## Is it possible that speed of a gravitational waves are greater than c?

Since at event horizon, the escape velocity of black hole must be greater than speed of light but even light can't escape from black hole so is it possible that speed of gravitational wave > c?

 PhysOrg.com science news on PhysOrg.com >> Heat-related deaths in Manhattan projected to rise>> Dire outlook despite global warming 'pause': study>> Sea level influenced tropical climate during the last ice age

 Quote by Ravi Mandavi Since at event horizon, the escape velocity of black hole must be greater than speed of light but even light can't escape from black hole so is it possible that speed of gravitational wave > c?
When the Black Hole formed, the gravitational field was already there, permeating space. It doesn't go away because an event horizon formed.

 It would be hard to explain a 21 billion solar mass black hole by saying that the gravitational field was already there when the star collapsed. I think most cosmologists accept that the field grows as the BH accretes mass. But from where does the gravitational field originate? While a static field is not affected by an event horizon, the process of accreting mass is hardly static. If the gravitational field were an indication of the mass at the singularity then there is a problem of how the increases in the mass of the singularity, resulting in the changes in the gravitational field, propagate from the singularity backwards in time and faster than light in order to escape the event horizon. On the other hand, there is an explanation that as matter falls through the EH, it leaves its gravitational field frozen at the horizon.

Recognitions:
Gold Member

## Is it possible that speed of a gravitational waves are greater than c?

Under quantum electrodynamics, gravity should be mediated by virtual particles. Virtual particles are not bound by event horizons.

 I wonder instead why physicists/astronomers are so sure that gravitational waves travel with the speed of light? Why can it not be slower? Is it just an assumption that waits to be tested, or is there a deeper reason for that?
 The reason we believe that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light is that gravity is very accurately described by Einstein's equations of General Relativity. General Relativity has passed every experimental test to which it has been subjected, and General Relativity predicts gravitational waves, and predicts that they travel at the speed of light. While gravitational waves have never (yet) been detected directly, their consequence has been seen in the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar, the discovery and explanation of which earned them the Nobel prize. When gravitational waves are directly seen, probably within the next decade, I would bet a large sum of money that they are seen to travel at the speed of light.
 Recognitions: Gold Member Science Advisor Lorentz invariance is the part of GR that limits the propogation speed of fields to 'c' and it is assumed Lorentz invariace also applies to gravity. Hulse and Taylor received the 1993 Nobel for their work on binary pulsars, which showed timing increases that precisely matched those predicted by GR. If gravity were not Lorentz invariant, the results would not have matched the predictions of GR.
 Blog Entries: 6 Recognitions: Gold Member Science Advisor Remember that we have not quite yet observed gravitational waves. The theory that predicts them predicts their speed as c. Until or unless they are observed it is not appropriate to simply speculate whether this one point may vary. You must rather bite off a bigger chunk. One would be speculating whether there is an alternative theory, also predicting gravity waves but traveling at different speeds, which is self consistent and consistent with observed phenomena.

 Quote by skeptic2 On the other hand, there is an explanation that as matter falls through the EH, it leaves its gravitational field frozen at the horizon.
Good, you answered you own question.

All mass (thus all sources of gravity) started off either before or outside the BH, thus their gravitational fields were indeed already in effect when they fell into the BH.

 Power radiated by orbiting bodies: $$P = \frac{dE}{dt} = - \frac{32}{5}\, \frac{G^4}{c^5}\, \frac{(m_1m_2)^2 (m_1+m_2)}{r^5}$$ Orbital decay from gravitational radiation: $$\frac{dr}{dt} = - \frac{64}{5}\, \frac{G^3}{c^5}\, \frac{(m_1m_2)(m_1+m_2)}{r^3}$$ If gravitational wave velocity was greater than luminous velocity, then the amount of power radiated and the orbital decay of binary pulsars would be much less. If gravitational wave velocity was less than luminous velocity, then the amount of power radiated and the orbital decay of binary pulsars would be much more. However, the measurements of these functions in nature indicate agreement with these equations in which the intrinsic velocity of gravitational waves is exactly equal to luminous velocity. Could the gravitational wave velocity be measured directly from nature with is equation? Gravitational wave velocity: $$c = \left[ \left( \frac{64 G^3}{5} \, \frac{(m_1m_2)(m_1+m_2)}{r^3} \right) \left( - \frac{dr}{dt} \right)^{-1} \right]^{\frac{1}{5}}$$ Reference: Gravitational wave - Wikipedia
 Recognitions: Gold Member Science Advisor Jimbaugh, do you think Hulse was not compelling evidence of gravitational waves and their Lorentz invariance? phyzguy, apologies I was still pecking away when you posted essentially the same thing.

Recognitions:
 Quote by Orion1 Power radiated by orbiting bodies: $$P = \frac{dE}{dt} = - \frac{32}{5}\, \frac{G^4}{c^5}\, \frac{(m_1m_2)^2 (m_1+m_2)}{r^5}$$ Orbital decay from gravitational radiation: $$\frac{dr}{dt} = - \frac{64}{5}\, \frac{G^3}{c^5}\, \frac{(m_1m_2)(m_1+m_2)}{r^3}$$ If gravitational wave velocity was greater than luminous velocity, then the amount of power radiated and the orbital decay of binary pulsars would be much less. If gravitational wave velocity was less than luminous velocity, then the amount of power radiated and the orbital decay of binary pulsars would be much more. However, the measurements of these functions in nature indicate agreement with these equations in which the intrinsic velocity of gravitational waves is exactly equal to luminous velocity. Could the gravitational wave velocity be measured directly from nature with is equation? Gravitational wave velocity: $$c = \left[ \left( \frac{64 G^3}{5} \, \frac{(m_1m_2)(m_1+m_2)}{r^3} \right) \left( - \frac{dr}{dt} \right)^{-1} \right]^{\frac{1}{5}}$$ Reference: Gravitational wave - Wikipedia
This is an incredibly naive analysis... If you assume gravitational radiation does NOT travel at c, a lot has to change within relativity. If it's slower, well you have a massive graviton which among having a speed <c also admits longitudinal polarizations. The whole situation becomes significantly more complicated. If it's faster, all kind of crazy things go out the window and I don't even know where to start there.

Blog Entries: 6
Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by Chronos Jimbaugh, do you think Hulse was not compelling evidence of gravitational waves and their Lorentz invariance?
Yes I do. But I do not consider it direct observation. The pulsar observations make it that much harder to speculate outside of GR. One must explain them.

If however we can build a grav. wave detector we needn't speculate, we could measure the speed. Thus it is meaningful to ask what value we might measure.

Until then, this question is of a different type, (i.e. what does theory say) and so supposing a different answer than theory supposes a distinct theory.

Now personally I'll be shocked if we observe other than speed c grav waves...beyond shocked, flabbergasted.

 Recognitions: Gold Member Science Advisor Thanks for the clarification, jambaugh. As you probably recall, Kopeikin and Formalont attempted a direct measurement of the speed of gravity about a decade ago, but, it is considered controversial. I believe it was Steve Carlip who basically accused them of making a backdoor measurement of the speed of light.
 What is the gravitational wave frequency equation for the Hulse–Taylor binary pulsar system? Reference: Gravitational wave - Wikipedia PSR B1913+16 - Wikipedia The Discovery Of The Binary Pulsar - Hulse Binary Pulsars And Relativistic Gravity - Taylor General relativistic model for experimental measurement of the speed of propagation of gravity by VLBI - University of Missouri - Kopeikin and Fomalont
 what basically happens is that gravity bents space & time fabric. the light travels parallel to space & time fabric so at a point the fabric is stretched and light have to travel twice as long so that's why they say light cannot escape a black hole. As Eisenstein said that c is the optimum speed limit so lets say a particles with mass zero (energy) can travel at the velocity of c

Recognitions: