Astrophysics and Cosmology - Discuss the Universe here

[zeebo]

It seems as if the limited sensitivity of our gravity wave detectors would also be limitation on research and future learning. It took a massive collision of two black holes to cause a ripple the width of a human thumb ...

According to one of the previous links "A change in the lengths of the arms smaller than one-ten-thousandth the diameter of a proton (10-19 meter) can be detected."  That's a pretty amazing level of precision so maybe we can detect somewhat smaller events.

[Value Of Pi]

aside from the connection with Bob lazar, these thoughts mirrored mine exactly

I recall that Lazar talked about alien propulsion technology based on harnessing anti-gravity, but how does that relate to what I'm asking?

[Value Of Pi]

According to one of the previous links "A change in the lengths of the arms smaller than one-ten-thousandth the diameter of a proton (10-19 meter) can be detected."  That's a pretty amazing level of precision so maybe we can detect somewhat smaller events.

Yes, maybe. I guess I'm wondering, overall, how important this discovery will be if we don't develop the instrumentation to do more than confirm what Einstein already predicted. It seems like the plan is to do here what astronomers and physicists have done in the visible universe -- make observations and then come up with new theories to explain them.

We either need another Einstein to use math and imagination to move us forward, or we need to observe something that provokes some Einstein-like thinking. I'm not sure if the required technology is an inevitable development. But what do I know? I'm not a physicist or an astronomer.

[area51drone]

I recall that Lazar talked about alien propulsion technology based on harnessing anti-gravity, but how does that relate to what I'm asking?

I made the connection to Lazar, not you.   Lazar said in the 80's that gravity waves were the propulsion method, it was the first thing I thought about when they confirmed the findings (actually when AO mentioned the rumors) .   

What I don't understand is how relevant looking at gravity waves would be.   I understand it's an important achievement.  I just don't see why it would be that useful, but I'm looking forward to seeing what does come out of it.

[GravitySucks]

Being able to study gravitational waves opens a completely new window to the Universe. Up until now we have used electromagnetic radiation to study signals from the stars and other objects in the sky. But electromagnetic waves do not tell the whole story. They can reveal only those processes that produce radio waves, visible light, X-rays, etc. Gravitational waves are entirely different than electromagnetic waves and are generated by sources which do not produce electromagnetic waves for example, two isolated black holes colliding are invisible to our conventional telescopes. But they are readily detectable using gravitational waves.

The announcement by LIGO is as revolutionary for astronomy and astrophysics as it was when Galileo used the first telescope.

In fact, the binary black hole system they made the announcement on emitted three solar masses worth of energy in gravitational waves. This is like take three Suns worth of mass, completely annihilating them and dropping all that energy into the fabric of the Universe itself. At the peak of the event the black hole merger was fifty times more powerful than the electromagnetic output of all the stars in the entire Universe combined. Yet we were completely blind to such an event up to this point. We need detectors like LIGO to see these kinds of events and simply can't study them otherwise. Think about all the mysterious signals we get from pointing telescopes and radio dishes upward - fast radio bursts, gamma ray bursts, X-ray transients - LIGO pulls back the veil on even more mysterious and exotic phenomena.

The next step will be when there are enough gravitational wave detectors to refine positions on the sky. Then we may be able to see an event with gravitational waves and turn our conventional telescopes toward it as well, or vice versa, and learn a lot more about the phenomena that we can see in both wave regimes, such as the surface structures of neutron stars for example.

Moreover, gravitational wave astronomy also allows for tests of general relativity in the strong field regime, at energies we have never before tested GR. This is key because we can't do those kind of tests on Earth and require the detailed study of astronomical sources for. The results announced yesterday all conform to Einstein's field equations but as more statistics are gathered and binary mergers are seen we will amass a lot of data about how gravity behaves from direct observations and how this may limit proposed theories of quantum gravity going forward. The first significant thing we seem to have answered though not directly addressed yesterday is that the speed of gravitational waves seems to be the same as the speed of light, this kills all theories that expect light and gravitational waves to propagate at different speeds.

It's a very important discovery, words like "landmark", "watershed" and "game-changer" can easily be used as labels. The LIGO team will win a nobel prize for this.

Incidentally an additional 12 papers were released on the arXiv yesterday, it sounds as if they have a total of eight candidate detections so far but the system reported on was by far the most significant and clear. An impressive discovery.

I am trying to wrap my head around this and I am struggling with the premise of mass being completely anhilated and converted into energy, and I am not sure I can even frame my question(s) correctly.
if I understand correctly,
The reason we have been blind to this merger of black holes is because the gravitational force of the black holes does not allow for the escape of electromagnetic radiation. And it is the mass that causes that gravitational force, so if the mass were anhilated into energy, the gravitational force would be lessened, allowing for the electromagnetic radiation of the energy to be detected.

is if that the "three Suns worth of mass" is just a small fraction of the combined mass of the two black holes combining that accounts for this?

Wouldn't this mass and/or energy, even if it was anhilated, still remain within the event horizon of the black hole?

I can almost visualize ripples in space time caused by gravitational waves, but all animations I have seen of the event show the ripples expanding away from the origin. That seems counter intuitive to me. It seems that ripples or waves would first move toward the origin, like a stone dropped into water, and then propagate away as an after effect.

I feel I haven't framed my questions completely or even coherently, all I know is my head hurts more today than it did last week.

[Richard Groyper]

I am trying to wrap my head around this and I am struggling with the premise of mass being completely anhilated and converted into energy, and I am not sure I can even frame my question(s) correctly.
if I understand correctly,
The reason we have been blind to this merger of black holes is because the gravitational force of the black holes does not allow for the escape of electromagnetic radiation. And it is the mass that causes that gravitational force, so if the mass were anhilated into energy, the gravitational force would be lessened, allowing for the electromagnetic radiation of the energy to be detected.

is if that the "three Suns worth of mass" is just a small fraction of the combined mass of the two black holes combining that accounts for this?

Wouldn't this mass and/or energy, even if it was anhilated, still remain within the event horizon of the black hole?

I can almost visualize ripples in space time caused by gravitational waves, but all animations I have seen of the event show the ripples expanding away from the origin. That seems counter intuitive to me. It seems that ripples or waves would first move toward the origin, like a stone dropped into water, and then propagate away as an after effect.

I feel I haven't framed my questions completely or even coherently, all I know is my head hurts more today than it did last week.

Theoretically, "Hawking Radiation" is the only energy that is emitted/escapes (due to quantum effects) from a singulary. Nothing else (that scientists know of) escapes the 'Event Horizon', unless the matter/energy is ejected before entering.

Too answer your question: No; the (theoretical) "Hawking Radiation" would not remain in the event horizon. That would be impossible, due to it being emitted away from the center of gravity. 

[GravitySucks]

Theoretically, "Hawking Radiation" is the only energy that is emitted/escapes (due to quantum effects) from a singulary. Nothing else (that scientists know of) escapes the 'Event Horizon', unless the matter/energy is ejected before entering.

Too answer your question: No; the (theoretical) "Hawking Radiation" would not remain in the event horizon. That would be impossible, due to it being emitted away from the center of gravity.

Thanks. Time to read up about Hawking Radiation.

[FearBoysWithBugs]

The reason we have been blind to this merger of black holes is because the gravitational force of the black holes does not allow for the escape of electromagnetic radiation. And it is the mass that causes that gravitational force, so if the mass were anhilated into energy, the gravitational force would be lessened, allowing for the electromagnetic radiation of the energy to be detected.

Correct about electromagnetic radiation.  However, relativity predicts that black holes emit gravitational radiation -- gravitational waves -- which carry energy away from the black hole. 

Even though some loss (3 solar masses) of energy was lost during the collision, the mass of the resulting black hole was larger than either of the two that created it.  So it's still a black hole, ie no escape of electromagnetic radiation.

[Radio Activity]

Is it possible for black holes to swallow up all matter in the universe and then swallow up each other eventually creating a super massive black hole of everything? Could it then collapse to a point and explode in a big bang?

[Richard Groyper]

Is it possible for black holes to swallow up all matter in the universe and then swallow up each other eventually creating a super massive black hole of everything? Could it then collapse to a point and explode in a big bang?

There's a theory that our universe is IN a black hole.

[FearBoysWithBugs]

Is it possible for black holes to swallow up all matter in the universe and then swallow up each other eventually creating a super massive black hole of everything? Could it then collapse to a point and explode in a big bang?

That would require, as a start, that the expansion of the universe is slowing, and it seems to be doing the reverse: the expansion is accelerating.  That suggests that there could not be a merger of all black holes into one big honkin black hole.

[Value Of Pi]

There's a theory that our universe is IN a black hole.

That's heavy, man.

[GravitySucks]

This, and some of the other videos in the series about the size of the universe made my head hurt slightly less.


http://youtu.be/1Tstyqz2g7o

[Chronaut]

 

Yes, maybe. I guess I'm wondering, overall, how important this discovery will be if we don't develop the instrumentation to do more than confirm what Einstein already predicted. It seems like the plan is to do here what astronomers and physicists have done in the visible universe -- make observations and then come up with new theories to explain them.

We either need another Einstein to use math and imagination to move us forward, or we need to observe something that provokes some Einstein-like thinking. I'm not sure if the required technology is an inevitable development. But what do I know? I'm not a physicist or an astronomer.

As Agent : Orange mentioned, this isn’t just a confirmation, it’s a whole new tool we’ll be able to refine, which gives us our first peek at the physics within an event horizon, and may eventually give us new information about the regions of the universe beyond the comic microwave background radiation â€" both of which are vital to understand the murky region where general relativity and quantum mechanics are both playing key roles at the same time.  That’s probably going to lead to the unified field theory we’ve all been waiting for.  When we have that one sexy little equation that ties quantum mechanics together with general relativity, the technological advances we’ll eventually see from that breakthrough are going to make the advancements of last century look like legos and alphabet blocks.

I can almost visualize ripples in space time caused by gravitational waves, but all animations I have seen of the event show the ripples expanding away from the origin. That seems counter intuitive to me. It seems that ripples or waves would first move toward the origin, like a stone dropped into water, and then propagate away as an after effect. 

The ripples model isn’t accurate because waves on water are just up and down â€" gravitational waves are quadrupole radiation, stretching perpendicular to the direction of travel along one axis, and then stretching perpendicular to the direction of travel along a second axis oriented at 90deg to the first axis.  And if that isn’t weird enough to visualize, they polarize at 45deg angles rather than 90deg, and can rotate as well.

I’m not sure if water waves propagate to the center first, but gravitational waves just radiate away, like light does.

Theoretically, "Hawking Radiation" is the only energy that is emitted/escapes (due to quantum effects) from a singulary. Nothing else (that scientists know of) escapes the 'Event Horizon', unless the matter/energy is ejected before entering. 

Whenever a body falls into a black hole it radiates gravitational waves, so we’ll be able to observe that whole process now, right down to the collision at the singularity.  Gravitational waves carry energy away from the inside of a black hole, so they’re kinda like an x-ray that lifts the veil of what’s going on it there.  Pretty damn exciting stuff.  I haven’t caught up on the new papers yet, but the shape of the signal should tell us some specifics about the event that caused the waves we picked up.  As we build more and better detectors, we’ll be able to tease more information from the signals we pick up.

The European Space Agency has a space-based gravitational wave detector called eLISA scheduled to go up in 2038; hopefully they’ll speed that along now that we have confirmation, and maybe by then they’ll be able to achieve a higher resolution than the LIGO facilities.

I made the connection to Lazar, not you.   Lazar said in the 80's that gravity waves were the propulsion method, it was the first thing I thought about when they confirmed the findings (actually when AO mentioned the rumors) .   

What I don't understand is how relevant looking at gravity waves would be.   I understand it's an important achievement.  I just don't see why it would be that useful, but I'm looking forward to seeing what does come out of it.

Bob Lazar’s description of gravitational waves isn’t correlated with general relativity or the nuclear strong force.  That’s one of the “tells” about his story that reveals to physicists that his model is bogus.  Gravitational waves have been well understood mathematically for decades, and they don’t work the way he says.

I see promise in gravitational waves as a propulsion mechanism for manned interstellar spaceflight, but that's a moot point until we can somehow generate high amplitude gravitational waves technologically.  My greatest hope for a unified field theory is that we'll find a way to generate and amplify gravitational waves in the lab.

[area51drone]

Bob Lazar’s description of gravitational waves isn’t correlated with general relativity or the nuclear strong force.  That’s one of the “tells” about his story that reveals to physicists that his model is bogus.  Gravitational waves have been well understood mathematically for decades, and they don’t work the way he says.

I see promise in gravitational waves as a propulsion mechanism for manned interstellar spaceflight, but that's a moot point until we can somehow generate high amplitude gravitational waves technologically.  My greatest hope for a unified field theory is that we'll find a way to generate and amplify gravitational waves in the lab.

Please enlighten me on how Bob Lazar is wrong given that you just said in your second paragraph basically what I believe he has said.   I assume you're talking about "element 115" or whatever that was - that is what the craft supposedly used as fuel.   As far as I know, he never said that the nuclear force and gravity were linked.   He said that there was a device on board that was basically an amplifier that generates gravity waves kind of like a microwave.    I'm paraphrasing, those weren't his exact words.

[Agent : Orange]

Very interesting paper posted to the arXiv last night. This group using Fermi observed a gamma-ray transient source with energy above 50 keV in a direction consistent with GW150914, which arrived some 0.4 seconds after the GW event was recorded.

Coincidence? Or has the first electromagnetic counterpart of a gravitational wave source already been seen?
http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.03920

These groups also tried searching for an electromagnetic counterpart but did not find anything. PAN-STARRS1, INTEGRAL and DECam all missed it but make a good case for the feasibility of future observations of EM counterparts to GW detections.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04156
http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04180
http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04198

And ahoy Chronaut!

[Chronaut]

Hi Agent : Orange â€" I love your work here; it’s great to find some advanced physics on BellGab =P

You’ve covered the exciting academic sides of this subject, but area51drone had some questions about Bob Lazar’s statements and how they may or may not apply to this subject, and since I’ve studied that case pretty thoroughly I thought I’d answer him here:  I’m hope it’s not too far off-topic for this thread!

Please enlighten me on how Bob Lazar is wrong given that you just said in your second paragraph basically what I believe he has said.   I assume you're talking about "element 115" or whatever that was - that is what the craft supposedly used as fuel.   As far as I know, he never said that the nuclear force and gravity were linked.   He said that there was a device on board that was basically an amplifier that generates gravity waves kind of like a microwave.    I'm paraphrasing, those weren't his exact words.

The Bob Lazar case is actually very interesting, but not for the reasons most people think.  A close look at; the public records that we do have about him, his statements about the security procedures he describes and the presence of “minders” when he’s interviewed in person, and the routine mistakes he makes when talking about physics, suggest to me that he’s a covert operative employed by a secret government program involved in heavy element research, and he was probably a low-level support technician at Los Alamos when he was recruited to tell his wild story about ufos.  Of particular interest is the little-known fact that our best nuclear physicists conducting superheavy element nucleosynthesis in Dubna, Russia, believe that there may be a neutron-rich isotope of element 115 on the “island of stability” with a half-life measured in geological timescales.  Modern facilities aren’t capable of probing that region of the periodic table though, so proposals are on the table for new accelerators that could reach it.  But we’re talking about gravitational waves and Lazar’s crazy claims about them, so let’s focus on that.

I’m kinda surprised that you were unaware of Lazar’s assertions that there are two forms of gravity waves:  he calls them “gravity A” and “gravity B.”  He discusses them in most of his interviews when he gets into the alleged ufo propulsion technology, and these statements are frequently referenced in online discussions as well.

Lazar claims that the “gravity A wave” holds the atomic nucleus together â€" so he’s talking about what we know as the nuclear strong force, aka the color force.  That introduces a host of serious problems because the strong force has an extremely short range and is extremely intense (it doesn’t fall off by the inverse square law that gravity does and it’s 38 orders of magnitude more powerful than gravity is at that range).  Lazar also claims that the “gravity B wave” is responsible for the macroscopic effects we see in astrophysics, between the Sun and the Earth for example.  Except we know that gravity is much more like a charge â€" it’s static, and only radiates gravitational waves when there’s a quadrupole moment â€" and the gravitational waves emitted in that case do not bind celestial bodies together.

This post would be a chapter or perhaps a book if we discussed the problems with Lazar’s gravity wave statements in detail, so I’ll just list some of the other problems:  gravity waves don’t follow waveguides like EM waves do; the strong force doesn’t reach beyond the electron shell of any atom â€" it barely reaches beyond the nucleus, even among the superheavy isotopes - which we know from experimentation and the accuracy of the models that describe these nuclei; even if you could channel gravitational waves along three tubes to point at your destination (as he describes in his “Omicron configuration” descriptions) gravitational waves wouldn’t “pull the craft to the destination”; the energy levels of the reactor he describes don’t come even remotely close to the energy requirements of producing gravitational wave effects of useful magnitudes without violating the conservation of energy; he describes “bouncing” a golf ball off the field of the gravity reactor, but obviously the field isn’t being contained within it if that’s possible, rendering the “gravity waveguides” moot.

Here are some excerpts of Lazar’s statements, followed by critiques from a Yale particle physicist, and then a couple of additional Lazar quotes from a radio interview transcript, so you can see what Lazar has said about gravitational waves and why he’s wrong about them:

Lazar:  There are currently two main theories about gravity. The "wave" theory which states that gravity is a wave, and the other is a theory which includes "gravitons", which are alleged sub-atomic particles which perform as gravity, which by the way, is total nonsense.

Dr. Morgan:  These statements by Lazar are "total nonsense". There is only ONE currently accepted theory of gravity: General Relativity. In GR, gravity is described as a distortion of spacetime, not as a particle or a wave. There are phenomena known as "gravitational waves" which exist in GR, but this does not seem to be what Lazar is talking about. Lazar says that gravity IS a wave. It isn’t a wave. The "gravitons" which he speaks of are a feature of QUANTUM gravitational theories, and I think they require a little explanation.

All physicists realize that the theories of QM and GR are incomplete, because they are mutually incompatible. In order to have a complete theory, theoretical physicists are looking to combine the two into a unified theory which will involve a quantum theory of gravity. There are currently no quantum theories of gravity that work.  But even though a satisfactory theory does not yet exist, there is nothing at all nonsensical about gravitons. When an adequate quantum theory of gravity IS formulated, the energy of the gravitational field will be quantized. This quantum of the gravitational field is what physicists call the graviton. It is no more nonsensical than the photon - which is the quantum of the electromagnetic field.

(To add to the confusion of Lazar's statement, in any quantum theory of gravity, as in all quantum theories, the graviton will be, in a sense, BOTH a particle AND a wave!)

Lazar:  Gravity A is what is currently being labeled as the "strong nuclear force" in mainstream physics ...

Dr. Morgan:  This is the place where Lazar begins to get him self in real trouble. As it is understood now, the strong nuclear force has NOTHING TO DO WITH GRAVITY. Such a statement shows either a complete lack of understanding of the physics of the Standard Model of particle interactions, or a BLATANT attempt at deception. The equations and coupling strengths which describe the two forces are totally different and unrelated. The strong force couples only to quarks and gluons. The gravitational force couples to all particles with mass. The strong force is extremely short range. The range of gravity is infinite. The gravitational coupling constant is orders of magnitude smaller than that of the strong interaction. There is NO BASIS for using the word "gravity" to describe the strong interaction IN ANY WAY.

Lazar:  The most important attribute of these heavier, stable elements is that the gravity A wave is so abundant that it actually extends past the perimeter of the atom. These heavier, stable elements literally have their own gravity A field around them...

Lazar:  No naturally occurring atoms on earth have enough protons and neutrons for the cumulative gravity A wave to extend past the perimeter of the atom...

Dr. Morgan:  Since Mr. Lazar has already identified this gravity A wave with the nuclear force, he is essentially claiming that the nuclear force of element 115 extends beyond the limits of the "115-ium" atom. (I'm tempted to call it Lazarium...and somewhat surprised that he doesn't!!) This is simply not possible, given the known properties of the nuclear force. The past 50 years of probing the nucleus have taught us that the range of the nuclear force is VERY short, and protons and neutrons only feel the pull of their nearest neighbors in a nucleus. Because of this fact, the nuclear force extends out to about the same distance away from a nucleus NO MATTER HOW MASSIVE THE NUCLEUS IS. This fact is fundamental to the science of nuclear physics.

http://web.archive.org/web/20061220030435/http://www.serve.com/mahood/lazar/critiq.htm


Lazar: Everything seems to come down to 115. It's a super-heavy element. It seems that as you get into the heavier elements -- and I'm sure this property extends into as-yet-undiscovered elements in excess of atomic number 115 -- that the ATOMIC gravity wave inside the atoms holding things together begins to extend outside of the atomic structure itself, and it's this wave that can be tapped off in quantity -- small quantity, actually. This wave can be amplified, contained, and used for a useful purpose.

Lazar: The low-speed mode -- and I REALLY wish I could remember what they call these, but I can't, as I can't remember the frequency of the wave -- The low-speed mode: The craft is very vulnerable; it bobs around. And it's sitting on a weak gravitational field, sitting on three gravity waves. And it just bounces around. And it can focus the waves behind it and keep falling forward and hobble around at low speed. The second mode: They increase the amplitude of the field, and the craft begins to lift, and it performs a ROLL maneuver: it begins to turn, roll, begins to turn over. As it begins to leave the earth's gravitational field, they point the bottom of the craft at the DESTINATION. This is the second mode of travel, where they converge the three gravity amplifiers -- FOCUS them -- on a point that they want to go to. Then they bring them up to full power, and this is where the tremendous time-space distortion takes place, and that whips them right to that point.

http://j_kidd.tripod.com/b/42.html

[FearBoysWithBugs]

The past 50 years of probing the nucleus have taught us that the range of the nuclear force is VERY short, and protons and neutrons only feel the pull of their nearest neighbors in a nucleus. Because of this fact, the nuclear force extends out to about the same distance away from a nucleus NO MATTER HOW MASSIVE THE NUCLEUS IS. This fact is fundamental to the science of nuclear physics.

Nice summary.  I would add that a reason why larger elements are unstable is that the nucleus itself is larger than the smaller elements.  Meaning that protons on opposite sides of the nucleus feel a mutual repulsion from their positive electromagnetic charges that overcomes the binding of strong force, resulting in a decay or series of decays to a lower and eventually more stable element.  That would not be the case, presumably, if the strong force extends beyond the radius of the atom.  I might not be understanding Lazer's claims correctly but I think that some version of what I just explained would also tend to debunk them.

[Agent : Orange]

Nice review Chronaut and FBWBugs.

I heard a tape of Lazar's claims somewhere. From what I remember his ideas were a lot of science-fiction word-salad to me. He picked some legitimate terms but arranged them in a way that didn't make much sense overall. I also remember that he was all prose, no math. Which does not help. The "gravity A" and "gravity B" business is nonsense.

However, to break the fourth wall with a knowing wink, Ununpentium was recognized as an element in December 2015 but only about 100 atoms of the stuff have ever been produced. Not quite on the island of stability either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununpentium

[Chronaut]

Nice summary.  I would add that a reason why larger elements are unstable is that the nucleus itself is larger than the smaller elements.  Meaning that protons on opposite sides of the nucleus feel a mutual repulsion from their positive electromagnetic charges that overcomes the binding of strong force, resulting in a decay or series of decays to a lower and eventually more stable element.  That would not be the case, presumably, if the strong force extends beyond the radius of the atom.  I might not be understanding Lazer's claims correctly but I think that some version of what I just explained would also tend to debunk them.

Yep - in fact you've just described the basic calculation that led to the atomic bomb.

I made an oversight with my formatting though - that statement you quoted wasn't from me, that was a response from Dr. David Morgan to Lazar's remark, and naturally he's right: as a particle physicist he understands nuclear forces very well.

[Richard Groyper]

Quantum gravity.

[Chronaut]

Nice review Chronaut and FBWBugs.

I heard a tape of Lazar's claims somewhere. From what I remember his ideas were a lot of science-fiction word-salad to me. He picked some legitimate terms but arranged them in a way that didn't make much sense overall. I also remember that he was all prose, no math. Which does not help. The "gravity A" and "gravity B" business is nonsense.

However, to break the fourth wall with a knowing wink, Ununpentium was recognized as an element in December 2015 but only about 100 atoms of the stuff have ever been produced. Not quite on the island of stability either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ununpentium

Yep - Lazar sounds like he learned most of his physics from the popular science press - he routinely misses fundamental aspects of academic physics that a Ph.D or Master's graduate would never overlook.  And it's inconceivable that a physicist in that position wouldn't remember a single equation from the work they were doing.  I suspect that all of the stuff about ufos and gravity waves was part of the cover story - a dazzling little wrapper to get the real story components (the security protocols for validation purposes, and the mention of a stable isotope of element 115 for funding purposes) widely disseminated and into the hands of the budget committees without breaking compartmentalization secrecy.

And while it's true that researchers have made an isotope of Ununpentium, they believe there may be additional isotopes and that one particular neutron-rich isotope that's beyond our current synthesis capabilities may be extremely stable.  One estimate offered an upper range on the half-life of millions of years.  So it's possible that we could find the stuff in the dirt, if we looked hard enough.

[gabrielle]

Would you guys please stop being so fascinating.  I am trying to get some work done over here!  Honestly, this is the most interesting stuff I have read in a long time. Thank you all for this discussion and for taking the time to answer questions so thoughtfully.  I am sure I not the only non-scientist reading this and trying to follow. THANK YOU.

[GravitySucks]

Would you guys please stop being so fascinating.  I am trying to get some work done over here!  Honestly, this is the most interesting stuff I have read in a long time. Thank you all for this discussion and for taking the time to answer questions so thoughtfully.  I am sure I not the only non-scientist reading this and trying to follow. THANK YOU.

Maybe we need to have a 2017 Scientists of BellGab Calendar just for the Bella-Haven babes.

[gabrielle]

Maybe we need to have a 2017 Scientists of BellGab Calendar just for the Bella-Haven babes.

As long as it has the phases of the moon ....I'd go for it. LOL.

I would prefer you all do a podcast or a show about this stuff.  Well...maybe both.

[Chronaut]

Maybe we need to have a 2017 Scientists of BellGab Calendar just for the Bella-Haven babes.

We can’t have that â€" if we publish photos I’ll never know which of the ladies love me for my mind and which ones simply fell for my good looks =)

As long as it has the phases of the moon ....I'd go for it. LOL.

I would prefer you all do a podcast or a show about this stuff.  Well...maybe both.

I'd be happy to see a Science forum here - then we could see about doing a little science-themed GabCast spinoff from time to time...

[area51drone]

Thank you for the detailed reply, chron. I do remember some of that
now that you mention it. The only thing I can reply to that is that Lazar did have multiple witnesses who saw the craft in flight, unless of course they are all lying, and that as you mentioned, our knowledge is limited even though we think "we" know a lot. I say we because I'll admit I don't.  I think the best part of your response is that people should consider the gravity waves that were detected similarly to the distortion you'd experience on the crest of an ocean wave as opposed to a light wave, right?  However, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around this... you could easily say that light is a distortion in the electromagnetic ocean, no?

I'm sure I'm showing more ignorance here, but you mentioned the conservation of energy... wasn't there a new space drive recently proven to break that very law? I apologize for not having that drives name on the tip of my tongue, and I'm on my cell so it's hard to look up while responding to this.

[gabrielle]

We can’t have that â€" if we publish photos I’ll never know which of the ladies love me for my mind and which ones simply fell for my good looks =)

I'd be happy to see a Science forum here - then we could see about doing a little science-themed GabCast spinoff from time to time...

Will the brilliant minds in thread entertain questions from the cheap seats?  I feel like I owe you all a tuition fee already.  Can "artsies" ask questions here? 

[FearBoysWithBugs]

Will the brilliant minds in thread entertain questions from the cheap seats?  I feel like I owe you all a tuition fee already.  Can "artsies" ask questions here?

Of course you can.  Ask away, and don't be shy.

[gabrielle]

Of course you can.  Ask away, and don't be shy.

Can a gravitational wave cause another object to move?  (don't laugh...)