LIGO has template for NS-BH mergers also in place for detecting such events, so I am assuming such events are expected to be detectable as well. Large mass NS would also have considerable spactime curvature near them.
OK, sounds like the event will be completed in finite time even for a distant observer, though the distant observer may not be able to see it happen fully. If it was a smaller neutron star and a much larger black hole scenario (though between them enough to have detectable GWs), would the...
This question is in context of the recent gravitational wave detection by aLigo. Apparently aLigo has detected the entire process, including the before merger, during merger, and aftermath of the completed merger.
My understanding is that two black holes should not be seen to be merging in...
Thanks for all the answers. Checked out all the references also and they are good.
The confirmation I got is that the deviation would be nearly twice the Newtonian value. This is what I suspected would be the case though some other notions were bothering me by throwing up (mistakenly) other...
You would probably know the often used example: If you went back in time and killed your grandmother before your father was born, then you couldn't have been born. But you are there just the same! So causality is violated.
Since causality is assumed to hold under all circumstances, the...
Currently accepted understanding in science is probably the best way to look at it. If time travel were proven possible tomorrow, causality would be violated (and vice versa). What is interesting is that current understanding of science (with experimental verification!) would allow your son to...
Agreed.
This is the part that was bothering me. The relativistic mass of the particle traveling near c should be very large. Does that not increase its gravitational mass exponentially? If it does, then why does it not increase GMm/R^2 proportionately? I am extrapolating from the...
Light traveling transverse to a massive body (e.g. Sun) is deviated by an angle twice the amount predicted by Newtonian gravitational theory. This is predicted by GR and proven experimentally.
What would be the deviation of a matter particle traveling near c transverse to a massive body...
I have a question about neutrinos in this respect.
Understanding from relativity is that if something has mass, not only can it not travel faster than c, but it must travel at less than c (i.e. cannot even travel at c). Neutrinos qualify as having mass.
However, all recent experiments...
Thanks PD, WBN. I think you have clarified the situation.
Now let me ask you a more "thorny" question. I am not sure the question is appropriate, and if it is whether you have the answer...
Replace the second scenario of 'pebble on string' to a scenario where there is a central negative charge...
I think what you are saying is right, and I am getting a sense of it, but there's something I am still not quite able to understand...
First, how are the two scenarios different from Einstein's elevator example... and maybe I am missing the understanding of the word 'tidal' ... will help if...
Then let us consider the 'pebbles' to be 'satellites' with human beings inside. Would they be able to tell the difference in the two scenarios (without any reference to the outside)? I feel in the second case also the centrifugal force will match the pull on the string, so inside observers would...
OK, I am trying to get a simple answer, and an example may help.
Situation (a): A pebble is moving in a circular orbit around Earth at a distance R from center of Earth, under Earth's gravitational influence.
Situation (b): An alien sitting in a rocket in deep space is whirling about a...
A bit confused. How does this fit in with the Equivalence Principle? Does it mean that a non-gravitational accelerated frame (even if tidal/central) is not equivalent to a true gravitational field? (If not, in what way?)