In the first black hole collision, in 2015, LIGO claimed
that 3 solar masses were radiated.

How do they know that?

--
Rich

On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 6:17:54 PM UTC-6, RichD wrote:
> In the first black hole collision, in 2015, LIGO claimed
> that 3 solar masses were radiated.
>
> How do they know that?

They know the "song" the collision event produced, as predicted by GR, so they know the masses of the initial black holes. They know the displacement of every atom across a wavefront of many tens of billions of square light years, and they have an attendant energetic light flash that helps tie down the position in the quadrant. That GR makes a prediction of how much mass is lost from "before" to "after", has some ability to quantify.

Consider that the event horizon "necks" between the two as they approach, and the temperature and mass / energy loss rate is a function of radius, that some of this radiates into the "rounder" portions, doesn't mean it all does. Plus you'll have accretion disks whose displacement is "millimeters", and not a fraction of an atomic radius, and the attendant induced heating.... if not dissociation.

But this is covered (and more correctly) on papers on arxiv.org.

David A. Smith

Dlzc wrote:

> On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 6:17:54 PM UTC-6, RichD wrote:
>> In the first black hole collision, in 2015, LIGO claimed that 3 solar
>> masses were radiated. How do they know that?
>
> They know the "song" the collision event produced, as predicted by GR,
> so they know the masses of the initial black holes. They know the
> displacement of every atom across a wavefront of many tens of billions
> of square light years, and they have an attendant energetic light flash
> that helps tie down the position in the quadrant. That GR makes a
> prediction of how much mass is lost from "before" to "after", has some
> ability to quantify.

so they combine something, which might appear true, with something completely bullshit, to assimilates as truth in lying papers. That's how politics goes 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗻𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮 𝗮𝗺𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮. They might win the Nobel prize with that discrete filter algorithm. Same spirit, they can't see the genocide in Palestine.

the fools were thinking, they can just enter and steal from Russia whatever they want. Admitted by the fucking Merkel and Macron, signing a peace agreement, to arm the fucking ukrein. Here's the greater fuckin germonia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Germanism#/media/File:Greater_Germanic_Reich.png

On 02/18/2024 08:03 AM, Dlzc wrote:
> On Saturday, February 17, 2024 at 6:17:54 PM UTC-6, RichD wrote:
>> In the first black hole collision, in 2015, LIGO claimed
>> that 3 solar masses were radiated.
>>
>> How do they know that?
>
> They know the "song" the collision event produced, as predicted by GR, so they know the masses of the initial black holes. They know the displacement of every atom across a wavefront of many tens of billions of square light years, and they have an attendant energetic light flash that helps tie down the position in the quadrant. That GR makes a prediction of how much mass is lost from "before" to "after", has some ability to quantify.
>
> Consider that the event horizon "necks" between the two as they approach, and the temperature and mass / energy loss rate is a function of radius, that some of this radiates into the "rounder" portions, doesn't mean it all does. Plus you'll have accretion disks whose displacement is "millimeters", and not a fraction of an atomic radius, and the attendant induced heating... if not dissociation.
>
> But this is covered (and more correctly) on papers on arxiv.org.
>
> David A. Smith
>

It's a chore wading through the first thousand collaborators' names, ....

Basically what's involved is the pseudo-centroid,
in a world like today's where in open systems
there's pseudo-momentum, it making a wobble,
or something like a super-nova making a hump,
that it results the higher-order overtones,
of the infinitely-many higher-orders of acceleration,
why it makes a signal that theoretically propagates
as fast as any other change in the geodesy,
which is always evaluated instantaneously, everywhere.

For a long time the, "cryogenic Weber bar",
had a reasonable explanation why among the
noise it detected, was signal, in gravitational waves.

Whether Newtonian or Einsteinian,
gravitational waves go as fast as anything.

Then, traditional theories of standard candles
and stellar formation, estimate the distance,
traditional theories of binary pulsars or dual
neutron stars or binary black holes their timing,
estimate the size, then it's some algebra.

On Sunday, February 18, 2024 at 12:36:24 PM UTC-6, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> It's a chore wading through the first thousand collaborators' names, ....

Like a symphony orchestra. The people that play, the people the front the money...

David A. Smith

On 02/19/2024 06:01 AM, Dlzc wrote:
> On Sunday, February 18, 2024 at 12:36:24 PM UTC-6, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>> It's a chore wading through the first thousand collaborators' names, ....
>
> Like a symphony orchestra. The people that play, the people the front the money...
>
> David A. Smith
>

And I had heard "grade inflation" was bad, ....

I sort of expect at least one guru to napkin-back
with 8-digit details the site-plan then the more
or less invoice numbers of the installation,
then each of the "data scientists" gets their own
paper.

I mean if they all have one methodology and one
interpretation, who's on the hook for the prize?

Heh, the prize. "Well, after shaving-the-penny
of this Krugerrand down for each of you, you
each get one lick-n-stick foil star."

Here it's "coat-tailing wall-papering fudge-coaters",
not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that,
it's just a usual maxim about the bigger the meeting,
the minds.

So, 1) standard candles, 2) timing of binary pulsars,
then 3) the window from the arrival and intensity and
direction of the gravitational wave to correlated
optical, radio, and infrared, maybe some neutrino,
where there are lots of kinds of neutrinos, emissions
from the source, of the bounce, is it agreeable that
those are the inputs to the computation?

Hey did you hear that James Webb Space Telescope
roundly confirmed that 2MASS thoroughly paint-canned
inflationary cosmology at least twenty years ago?

I just figure they might be better off with
one paper being "the data" and each of their
own then the data scientists being "their analysis".

Too many chiefs, too many chefs, one giant opinion, ....

Now I'm having some fun with this yet
I don't want it to be like inflationary
cosmology and just having to order a larger
round-file.

On Monday, February 19, 2024 at 11:01:11 AM UTC-6, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> Now I'm having some fun with this yet
> I don't want it to be like inflationary
> cosmology and just having to order a larger
> round-file.

Better do that, Don Quixote. Because it isn't clear that you are playing this sad set of pipes for your own enjoyment. Out, soon to be silenced by Google.Groups.

David A. Smith