I’m curious to see if they can see black holes and dark matter with this new tech.
Due to relativistic time dialation, the entire known universe could be crossed within a human lifetime. You only need to constantly accelerate at 1g. Not easy after a certain point, and even then everyone back home would grow old and die in the time that was only a day or so to you. Kinda scary to think about.
Quote: two black holes, one 29 times the mass of the Sun, the second 36 times, spiraled into each other. When the collision took place, the equivalent of three times the mass of the Sun was converted directly to energy and released in the form of gravitational waves. For a brief fraction of a second, this single event produced more power than the entire rest of the visible Universe combined.
Also I have trouble understanding how they worked out the mass of each black hole? And a sun three times the mass of our sun would produce more energy than the rest of the universe? So our sun is currently amongst the biggest power producers???
Time is a constant. It doesn’t discriminate. Your view of people on earth would be skewed but just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. This gravitation wave erupted how long ago?
What Im really excited about is the discovery of the wave-like behavior of gravity could lead to a quantum theory of gravity, making black holes and practically anything with large gravitational field much easier to understand. Think about being able to know what’s inside of a black hole….
Fully agree
Due to relativistic time dialation, the entire known universe could be crossed within a human lifetime. You only need to constantly accelerate at 1g. Not easy after a certain point, and even then everyone back home would grow old and die in the time that was only a day or so to you. Kinda scary to think about.
[/quote]
Time is a constant. It doesn’t discriminate. Your view of people on earth would be skewed but just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. This gravitation wave erupted how long ago?
[/quote]
Read this
I don’t believe time travel even works with the laws of the universe. I don’t think matter can exist anywhere except in the present. And I believe the present can’t exist in the exact same area of space-time more than once.
The idea of time-travel only exists in imagination because we want the power we imagine it holds. But I think the idea matter from the past still exists is a glitch in how we perceive our existence.
The reference to different times is not referring to traveling through time Jules Verne style but to the understanding that time is perceived to run at a different rate at different speeds.
Cheers David
Time is a constant. It doesn’t discriminate. Your view of people on earth would be skewed but just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. This gravitation wave erupted how long ago?
[/quote]
Read this
[/quote]
Interesting read, though my brain has had it. It’s after midnight here. I do wonder how accurate their instruments are though. 0.007 seconds over 6 months?
You can’t do it. See my previous post about trying the get up to a decent fraction of the speed of light. You can not endlessly accelerate, as you approach the speed of light the energy requirement would literally be more than the energy in the whole universe.
They can calculate it based on the wave.
When they say energy in the amount of 3x the mass of the sun, they mean that mass instantly converted straight into energy. A certain amount of mass can become a certain amount (actually a massive amount) of energy. We all know the equation for converting mass into energy. Einstein: E=MC² Energy = Mass x speed of light squared.
And it was only more energy than the rest of the universe’s light energy squeezed into one very tiny fraction of a second. Still, it’s one massive blast in that fraction of a second. They are illustrating how massive it is.
Thanks halo I kinda get the second explanation but the first how do they know the ratio? Could’ve been 70/30 not 55/45 ?
Good question. I don’t know. It hasn’t been addressed in what I’ve read so far. So I can only guess. With different masses, their spin / orbit around each other would be lopsided. The center of their orbit would be closer to the larger one. I would guess that this can be seen in the waves given off while they are still orbiting, before they actually collide together.
That’s what I meant by after a certain point it’s difficult to continue accelerating. The limit being current propulsion technology. I don’t know enough to say that it won’t ever be possible, I mean if you told someone in the Middle Ages that you could carry around a fireless light source that only works when you want it to, you’d be burned as a witch.
Fascinating, all this kind of things + light are the things i like most 
what i wanted to add :
1. big bang or the beginning of our universe is taken as an singularity by scientist. this mean that for the scientist what mater it start from there and what follow later. before that we have 0 evidence or data to observe an build an logical theory. so before big bang anyone can speculate or say what ever and will have right or wrong without fear of proven wrong
2. mass of stars planets or even black holes are calculated by the effect they have on object near them, how fast they spin how much the light bend and so on.
about the discussion on traveling with high speed near light speed i was thinking on something…. as predicted by theory the faster you travel more energy u need because the increase of the mass, but for example if the rocked is pushed by the burning gases with a force = (speed x mass ) this force will be greater in higher speed because the mass of the gases will increase too … is this factor taken in consideration by someone 
A bit of this and that… Physics and math are the tools and language used to describe the cosmos, at best a map. There are no layman’s terms that come anywhere close to describing the things we cannot yet imagine or visualize. Our understanding is so limited it’s a bit presumptuous to say what is or isn’t possible. Not much different in that respect from when we thought the world was flat. We poke and prod and hurl bits of matter at other bits to see what destruction can tell us of structure but both sub-atomic physics and astrophysics are still more questions than answers. We tend to make use of concepts long before we fully understand them but approach what is new with both fear and yearning. I used to wonder if the asteroid belt was once a planet.
That’s OK, time travel doesn’t believe in you either.
Belief is not a requirement for something to be plausible, or true. Likewise, matter from the past that still exists is why we are still here. You still exist from yesterday, don’t you?
Too many comments to quote here… but; No, Star Trek is not real, but some of the technology within its fictional bounds has inspired people to invent it, i.e the rudimentary tricorder, various medical scanning equipment, the cellular phone, etc.
As to who may have doubted Einstein, Hawking himself doubted many of Einstein’s theories, including the existence of black holes. We now know that Hawking was incorrect in stating that they do not likely exist. They do.
Black holes were only theoretical. However, the definition of a scientific theory means that there is some evidence to support it. This is confusing “theoretical” with “hypothetical”. Hypothetical has no substantiated evidence, but is merely presented as a hypothesis, or idea.
Also do not forget that while MOVING faster than light is theoretically impossible except with infinite energy (apparently unless you are a neutrino), TRAVELLING faster than light is not. You just need to get there first. This is where warped space-time and wormhole shortcuts come into play.
Please remember that time is relative, and merely a construct of our own creation to understand what was, what is, and what will be. The universe is not temporally-aware nor does it care.
I love hypothetical ideas, mine being that it is the black holes that are churning out ‘space’, swallowing everything around them, then breaking it down into it’s real basic components, ie dark matter and dark energy, and spitting it back out into the universe, a bit like fluffing up a pillow, thus needing more room and causing the universe to expand! Just a thought!
Hey here’s a question for those who know. It will be 2D for ease of understanding.
Is the speed of light measured from the object emitting it? Meaning a candle sends light at the same speed in both directions. So if a car drives past the candle, is that light going C + MPH ?
If the answer is no, it does not go faster from the car, then what is the universe’s magical reference point?