god of Physics, Einstein. "The theory{GR}, wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved." N Tesla

Aug 21, 2019
LIGO is a test for our ability to remain objective. Maintain your skepticism: what seems to be deficient falls apart upon even a cursory study of the pattern of its progress. NGC 4993 is no longer being observed after its luminosity enhancement post-GW170817 defied all models and has now led to directly-contradictory reports on the rate of the attenuation of X-ray emission. Distance error of 50% of 41 Mpc understated - X-ray variable stars fit the vague models. The last non-radio observations of Chandra and Hubble were promptly ended at almost exactly a year after the reported LIGO transient, and both satellites shut down a few weeks apart directly after the rather unsettling news hit home. Why aren't we demanding further observation? Ongoing error and foreground analysis:
https://fulguriti...bar.html
......I guess we'll just need to be observant & show patience to see where YOU go with your Comments here & blog elsewhere.

Aug 21, 2019
@Gorgar

You know Tesla is dead right?

Aug 21, 2019
@Whyde.

Good morning (here), mate. Had a spare hour before going out for the day, so I came in to see how you responded to mine of yesterday:
You can experience space directly by spinning in situ and feeling the inertial effect on the material of your arms causing them to extend as you spin. NO matter what you do, you can NOT experience "time" directly
I experience time by noting that the faster I spin (speed - a measure of time) the more my arms will extend.
But the motion is the fundamental factor; the abstracted/derived 'time' value is a consequence/function of motion, whatever that rate of motion may be.
You should stop being silly; and actually think about which is real physically effective causal thing/dimension (space) and which is NOT ("time" abstraction). :)
"Space" is not the causal thing The stuff IN it is
There can be NO "nothing"; ergo, "Space" MUST BE the original fundamental physically effective "something" BY which EVERYTHING manifests. :)

Aug 21, 2019
LIGO is a test for our ability to remain objective. Maintain your skepticism: what seems to be deficient falls apart upon even a cursory study of the pattern of its progress. NGC 4993 is no longer being observed after its luminosity enhancement post-GW170817 defied all models and has now led to directly-contradictory reports on the rate of the attenuation of X-ray emission. Why aren't we demanding further observation?
https://fulguriti...bar.html
......I guess we'll just need to be observant & show patience to see where YOU go with your Comments here & blog elsewhere.


Control reports and analysis of LIGO are ongoing at many scales. Recent critical papers:

1. Noise residuals for GW150914 using maximum likelihood and numerical relativity templates https://arxiv.org...03.02401

2. [Marojuet al. 2019] Looking for ancillary signals around GW150914
https://arxiv.org...2823.pdf

Aug 21, 2019
A CHOSEN REGULAR/REPEATING MOTION across a space/dial etc is used as the 'comparative standard' for 'timing' other motions/changes across space/process. That's why 'time' is a CIRCUITOUS abstract concept/tool for analysis only; and NOT a real, causal, physically effective 'thing/dimension' of any kind. It's subtle. Do you understand? :)

Don't understand YOUR version (or SEU's) of it...
It's a descriptive word for measured amount of motion of an arbitrary number of sequential "event" reference frames. If you deny the word/concept "time", you deny duration and motion. Which is about as insane as denying your are human...
I don't see "time" as another dimension. I only see it as a property of any of the first three.
Which, in and of themselves, are also only a product of thought, as well...
says Whyde

Perhaps YOU don't see 'time' as a dimension, but scientists do include 'time' as a dimension in their math equations/formulas just as Einstein and Minkowski did.

Aug 21, 2019
AETHER - The Definition
Space is our vacuous vacuum
where
This Aether is matter - gravity - photons occupying our vacuum
for
Our universe, our space, our vacuum is not Aether
Let us take a little Time and ponder the mysteries of the cosmos

"Obsessive-compulsive rhyming disorder is a psychiatric disorder, like that of a obsessive hoarder, most often found north of the US-Mexico border. Known in short form as OCRD as well as by those with ADD, it is characterized by distressing, intrusive thoughts that may leave one's stomach tied up in knots. Sufferers neutralize these obsessions by creating lyrical successions that, at least in part, resemble a rhyme or poem of the heart..."

...parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme...

Aug 21, 2019
@Gorgar

You know Tesla is dead right?

The quote from the mid-'30's is just as relevant today as it was then.

Aug 21, 2019
"It's a descriptive word for measured amount of motion of an arbitrary number of sequential "event" reference frames. If you deny the word/concept "time", you deny duration and motion. Which is about as insane as denying your are human..."says Whyde

And as I have said often, 'time' is ONLY a CONCEPT that is produced by the human mind/imagination. That YOU don't SEE 'time' as another dimension means that you are going further away from the 'status quo' of present and past scientific belief that 'time' is a dimension in addition to the other 3 spatial dimensions.

The word 'time' itself is non-descriptive of its real intended value, but only as a word to be used in implying that it is more than a mere CONCEPT, with qualities far above that which is real.

In science, the word 'time' has been hijacked to imply that it has dimensional qualities that must be reckoned as a partner of Space, and without which nothing could exist. It is a false narrative that has come from scientists.

Aug 21, 2019
In science, the word 'time' has been hijacked to imply that it has dimensional qualities that must be reckoned as a partner of Space, and without which nothing could exist. It is a false narrative that has come from scientists.
.......I have often wondered WHY scientists have done this. It has to be WILLFUL but why?

Is it their human spirit that drives them to find something with mystical qualities to it? And in the early 20th Century it was TIME around which they built so much mysticism?

These days it's more about Dark Energy than Time it seems. I guess by giving mystical qualities to an issue the greater the likelihood people will believe it.


Aug 21, 2019
In science, the word 'time' has been hijacked to imply that it has dimensional qualities that must be reckoned as a partner of Space, and without which nothing could exist. It is a false narrative that has come from scientists.
....I have often wondered WHY scientists have done this. It has to be WILLFUL but why?

"Without time as a real property of the universe, the Second Law [of thermodynamics] becomes meaningless." -- see Does Time Really Exist?

Aug 21, 2019
...parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme...
Human mind's a wondrous thing ain't it? How much of psychology do you reckon is still pseudoscience?

Aug 22, 2019
This egg box in time and space

SEU, after musing over this egg box in the silkscreen department
As of the end of the first week
We were all getting into cutting out templates on A1 tracing paper for silk-screening

SEU, you are experiencing this same effect
You're getting into this subject called time
Now you're seeing these inconsistencies
These pitfalls, as common usage of terms has befuddled our minds
That now we are falling foul of a common ailment, old dogs can't learn new tricks
We are in danger of becoming old fogies, running down the garden path, shouting at anyone passing the gate, who contradicts this non entity called time
So keep up this timely good work

Aug 22, 2019
We're detecting gravitational waves and confirming the sources on a yearly basis.

Get over it.

Aug 22, 2019
We're detecting gravitational waves and confirming the sources on a yearly basis.

Get over it.


Who is this "we"?
You're not doing anything but affirming your beliefs. The foreground tells a different story. Read what happened just a few hours ago:
https://twitter.c...19961856
https://twitter.c...32666368

LIGO is a sham and they know it.

Aug 22, 2019
LIGO will be the great test of naive strong anthropic Bayesianism, itself an epistemological-methodological response to a perceived crisis of replication.

Aug 22, 2019
We the human race. Which you seem to be insisting you're not part of.

Aug 22, 2019
For the moment, since you also appear to be innumerate, not sure why you're bloviating about statistics when you don't understand them.

Aug 22, 2019
For the moment, since you also appear to be innumerate, not sure why you're bloviating about statistics when you don't understand them.


And you do in this context? Merely by not making distinctions as to how experimental method may employ statistical techniques isn't promising for you. Bayesian probability tends toward non-rejection of a true null hypothesis, which is unsuitable for establishing initial research from generic empirical signals (log-normal chirps). Statistics are meaningless when prior distributions are pure confidence that has been constrained to be circularly-dependent on updated assumptions given that LIGO maintains that there is no unexplained noise (which is far from true). The alphanumeric trigger codes (e.g. S190814bv) have suffixes that indicate the order of arrival for template-fitting triggers. For Aug. 14, 2019, S190814 is the 74th trigger. Only updated threshold for nonstationary "noise" coincident w/signal given dependent SNR excludes signals.

Aug 22, 2019
We the human race. Which you seem to be insisting you're not part of.

Da Schneib
1 hour ago
For the moment, since you also appear to be innumerate, not sure why you're bloviating about statistics when you don't understand them.


What is it you're psycho-babbling about this time?

You, a retired dinosaur old technology computer programmer, but you, along with Castro, have no rebuttal except to embark on yet ANOTHER name calling rant because another Pop-Cosmology fantasy is showing all the earmarks of being just that, a FANTASY.


Aug 22, 2019
For the moment, since you also appear to be innumerate, not sure why you're bloviating about statistics when you don't understand them.


Da Schneib, any claim I make involves robust signal processing and the production of statistical functions for quantitative analysis. By all means poison the well, but please learn what innumerate means. Mathematics and coding are not synonymous:

GW150914 event
https://fulguriti...ere.html
GW150914 spectrum and lag analysis; signal eigenmodes from foreground:
https://fulguriti...ost.html
CG lightning during LIGO triggers
https://fulguriti...ung.html
LIGO noise/bias
https://fulguriti...for.html
GW170817
https://fulguriti...bar.html
NGC4993
https://fulguriti...993.html

Aug 22, 2019
@Gorgar

You know Tesla is dead right?

The quote from the mid-'30's is just as relevant today as it was then.


No it is not, especially from a guy who fell in love with a pigeon.

Aug 22, 2019
For the moment, since you also appear to be innumerate, not sure why you're bloviating about statistics when you don't understand them.


Da Schneib, any claim I make involves robust signal processing and the production of statistical functions for quantitative analysis. By all means poison the well, but please learn what innumerate means. Mathematics and coding are not synonymous:

GW150914 event
https://fulguriti...ere.html


Schneib does not have a degree in anything related to Electrical Engineering, he comprehends none of this. Also he is an embedded moderator for Physorg in this chatroom who has been known for the nefarious conduct of changing Comments, of his own & others, in pursuit of his own egotistical agenda here in this chatroom.

Aug 22, 2019
...parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme...
Human mind's a wondrous thing ain't it?
Not really. Our personalities are unfortunately the sum total of our defects, not our strengths.
How much of psychology do you reckon is still pseudoscience?
Whatever. Sorry but mental illness annoys the fuck out of me. Especially when people are apparently proud of it.
https://youtu.be/T52EZ7bMa9w

SEU/granville/benni

Aug 22, 2019
@Gorgar

You know Tesla is dead right?

The quote from the mid-'30's is just as relevant today as it was then.


Well, it WAS a good looking pigeon...

Aug 22, 2019
[...]non-rejection of a [*prima facie*] true null hypothesis, which is[...]meaningless when prior distributions are pure confidence that has been constrained to be circularly-dependent on updated assumptions


I forgot to qualify the word 'true,' as my intention was to emphasize a kind of semantic type I error. Yes, I'm an idiot.

The overestimation of the significance of possible difference between ill-defined categories ("noise" and "signal") can stem from a desire to obfuscate significant differences, and Bayesian updates may involve the refinement of the definitions of these differences in insidious ways (no sample size, but a fallacy that establishing high-confidence from theory can be equivalent to a large sample size) - a technically true affirmation of conditions that lack independence between testable attributes, as these distinctions require a network of controls then derived in succession from cherry-picked posteriors - a fallacious nightmare.

Aug 22, 2019

Who is this "we"?
You're not doing anything but affirming your beliefs. The foreground tells a different story. Read what happened just a few hours ago:
https://twitter.c...19961856

LIGO is a sham and they know it.


Ah, yes, I see another brilliant mind has joined us in the adventure of sciencing !
Self promotion is always a sign of genius, especially when it comes from Twitter or a blog...
So compelling !
@T_ Gutierrez
So when will the paper be published ?
Is the publisher Twitter or ?

Aug 22, 2019

Schneib does not have a degree in anything related to Electrical Engineering, he comprehends none of this. Also he is an embedded moderator for Physorg in this chatroom who has been known for the nefarious conduct of changing Comments, of his own & others, in pursuit of his own egotistical agenda here in this chatroom.


@Benni
Ah, such beauty... The projection is superb !

Do these thoughts come to you while the filthy water flows out of the bucket or ?

Aug 22, 2019
Who is this "we"?
You're not doing anything but affirming your beliefs. The foreground tells a different story. Read what happened just a few hours ago:
https://twitter.c...19961856

LIGO is a sham and they know it.


Ah, yes, I see another brilliant mind has joined us in the adventure of sciencing !
Self promotion is always a sign of genius, especially when it comes from Twitter or a blog...
So compelling !
@T_ Gutierrez
So when will the paper be published ?
Is the publisher Twitter or ?
.......I see picking bones out in the weeds & tall grass got to be boring for you today mister Anthropologist alias Castrov. Where is your "sciencing"?

Maybe there are some Differential Equations laying around somewhere that you need to ask Benni for assistance yet again? Or do you think what DEs you told us you recall from high school algebra will suffice in solving gamma radiation decay equations?

Aug 22, 2019
...parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme... Human mind's a wondrous thing ain't it?
Not really. Our personalities are unfortunately the sum total of our defects, not our strengths.

Careful, that comment is a double edged sword...
How much of psychology do you reckon is still pseudoscience?
Whatever. Sorry but mental illness annoys the fuck out of me. Especially when people are apparently proud of it.
https://youtu.be/T52EZ7bMa9w

Oh, come on. The 3 stooges are CLASSIC humour. It takes a sane brain to get that...


Aug 22, 2019
GhostlyOtto's parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme

Wind in the Willows by Alan Bell
As I went a walking
one morning in spring
I met with some travelers
in an old country lane
One was an old man
the 2nd a maid
The 3rd was a young boy
who smiled as he said

With the wind in the willows
and the birds in the sky
We've a bright sun to warm us
wherever we lie
We have bread and fishes
and a jug of red wine
to share on our journey
with all of mankind

I sat down beside them
the flowers all around
and we ate on a mantel
spread out on the ground
They told me of prophets
and princes and kings
and they spoke of the one God
Who knows everything

I asked them to tell me
their name and their race
So I might remember
their kindness and grace
My name is Joseph
This is Mary my wife
and this is our young son
Our pride and delight
https://www.youtu...nuCWUrWs

Aug 22, 2019
Careful, that comment is a double edged sword...
Wise guy ay? At least I know exactly how the world works. How many people do YOU know who can say that with a straight face?

Is true I tell you.

Aug 22, 2019
Bots fill space with deliberately-deceptive praise and logical challenges, in order to conceal criticism of articles and antagonistic information from ready direct access after comments are closed. The first and last win in this world of distractions. The poetics are a tell. https://mashable....s-a-bot/

Aug 22, 2019
granville583762
2 hours ago
Comment posted by a person you have ignored
Yeah maid and said dont rhyme you retard

Aug 22, 2019
This Vow of Silence

GhostlyOtto's parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme

As granville583762 hathing never put anyone on this ignore
Foreth GhostlyOtto, what earthly point is this message

"granville583762
2 hours ago
Comment posted by a person you have ignored"

Foreth GhostlyOtto, if you hath some on ignore
You obviously do not want to hath anything to do with this instance you hath on ignore
That includes any message indicating this instance you hath on ignore has left a comment

Foreth GhostlyOtto, if you want to view one you hath on ignore
You can
1, you view with one of your many aliases
2, simply view of line

p.s. as an aside, on a site where commenting is this very reason for being, what is this point of hathing everyone else on ignore, for you might as well take a vow of silence and enrol in a monastery

Aug 22, 2019
@Protoplasmix.
In science, the word 'time' has been hijacked to imply that it has dimensional qualities that must be reckoned as a partner of Space, and without which nothing could exist. It is a false narrative that has come from scientists.
....I have often wondered WHY scientists have done this. It has to be WILLFUL but why?

"Without time as a real property of the universe, the Second Law [of thermodynamics] becomes meaningless." -- see https://www.thoug...-2699430]https://www.thoug...-2699430[/url]
First off, mate, the concept of "Meaning" is a human/metaphysical concept, not a physically effective causal 'real thing' in itself. And the article you linked:

https://www.thoug...-2699430]https://www.thoug...-2699430[/url]

..just carries on with metaphysical perspectives 'garnished' with his own 'unreal' opinions, assertions, interpretations, concluding that universe cannot do without 'time'. It's circuitous argumentation, personal biases and metaphysics throughout. :(

Aug 22, 2019
ERRATA.

The link should have read:

https://www.thoug...-2699430

Thanks.

Aug 22, 2019
.......I see picking bones out in the weeds & tall grass got to be boring for you today mister Anthropologist alias Castrov. Where is your "sciencing"?

Maybe there are some Differential Equations laying around somewhere that you need to ask Benni for assistance yet again? Or do you think what DEs you told us you recall from high school algebra will suffice in solving gamma radiation decay equations?


Dafuq are you on about, thicko? I didn't post that comment. Open your eyes you moron. And we have already shown that you cannot even do basic arithmetic, let alone DEs, you posing imbecile. Get them floors mopped, you cretin.

Aug 22, 2019
@Castro.
.......I see picking bones out in the weeds & tall grass got to be boring for you today mister Anthropologist alias Castrov. Where is your "sciencing"?

Maybe there are some Differential Equations laying around somewhere that you need to ask Benni for assistance yet again? Or do you think what DEs you told us you recall from high school algebra will suffice in solving gamma radiation decay equations?

Dafuq are you on about, thicko? I didn't post that comment. Open your eyes you moron. And we have already shown that you cannot even do basic arithmetic, let alone DEs, you posing imbecile. Get them floors mopped, you cretin.
Stop wasting your time (and blood pressure) on @Benni. Go and answer my point made in the last post to you in thread:

https://phys.org/...kes.html

Or have you tacitly conceded my point therein with your many-day's silence since then, mate? :)

Aug 22, 2019
IF an alleged Black Hole did indeed consume an alleged Neutron Star 900 million years ago, and it took 900 million years for the 'ripples' to arrive at the telescopes, then why do they say that:
"...Telescope responded to the detection alert and scanned the entire likely region of space where the event occurred, but we've not found any visual confirmation."
Is that 'visual confirmation of the RIPPLES, or is it just the GW that had arrived? Or are Ripples and GW the same thing?

Somehow this reminds me of the search for Dark Matter which they can't seem to find and yet they swear that DM is there - somewhere.

Aug 22, 2019
Careful, that comment is a double edged sword...
Wise guy ay? At least I know exactly how the world works. How many people do YOU know who can say that with a straight face?

Just one... And even then, I'm not 100%...
But I move on.

Is true I tell you.

And it's also true that you must take care that what you say can't be applied to your own self...

Aug 22, 2019


T_Gutierrez said:

Who is this "we"?
You're not doing anything but affirming your beliefs. The foreground tells a different story. Read what happened just a few hours ago:
https://twitter.c...19961856

LIGO is a sham and they know it.

To which kl31415 the self-admitted homosexual retorted:

Ah, yes, I see another brilliant mind has joined us in the adventure of sciencing !
Self promotion is always a sign of genius, especially when it comes from Twitter or a blog...
So compelling !
@T_ Gutierrez
So when will the paper be published ?
Is the publisher Twitter or ?


It appears that this above "discussion" was mistaken for something that the geriatric Castrovagina had said, but didn't.
I am almost certain that Gastritis will forget the whole affair and return to vilifying and cussing at those for whom he has much envy.

Aug 22, 2019
IF an alleged Black Hole did indeed consume an alleged Neutron Star 900 million years ago, and it took 900 million years for the 'ripples' to arrive at the telescopes, then why do they say that:
"...Telescope responded to the detection alert and scanned the entire likely region of space where the event occurred, but we've not found any visual confirmation."
Is that 'visual confirmation of the RIPPLES, or is it just the GW that had arrived? Or are Ripples and GW the same thing?

Somehow this reminds me of the search for Dark Matter which they can't seem to find and yet they swear that DM is there - somewhere.

Gravitational ripples aren't viewed by telescopes. They are sensed by interferometers and telescopes zoom in the general direction of the "ripple" to find visual (actual telescope) confirmation.

Aug 22, 2019
Thanks. I wasn't certain what I was reading.

Aug 22, 2019
Floor mopping is a great teacher, arguably better than most higher academic institutions. It is this humility and hard work that the new crop of neo-theological sci-fi adult children with Python skills lack. Beg for AI, and lose your ability to synthesize across disciplines.

Aug 22, 2019
Theory isn't method. Some people never learned the difference.

Aug 22, 2019
...parsley sage, rosemary and Thyme...
Human mind's a wondrous thing ain't it?
Not really. Our personalities are unfortunately the sum total of our defects, not our strengths.
How much of psychology do you reckon is still pseudoscience?
Whatever. Sorry but mental illness annoys the fuck out of me. Especially when people are apparently proud of it.
https://youtu.be/T52EZ7bMa9w

SEU/granville/benni
says the Nazi still spewing his Philosophy

Speaking of mental Illness, Otto yet indulges in his Pot calling the Kettle black. Otto has been a resident of physorg almost since its beginning. And it is due to this lengthy presence in this science site that Otto believes himself as having the 'credentials' to determine who must leave the site and who can stay - but only at his pleasure. Otto makes accusation after accusation against those who are science-minded but are culturally slightly different in their style. Otto believes his sh!t don't stink

Aug 23, 2019
Crank nutjobs are filled with terror that we keep detecting more and more heavy star mergers the longer we watch, and that we're now looking actively for optical counterparts. It makes them look silly, and ridicule is the best defense against crankery.

Aug 23, 2019
Gravitational and Electromagnetic Waves in Time and Space
SE> IF an alleged Black Hole did indeed consume an alleged Neutron Star 900 million years ago, and it took 900 million years for the 'ripples' to arrive at the telescopes, then why do they say that:
"...Telescope responded to the detection alert and scanned the entire likely region of space where the event occurred, but we've not found any visual confirmation."
Is that 'visual confirmation of the RIPPLES, or is it just the GW that had arrived? Or are Ripples and GW the same thing?

Somehow this reminds me of the search for Dark Matter which they can't seem to find and yet they swear that DM is there - somewhere.

SEU, as they are confirming they've observed gravitational waves 900million Lys hence
As Blackholes are proposed to be the outcome, glowing months after these gravity waves of collision
The X-Rays so produced, are viewed for months after receiving these 900 million year old gravity waves!

Aug 23, 2019
Crank nutjobs are filled with terror that we keep detecting more and more heavy star mergers the longer we watch, and that we're now looking actively for optical counterparts. It makes them look silly, and ridicule is the best defense against crankery.

Crank-nutjobs-terror-silly-ridicule-defense-crankery.
Have any more?

What is worse than crankery is that confirmation bias can be completely overlooked.

Theory is not being challenged, just method. I advocate conventional GR and accept binary mergers.

Research numerical relativity and maximum likelihood templates with respect to their fitting to log-normal transients with bound amplitude and frequency. Science goes nowhere if there are no controls to experiments and rigorous falsification. There is no independent distinction between a theoretical gravitational wave chirp and any of hundreds of rejected signals arriving per day in all three stations with proper lags.
https://fulguriti...pot.com/


Aug 23, 2019
X-Rays so produced, are viewed for months after receiving these 900 million year old gravity waves!

https://fulguriti...993.html
https://fulguriti...ulti.htm
https://fulguriti...bar.html
AT2017gfo fit to GRB170817A at NGC 4993 DL of ~40 Mpc (130,500,000 ly); LIGO error >50% of 40 Mpc. X-ray flux/optical lum. increased after months; at 1 year no signif. decline. Light curves >2 orders of mag. dimmer than off axis models. Prior threshold object found in pre-GW170817 images; AT2017gfo indistinguishable from MW X-ray variable stars. Manual transparencies used for sky area search; the first optical object located selected (after ~11 hrs; X-ray >9 days). GRB trig (>10^2 GRB alerts to LIGO/day) ~1.3*mean counts at 10-300 keV, rescaled to DL estimate derived from post hoc selected LIGO template given 20 Mpc DL error in a 28 deg2 search area.

Aug 23, 2019
@T_Gut

That is a lot of sciency words there. Sounds exactly like something a @cantthink sock puppet would say. I accept this but deny everything else.

Aug 23, 2019
@T_Gut

That is a lot of sciency words there. Sounds exactly like something a @cantthink sock puppet would say. I accept this but deny everything else.


@ hat1208
Well, the paper is being written as we speak ;)
Apparently...

I'd think, if this was real science it would be published in the proper place, not the authors blog or Twitter account...

But I don't think it's canthink tho, he fervently denies GR.
More likely, this character appeared here in high hopes of getting more followers on Twitter or his blog.

Aug 23, 2019
Crank nutjobs are filled with terror that we keep detecting more and more heavy star mergers the longer we watch, and that we're now looking actively for optical counterparts. It makes them look silly, and ridicule is the best defense against crankery.

Bandwagons are all the same:
~40 Mpc GW170817 BNS
~40 Mpc S190822c BNS (retracted by LIGO)
~267 Mpc S190814bv NSBH
~261 Mpc S190816i NSBH (retracted by LIGO)
https://twitter.c...35648512
retracted BNS trig. S190822c >99% BNS nearly identical DL as BNS trig. GW170817
retracted NS-BH S190816i nearly identical DL as NS-BH trig S190814bv. Confidence in a mass-gap assessment was 100% for S190814bv, then 100% NS-BH.
Notice day-of-year qusiperiodic cyclical recurrence for recent LIGO-Virgo triggers (complete consecutive sequences as of Aug 23, 2019), with permuted intervals:
O2: GW170729, GW170809 , GW170814, GW170817, GW170818, GW170823
O3: S190727h, S190728g, S190808ae, S190814bv, S190816i, S190822c

Aug 23, 2019
......I see picking bones out in the weeds & tall grass got to be boring for you today mister Anthropologist alias Castrov. Where is your "sciencing"?

Maybe there are some Differential Equations laying around somewhere that you need to ask Benni for assistance yet again? Or do you think what DEs you told us you recall from high school algebra will suffice in solving gamma radiation decay equations?


You are confused again @Benni boy :)

Also, I've never said I can do differential equations, don't know about Castro but he sounds like a competent chap, unlike the janitor that can't deal with a simple maths equation, free neutron decay or any decay for that matter...
Well the brain decay is very prominent and quite visible to all on the forum,hehe.

What is the differential equation of the day Benni boy ?
Boiler room cleansing equation ?

Aug 23, 2019
@T_Gut

That is a lot of sciency words there. Sounds exactly like something a @cantthink sock puppet would say. I accept this but deny everything else.


You misunderstand what it takes for an experiment to properly characterize its foreground noise. In this case, ongoing monitoring of an audacious travesty is required.

Science seeks consistency and robust evidence that is not obviated through pop culture references and vague claims tacked together with artists impressions and free rescaling of parameters to fit desired sources. Science shouldn't have to endear itself to your incapacity to distinguish hyperbole and authority from data and proper error analysis. Science is not merely ambiguity updated with consensus, and your behavior is as transparent as your fallacy of division. At first, you feel appalled that you would spend the last three years being hoodwinked. LIGO is digging its own grave - each trigger another nail in the coffin. Self-parodies are a gift. Thank you.

Aug 23, 2019
@kl31415

Thanks. And yes I am waiting with baited breath on the written up paper to be posted to the arXiv server.

Aug 23, 2019
T_Gutierrez: What is worse than crankery is that confirmation bias can be completely overlooked.

Theory is not being challenged, just method. I advocate conventional GR and accept binary mergers.


kl31415
@T_Gut
That is a lot of sciency words there. Sounds exactly like something a @cantthink sock puppet would say. I accept this but deny everything else.
@ hat1208
Well, the paper is being written as we speak ;)
Apparently...
But I don't think it's canthink tho, he fervently denies GR.


Aren't you all so predictable? Do you actually read papers, or just read the first line of the abstracts? Perhaps you even scroll to the conclusions. Project how you were touched so deeply. It's a fascinating study to see that people who can't evaluate evidence will become virtual clones imprinted by all the verbatim cliches in the book - as if perpetuating sexual abuse: groomed by bandwagon epistemology. So sad. Go back to your pornography obsession where you belong.

Aug 23, 2019
LIGO thinks all of you are a bunch of manipulable tools. It is because I defend Einstein and GR that I perform this falsification effort. In defense of GR and in defense of scientific method, LIGO is monitored. Their recent bandwagon propaganda is the most premature yet. I had to come to this forum to wade in the muck of irrelevance and resentment, deflection and alibi.

Aug 23, 2019
LIGO thinks all of you are a bunch of manipulable tools. It is because I defend Einstein and GR that I perform this falsification effort. In defense of GR and in defense of scientific method, LIGO is monitored. Their recent bandwagon propaganda is the most premature yet. I had to come to this forum to wade in the muck of irrelevance and resentment, deflection and alibi.


You should keep a sharp eye out for new submissions concerning LIGO on this website so you can get your Comments on the front-end of the Comments section rather than at the rear where we are now, almost no casual reader takes the bother to come this far down the Comments.

It is the CASUAL READER you want to reach, not these consummate unprofessionals who populate the back end of the Comments section, these knee-jerk guys are just fodder for the fun of bouncing scientific data off their tinfoil hats, these are the "bunch of manipulable tools" & sadly have become their own brand of fools for being used as such.

Aug 23, 2019
You should keep a sharp eye out for new submissions concerning LIGO on this website so you can get your Comments on the front-end of the Comments section rather than at the rear where we are now, almost no casual reader takes the bother to come this far down the Comments.
...

Well, Benni.
He might be smart enough to know how to set his settings to read the last comments first...
Apparently, you haven't. You seem to be still in the last century when it comes to scrolling all the way down to the "back end" of the thread.
You have a DE for that?

Aug 23, 2019
I'm pissed at LIGO for lying to us to postpone the inevitable - even worse if they really think statistical confidence can be a process of noise reduction bolstered by numerical relativity, which already involves ad hoc violation of GR. Can we face that a scientific institution could go so far as LIGO has and still maintain faith in monological projects that exist in an echo chamber without rival projects to preclude abuses of method and theory? If we can imagine - assuming LIGO is incorrect (but that GWs still exist) - how an unopposed LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA-LIGO India will stunt LISA research, we may find that GW150914, GW151226, and GW170817 enabled the LIGO swarm to disenfranchise hundreds of competent scientists who work on extensions to GR (LIGO made no novel or even precise claims). A false dichotomy was maintained that was actually reinforced by ritual misuse of Bayesian methodology in a "black box." All the signs were there, but they underestimated the public. Shame on LIGO.

Aug 23, 2019
You should keep a sharp eye out for new submissions concerning LIGO on this website so you can get your Comments on the front-end of the Comments section rather than at the rear where we are now, almost no casual reader takes the bother to come this far down the Comments. ...


Well, Benni.
He might be smart enough to know how to set his settings to read the last comments first...
Apparently, you haven't. You seem to be still in the last century when it comes to scrolling all the way down to the "back end" of the thread.
You have a DE for that?
.....and your's is counter advice intended to keep the tin-foil hatters, such as yourself, as the dominant number of submissions in the Comments, it's why the guy whose monikers are Castrov, hat1208, & kl31415 uses at least three different monikers consistently agreeing with one another using exactly the same colloquialisms. It's not hard to see through.

Aug 23, 2019
and your's is counter advice intended to keep the tin-foil hatters, such as yourself, as the dominant number of submissions in the Comments, it's why the guy whose monikers are Castrov, hat1208, & kl31415 uses at least three different monikers consistently agreeing with one another using exactly the same colloquialisms. It's not hard to see through.


Sure, but can you solve differential equations?

Aug 23, 2019
Well, Benni.
He might be smart enough to know how to set his settings to read the last comments first...
Apparently, you haven't. You seem to be still in the last century when it comes to scrolling all the way down to the "back end" of the thread.
You have a DE for that?
.....and your's is counter advice intended to keep the tin-foil hatters, such as yourself, as the dominant number of submissions in the Comments, it's why the guy whose monikers are Castrov, hat1208, & kl31415 uses at least three different monikers consistently agreeing with one another using exactly the same colloquialisms. It's not hard to see through.

You DO have a theory!
(Albeit only a conspiracy one...)

Aug 25, 2019
....and your's is counter advice intended to keep the tin-foil hatters, such as yourself, as the dominant number of submissions in the Comments, it's why the guy whose monikers are Castrov, hat1208, & kl31415 uses at least three different monikers consistently agreeing with one another using exactly the same colloquialisms. It's not hard to see through.


You DO have a theory!
(Albeit only a conspiracy one...)


Conspiracy is what Benni's all about :)
He loves to spend time thinking there is someone out there on the interwebz that would care enough to create fake accounts on phys.org just to make him look stupid.

Although no one really needs to try, as he is performing this feat beautifully. Hehehehe

Aug 25, 2019
I'm pissed at LIGO for lying to us to postpone the inevitable - even worse if they really think statistical confidence can be a process of noise reduction bolstered by numerical relativity, which already involves ad hoc violation of GR. Can we face that a scientific institution could go so far as LIGO has and still maintain faith in monological projects that exist in an echo chamber without rival projects to preclude abuses of method and theory? If we can imagine - assuming LIGO is incorrect .............................(snipped bunch of conspiracist crap to make room) .........methodology in a "black box." All the signs were there, but they underestimated the public. Shame on LIGO.


Give up you clown. Go write a paper.

Aug 25, 2019
Never mind PDEs, this idiot can't even do statistics.

Aug 25, 2019


Give up you clown. Go write a paper.
LIGO has over a thousand authors tacked to a single paper. Who is actually writing these deficient showpieces?

Never mind PDEs, this idiot can't even do statistics.

Please, yet again, show me how this is true, and why you put so much weight into your conception of the power of statistics, when we should be speaking of criteria by which we can form independent hypotheses that can be tested. Funny though, we''re talking about physics, not statistics, and that these two epistemological categories are being equated here is never promising. We look at signals. My work decomposes signals and the logic of argument given statistical observables; statistics are evidence, not models in-themselves. Ongoing monitoring should be shown immediately, their conclusions pending completion of experiments being monitored. This is how science proceeds, not "publish or perish" ad infinitum. Public attitudes are informative here.

Aug 25, 2019
Public attitudes are informative here.
.....you bet, they show people's unwillingness to assemble new facts & adjust accordingly, but that's the fantasy world of Pop-Cosmology Culture exhibited by Da Schneibo, Castrogiovanni, kl31415, etc. These who have never seen a Differential Equation they could solve, but wizards of smart is what they believe themselves to be with their immutable fantasies of Pop-Cosmology firmly in place.

Aug 25, 2019
Oh! Those good old days...
Benni> the fantasy world of Pop-Cosmology Culture exhibited by Da Schneibo, Castrogiovanni, kl31415, etc

When in days of yore, there was an openness that is less prevalent of late
A kind of honesty
For was it not GhostlyOtto who once said "there is a poisonous atmosphere" since this phys.org anew
Fore Benni, GhostlyOtto is for once right, even as he proved himself right himself
GhostlyOtto> Downrated every comment in this thread.

For on a PW, they never had a rating facility
Consequently
This eternal problem
GhostlyOtto who once said "there is a poisonous atmosphere" since this phys.org anew
Foreth Benni, PW never experienced this problem eating at the very heart of phys.org
This rating system is this "poisonous atmosphere" of that GhostlyOtto speaks and hath proved

For Benni if you wanted to rant your displeasure or approval, you had to textually convey that point

Aug 25, 2019
For Benni
if you wanted to rant your displeasure or approval
you had to textually convey that point

for this rating system
although eating this very soul of phys.org
is this very social heart of phys.org

foreth in days of yore
we could look up our buddies
on their profile activity in their avatars

for it was a social link
on these busy highways of this web
for it was open so honest

not so this phys.org anew
our avatar buddies are not to be seen
but cloaked in this web of secrecy

so one and all
we want our buddy avatar links back
with this proviso

these likes-dislikes have to go
for as we pause over these comments so to read
we want a read-button so to click

so when we visit
our profile activity avatar buddies
our read comments are clear and honestly visible who has read our comments

for if you do not like
there in no unlike
so to click

for this social link
We want our buddies back
Our heart of phys.org

Aug 25, 2019
for this social link
We want our buddies back
Our heart of phys.org
...... in that case jonesy already has four or five votes for himself with all the monikers he has going, but the pointy tinfoil hat crowd living here don't care about that, these wizards of smart think if you are not the same manner of FRINGE they are that means you are abnormal.

Aug 25, 2019
This hat fitting session

the pointy tinfoil hat crowd living here

there was that moment in time
august last year
when for some strange reason
jonesy got itchy feet
mabe it was a premonition
when he
just like in worghaunts
there was this hat fitting session
where all the afore mention hats were created
then that week of peace and tranquillity
then the phoenix arose from the ashes
as the chosen hat made its entrance

Aug 26, 2019
These who have never seen a Differential Equation they could solve... immutable fantasies of Pop-Cosmology firmly in place.


See? There it is, the few words that compose Benni's vocabulary. When he was mopping the floors at the local university, he happened to overhear the words differential equation, and he said to himself "Gee, that sure seems like a smart thing!" and has been repeating those words ever since.

Aug 27, 2019

See? There it is, the few words that compose Benni's vocabulary. When he was mopping the floors at the local university, he happened to overhear the words differential equation, and he said to himself "Gee, that sure seems like a smart thing!" and has been repeating those words ever since.


Never forget the brilliant resolution of the mathematically mind boggling equation of 2+2/2=?

Ah the personality disorders you come in contact on the interwebz never ceases to amaze :)

Sep 05, 2019
CHOSEN REGULAR/REPEATING MOTION across a space/dial etc is used as the 'comparative standard' for 'timing' other motions/changes across space/process. That's why 'time' is a CIRCUITOUS abstract concept/tool for analysis only; and NOT a real, causal, physically effective 'thing/dimension' of any kind. It's subtle. Do you understand? :)

@RealityCheck
So, what did I just waste reading your drivel, if not TIME? I'm not subtle. Do you understand? :)

Sep 05, 2019
You have put the cart before the horse, mate, in more ways than one. Consider: space exists and you can move/rotate in it and directly feel the physically real effects on your arms as you rotate. At no stage is "time" a requirement for that motion/effect to manifest; as you tacitly confirm by your own observation re the differing rates/kinds of motion/process occurring throughout the universal space from which we DERIVE (abstract) a "time"/"timing" concept/tool for comparative analysis. :)

@RealityCheck
As we observe those differing rates, we develop a memory of them. Is time irrelevant to that, or are memories just a concept/tool?

Sep 15, 2019
@antigoracle.
So, what did I just waste reading your drivel, if not TIME? I'm not subtle. Do you understand? :)
You 'wasted' nothing. You were merely involved in the PROCESS of 'reading' for whatever duration you chose to do that. If you had also involved the PROCESS of 'thinking', maybe then you might have understood the subtle nuances involved. Maybe.

As we observe those differing rates, we develop a memory of them. Is time irrelevant to that, or are memories just a concept/tool?
You are talking of 'abstractions' from 'experienced' PROCESSES. The 'memories' may be 'qualitative' (emotional etc) or 'quantitative' (comparative to other externally recorded durations/events history/measurements etc).

Time is an abstraction/analytical concept/tool; it is not a physically real/effective 'causative or extant thing' in its own right (whereas Energy-Space/Quantum-Vacuum *is* such).

Read and research, and then think, some more, mate. Much more. :)

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