1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Black Hole Merger?

Discussion in 'The Material World' started by JoshuaTree, Jun 12, 2021.

  1. JoshuaTree

    JoshuaTree Flowers are red?

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2018
    Messages:
    983
    Ratings:
    +484
    Religion:
    Spiritual
    If nothing can escape the event horizon of a black hole how can two black holes merge? I've poked around google and read about gravity waves and 10% loss of mass etc... But how they merge isn't clear to me. If someone has a simple explanation I can understand I'd love to hear it. Thanks!
     
  2. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    14,828
    Ratings:
    +10,324
    Religion:
    Christian
    I am not so well versed in physics to understand it either. I would be curious to know. @Polymath257 do you have time to explain some of this?
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
  3. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    7,504
    Ratings:
    +6,581
    Religion:
    none
    I don't see your problem here. For two Black Holes to merge there is nothing that has to "leave" the event horizon. The spacetime distortion is already outside the horizon and that is what gets radiated in form of gravitational waves.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  4. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    34,827
    Ratings:
    +30,189
    Religion:
    None

    ^^^this^^^
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  5. WalterTrull

    WalterTrull Godfella

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,896
    Ratings:
    +1,356
    Oh that, well, yeah, uhmm...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,921
    Ratings:
    +455
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    Can I quote your question elsewhere?

    1. According to Steven Hawking a black hole can not be split into two black holes.
    2. The splitting in two parts is merging them together in the reverse run of time.
    3. The laws of nature are time-reversible,
    4. thus one is not able to merge two black holes.

    The author of idea: M.Sc. Dmitri Martila.

    Truth as God of Science
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  7. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    34,827
    Ratings:
    +30,189
    Religion:
    None

    2 the merging is bringing together, not splitting

    3 tell that to entropy

    4 oops Astronomers detect most powerful black-hole collision yet
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Twilight Hue

    Twilight Hue Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    35,978
    Ratings:
    +15,281
    Religion:
    Philosophical Buddhism
    Just two black holes merging into one big black hole.


    What I find more freaky is how black holes themselves die and dissipate.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  9. questfortruth

    questfortruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    2,921
    Ratings:
    +455
    Religion:
    Eastern Orthodox Christianity
    I have VCR. Video Casset Recorder. I had it.
    Thus, the film can be watched not from beginning to the end, but from end to beginning.
    It is the reverse of time.
    2. Thus, if something has merged in forward time, this is splitting into two parts in a reverse run of time.

    3. The entropy is the large-scale law, but on the local microscopic scale, there is no thermodynamics. What is the thermodynamics of an atom?!

    4. Hallucination, mass hallucination! UFO-effect or something.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    34,827
    Ratings:
    +30,189
    Religion:
    None

    2 It is therefore a mechanical simulation and nothing to do with reality

    3 black holes are not individual atoms but lots and lots of them. Nature is not a single atom but lots and lots if them. As is currently understood the arrow of time cannot go backwards.

    4 measurements with some of the mosr sophisticated equipment available on this planet. Of course the equipment could be hallucinating.
     
  11. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    20,665
    Ratings:
    +24,678
    Religion:
    Non-theist

    I don't see the problem. Nothing is leaving either black hole. The dynamics is complicated to model, but i fairly well understood.

    The gravity waves are from distortions of the spacetime outside of the black hole. The loss of mass is due to that energy release and simply represents a more 'stable' (less energetic) end state.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
  12. RestlessSoul

    RestlessSoul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2021
    Messages:
    1,197
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Religion:
    Agnostic Lapsed Catholic
    The obvious problem with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics - entropy always increases in a closed system; is the universe a closed system?

    Regards the reversibility of time; rather than a progression of moments, National Medal of Science winning physicist Yakir Aharonov sees time as the flow of information. And the flow runs backwards and forwards at the same time. Throughout a sequence of weak measurements on a photon, Aharanov observed that the photon’s state is a mix of it’s past and future state. In other words it is receiving information from the future; time, as characterised as the flow of information, is travelling in two directions at once.*

    * see The Quantum Astrologer’s Handbook, by Michael Brooks (the guy who, for his PhD thesis, made an electrical current circulate a ring of niobium metal in two directions at once).
     
  13. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    20,665
    Ratings:
    +24,678
    Religion:
    Non-theist

    This is the problem with reading popular treatments of QM.

    No, there was no flow of information back in time in Aharanov's experiment. All information goes into the future light cone.

    Yes, the current was flowing in two directions at once. That is a superposition, not a flow of information backwards in time.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. RestlessSoul

    RestlessSoul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2021
    Messages:
    1,197
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Religion:
    Agnostic Lapsed Catholic
    Aharanov makes two fairly robust assertions, does he not?
    1) that our notion of time and space is fundamentally flawed
    2) through preselection and postselection, we can read information from the future.

    Not sure why you have a problem with ‘popular’ treatments of QM. That sounds a little like the medieval church opposing translations of the Bible into popular European languages; lest the populace began to question the carefully curated religious orthodoxy of the time.
     
  15. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    20,665
    Ratings:
    +24,678
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Those are his more outlandish claims, but there is no experimental evidence for those claims. His more central ideas are in line with QM and do NOT have information flow backwards in time. The Aharanov-Bohm effect has been verified, but it is NOT an example of information flow backwards in time.

    And, in fact, one of the big problems in popular treatments of QM is exactly this sort of thing. The basis is usually trying to use classical mechanics and classical reasoning where QM applies.

    For example, in the 'quantum eraser', it is common in popular treatments to see claims that there is information going backwards in time to 'erase' the results of an experiment. That is simply false.

    The main problem I have is that they get QM wrong much more often than not. They tend to emphasize the 'gee-whiz' aspect and the apparent paradoxes. They tend to say outright false things about information moving faster than light, or backwards in time.

    I have absolutely no problem with people reading actual QM textbooks (which would be analogous to reading the Bible). What I have problems with is the poor quality of the popular treatments.

    One of the biggest problems in QM is people using classical physics and classical notions when quantum mechanics is involved. They are different. And you *will* get paradoxes if you try to understand QM using classical ideas. But you don't understand the better description in terms of the worse one. That leads to bad results. Instead, you should understand why the poor description worked as well as it did using the better description.

    In other words, the real question (which has mostly been answered) is why classical ideas worked so well for so long when it is actually QM that is what is going on.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. RestlessSoul

    RestlessSoul Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2021
    Messages:
    1,197
    Ratings:
    +1,012
    Religion:
    Agnostic Lapsed Catholic

    Hm. No doubt there are various interpretations of entanglement that do not require information to be travelling faster than the speed of light. Einstein described the phenomenon as ‘spooky’ though, did he not?

    I make no apologies for bypassing text books and reading those science writers that are accessible; nor for the fact that the “miracle and wonder” factors are what drew me to QM in the first place - along, no doubt, with all the other cranks, misfits and mystics.

    Pretty sure Michael Brooks, like Carlo Rovelli, is not a hack or a huckster btw.

    It is my intuitive conviction that the universe, and our experience of it, is predicated on paradox. It’s quite inspiring to discover that many theoretical scientists do share that perception.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Viker

    Viker Filia Diaboli, in a shroud of metaphor and mystery

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,436
    Ratings:
    +2,087
    Religion:
    LHP, Diabolism, Witchcraft
    Sorry. This is why I :heart: nerds. :p
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    20,665
    Ratings:
    +24,678
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Yes. And Einstein was demonstrably wrong when it came to QM.

    And there is a temendous amount of amazing material in QM. The problem is that *most* of the popular treatments are poor.

    Rovelli has done some good work on loop-quantum gravity. I would caution that *all* discussion of quantum gravity is speculative simply because we don't have the technology at this point to test *any* of the proposed theories. Loop-quantum gravity has some very interesting characteristics, but until we can test it, take it all with a grain of salt. The main competitor (although not the only one) is string theory.

    Brooks seems to be more of a politician than a scientist, although he seems to be on the right side of the science for the most part. Again, I would be cautious about his having an axe to grind.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
  19. JoshuaTree

    JoshuaTree Flowers are red?

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2018
    Messages:
    983
    Ratings:
    +484
    Religion:
    Spiritual
    Out of my league here for sure but trying to understand, great input from everyone, thanks!

    So is it true that black holes never merge, two "merging" black holes continue to merge until one of the two (the smaller) black holes totally dissipate in gravity waves? If a black hole is dissipating then something has to cross the event horizon right?

    My confusion is that the event horizon is caused by a singularity of a lot of mass, that mass can not merge with another singularity because if the event horizon, stuff spiraling in to the black hole is probably burnt off as gravity waves... But what happens to the singularity itself? Doesn't it have to remain unique to itself?

    Thanks!
     
  20. JoshuaTree

    JoshuaTree Flowers are red?

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2018
    Messages:
    983
    Ratings:
    +484
    Religion:
    Spiritual
    Buy what happens to the singularity below the event horizon?
     
Loading...