1. Standard memberHandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    At the edge
    Joined
    23 Sep '06
    Moves
    18031
    17 Oct '17 23:29
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/16/science/ligo-neutron-stars-collision.html?_r=0
  2. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    18 Oct '17 06:53
    I just watched the video of that link. Not bad.
  3. Joined
    06 Mar '12
    Moves
    625
    18 Oct '17 11:434 edits
    It has just occurred to me that this latest observation settles a particular scientific dispute for good; namely, the question of does gravity have a speed limit?
    Some hypothesized that gravity 'travels' (if that is the correct word) infinitely fast from the mass while others hypothesized that gravity 'travels' at finite speed c.
    Since now (from the OP link) we have simultaneously detected gravity waves and gamma rays at the same time from the same event occurring many light years away, that proves that gravity DOES have a speed limit and that the 'speed' of gravity is c.

    ANYONE;

    If my understanding of the theory of gravitons is correct, this proof that gravity travels at speed c also provides at least circumstantial evidence that gravitons exist. But is this proof that gravity travels at speed c ( + all other current evidence and valid inferences) also sufficient to scientifically prove gravitons exist? Or is there STILL some scientifically credible way for NO gravitons to exist?
  4. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    2047
    18 Oct '17 19:471 edit
    Originally posted by @humy
    It has just occurred to me that this latest observation settles a particular scientific dispute for good; namely, the question of does gravity have a speed limit?
    Some hypothesized that gravity 'travels' (if that is the correct word) infinitely fast from the mass while others hypothesized that gravity 'travels' at finite speed c.
    Since now (from the OP link) ...[text shortened]... ] gravitons exist? Or is there STILL some scientifically credible way for NO gravitons to exist?
    As I understand it, we have not measured particles in motion, but rather wave-like distortions. The structure of space has rippled, like someone shaking a blanket. No particles involved. There may be quanta of energy, of course, but that is still not a particle.
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    18 Oct '17 19:53
    Originally posted by @moonbus
    As I understand it, we have not measured particles in motion, but rather wave-like distortions. The structure of space has rippled, like someone shaking a blanket. No particles involved. There may be quanta of energy, of course, but that is still not a particle.
    But we know those waves travel damn close to c. Theory says anything with zero mass can go exactly at c and that seems to be the case with these waves. BTW, when the first set of detections happened, they calculated a full sun's worth of energy, that is to say, all the energy available say in fusion reactions or matter-antimatter reactions, was put into making the gravity waves so it started out as a very powerful event and what we got is just the echo of it spreading through space and time.
Back to Top