-11
$\begingroup$

By analysis of gravity waves GW150914 to S200114f when compared to a ratio from the Black Hole merger of 65 M ☉ at 260 Hz with Betelgeuse frequency of 64.698303 Hz the gravitational release on January 14, 2020 illustrates Betelgeuse's actual total solar mass of about 16.17 M ☉. This fits neatly with a solar mass approximation article from newswise exactly as they say 16.5 to 19 solar masses. Since the information was limited for the gravitational wave of S200114f, does this new found information derived from the Hertz and timings ratios to mass indicate a core collapse of the star Betelgeuse?

The exact value can be found using Table II in [52], where the leading harmonic ( = 2, m = 2, n = 0) for a black hole with a spin χ = 0.7 has G c3 MωGW = 0.5326 + 0.0808i, giving a ringdown frequency fGW|ringdown ≈ 260Hz 65M ☉ , https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1608/1608.01940.pdf

Their analysis reported a present-day mass of 16.5 to 19 solar mass--which is slightly lower than the most-recent estimates. The study also revealed how big Betelgeuse is, as well as its distance from Earth. The star's actual size has been a bit of a mystery: earlier studies, for instance, suggested it could be bigger than the orbit of Jupiter. However, the team's results showed Betelgeuse only extends out to two-thirds of that, with a radius 750 times the radius of the sun. Once the physical size of the star is known, it will be possible to determine its distance from Earth. Thus far, the team's results show it is a mere 530 light years from us, or 25 percent closer than previously thought.

Study of supergiant star Betelgeuse unveils the cause of its pulsations Betelgeuse is normally one of the brightest, most recognizable stars of the winter sky, marking the left shoulder of the constellation Orion.

Solar Mass to Hertz Ratio indicates the star Betelgeuse's total 16.17M ☉

Betelgeuse Solar Mass Loss Betelgeuse's Net Solar Mass loss of Betelgeuse is 13.74M ☉ which settled into a Neutron star with a mass of 2.4255M ☉. The following is very important towards black hole theoretical science; moreover what about this 3 solar mass with the ratio? Well it must have been involved with the violent collision of the black holes warping space time contributing to the gravity wave. As the giant black holes collided in the first nanoseconds; I postulate the area field was not yet settled and it was in the process of forming the 65M ☉. Thus a shape at its fraction of second collision was different until it settled, moving forward as the smaller black hole when entering the larger may have had a 3 solar mass oblong shape at the instant it was swallowed by the larger then finally rotating at a speed with its new mass. Timings Betelgeuse

Betelgeuse Neutron Stars Spin 3.26 ms

Betelgeuse Above image is of Orion with Red Star Betelgeuse and localization of gravity wave S200114f. Also here is the associated Hertz and timings of the gravity wave. Group Burst Detectors H1,L1,V1 Time of Signal 2020-01-14 02:08:18.230000 UTC Time Sent 2020-01-14 02:48:21 UTC False Alarm Rate once per 25.84 years Central Frequency 64.698303 Hz Duration 0.013534 seconds Orion Gravitation Wave location

Here is some code which supports a 5.2 light year delay for a visible Betelgeuse Supernova showing up in March of 2025.

 import time
 print('''Two to the power of Exponential growth of Gravities
 Constant <G> multiplied by the fine structure contant multiplied
 by 12 hours divided by n.
 To obtain a light year delay from a gravitational wave on January 
 14, 2020 sourced at Betelgeuse enter these parameters:

 divide Proton: 2489
 Spin Number: .594
 Enter Parsec's: 150
 Add Parsec's: 19
 Subtract Parsec's: 5
 ________________________________________ ''')
 while True:
     n = int(input("Enter Number to divide Proton: "))
     s = float(input("Spin Number: "))
     Parsec = int(input("Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
     Plus_Parsec = int(input("Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
     Minus_Parsec = int(input("Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
     start_time = time.time()
     G_constant = (.00000000006674)
     proton_width = (((0.00000000000001)*s)/(n))
     gravity_wave = ((proton_width))
     G = ((pow(2,((1 +(((.00000000006674*.0072973*(12/n))*((( 1 ))))))))))
     Gravities_Geometry = ((G*3.14))
     Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source = 
     (((((((G))/(gravity_wave))*86400*365)/((Gravities_Geometry)- 
     ((G/2))))/9461000000000000))/1000000

     Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity = (3.26*(Parsec+(Plus_Parsec- 
     Minus_Parsec)))
     difference = (Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity- 
     Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source)
     print('{0:.14f}'.format(G_constant),'Gravitational Constant')
     print('{0:.99f}'.format(proton_width),'Proton Width')
     print('{0:.110f}'.format(gravity_wave),'Gravity Wave')
     print(G,'G as exponential growth')
     print('{0:.15f}'.format(Gravities_Geometry),'Gravities_Geometry')

     print("{:,}".format(Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity),'Ligos 
     distance approximation from luminosity in light years')
     print('{0:,.1f}'.format(Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source),'Distance Gravity Wave 
     traveled going by ONeils Gravity Geometric')
     print("{:,}".format(difference),'difference from Ligo and Geometric source in light 
     years')
     e = int(time.time() - start_time)
     print('{:02d}:{:02d}:{:02d}'.format(e // 3600, (e % 3600 // 60), e % 60))
$\endgroup$
3
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This is a really badly presented question, complete with promotional video for your self-published book on the topic. Asking for validation of personal theories is off-topic, but in this case, perhaps science is best served by finding a real question hidden in all the mishmash, i.e. does GW150914 (S200114f) represent the core collapse of Betelgeuse, with the light from the supposed supernova lagging behind the GW by about 5 years? A categoric "NO", based on hard science, should be the end of the matter. Though it may not bode well for book sales... $\endgroup$ Jul 19 at 8:41
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I’m voting to close this question because it's really just an attempt by the OP to espouse their own theories on GW150914. $\endgroup$
    – HDE 226868
    Jul 21 at 1:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There's a good answer based on science, and an answer by the OP pushing the same self-promoting information they covered in their question. The best response is to vote the answer down until it disappears from view. $\endgroup$ Jul 22 at 2:05
11
$\begingroup$

No, for several reasons.

  1. The expected gravitational wave signature of a core collapse supernova looks nothing like that from a merging black hole binary system, so no sensible comparison can be done with GW150914.

  2. The maximum frequency of the gravitational waves from a merger decreases with increasing mass. The expected frequencies from a core collapse are expected to be of order $\sqrt{G\rho}$, where $\rho$ is the density of the core. During the collapse, the density increases from about $10^{11}$ kg/m$^{3}$ to $10^{17}$ kg/m$^3$, thus the peak frequencies would be $\sim $ kHz. Detailed numerical calculation predict a sweep of frequencies from a few hundred Hz to a few kHz over the course of a few tenths of a second (e.g. Andresen et al. 2020; Jardine et al. 2021), much higher than the peak frequencies of S200114f.

  3. Gravitational waves travel at (very close to) the speed of light -to a few parts in $10^{15}$, as was demonstrated conclusively by the almost simultaneous gravitational wave and gamma ray burst witnessed from a distant kilonova (Abbott et al. 2017). In a core collapse, the gravitational waves (and neutrinos) escape promptly, whereas the shockwave of a supernova would take a few hours to propagate outwards. The core of Betelgeuse did not collapse on 20/01/20 (minus the GW travel time) otherwise we would have seen the supernova a few hours later.

  4. No neutrino burst has been detected.

  5. The gravitational waves are unlikely to have come from the direction of Betelegeuse - see below; gravitational wave location map from Page et al. (2020) and I've marked Betelgeuse with a red star.

S200114f

$\endgroup$
0
-4
$\begingroup$

Betelgeuse Group Burst Detectors H1,L1,V1 Time of Signal 2020-01-14 02:08:18.230000 UTC Time Sent 2020-01-14 02:48:21 UTC False Alarm Rate once per 25.84 years Central Frequency 64.698303 Hz Duration 0.013534 seconds

Map of Orion Constellation for gravity wave S200114f

The short burst was part of the problem for Ligo to accurately pinpoint the source of a gravity wave on January 14, 2020 and sourcing gravity wave locations is complicated as I understand. This was their shortest burst ever, indicative of a core collapse, because no black hole mergers nor black hole neutron star mergers fit such a short burst. It looks as though they collected some heading information for an area of the sky without the complete pin point location. My ratio calculation of 16.17M ☉ really predicts it to be a fit for Betelgeuse from the limited information provided here with frequency and burst duration. When compared to the first gravity wave ever detected of 65M ☉ from a black hole merger the details provided were 260Hz and .15 seconds duration for GW150914. Without all the information basically we have an artifact to decode in the sky. A 535 light year accurate distance reading would imply this calculation which fits with orbital decay for light retardation.

Their analysis reported a present-day mass of 16.5 to 19 solar mass--which is slightly lower than the most-recent estimates. The study also revealed how big Betelgeuse is, as well as its distance from Earth. The star's actual size has been a bit of a mystery: earlier studies, for instance, suggested it could be bigger than the orbit of Jupiter. Their analysis reported a present-day mass of 16.5 to 19 solar mass

Ratio Image indicates Betelgeuse total Solar Mass 16.17M ☉ <---Side image Betelgeuse 16.17M ☉

My calculation here from python code due to my Gravity Geometric predicts like orbital decay near 1% for difference in speed of gravity to light speed:

Python Code link Gravity Geometric Calculation

529.1 ÷ 534.64 = .989 x 100 = 98.963 | 100- 98.963 = 1.03 % delay of light from Betelgeuse due to core collapse in 1491 from a gravity wave on January 14, 2020.

PSR 1913+16 orbital decay The speed of gravity (more correctly, the speed of gravitational waves) can be calculated from observations of the orbital decay rate of binary pulsars PSR 1913+16 (the Hulse–Taylor binary system noted above) and PSR B1534+12. The orbits of these binary pulsars are decaying due to loss of energy in the form of gravitational radiation. The rate of this energy loss ("gravitational damping") can be measured, and since it depends on the speed of gravity, comparing the measured values to theory shows that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light to within 1%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

That sky chart makes this gravity wave event and Betelgeuse seem to be close together. The actual coordinates should be considered, though.

Betelgeuse: 5 hours, 55 minutes, 10 seconds; +7 degrees, 24 minutes, 24 seconds

Localization of S200114F: 7 hours, 20 minutes, 28 seconds to 7hours 28 minutes, 48 seconds; +16 degrees, 53 minutes, 7 seconds to +17 degrees, 44 minutes, 5 seconds.

At their closest, Betelgeuse and S200114F are along a line of similar declination, but 1 hour and 25 minutes apart in Right Ascension. Assuming my calculations are correct, that places them a bit over 21 degrees apart in the sky

Although localization depends on the waveform morphology, approximately 50% of detected signals would be imaged after observing 100–200 deg2 in 2015 and 60–110 deg2 in 2016, although knowledge of the waveform can reduce this to as little as 22 deg2. Unlike many electromagnetic observations, gravitational-wave source position uncertainties are very large, typically larger than 100 deg2. Therefore, gravitational-wave searches produce probability distributions over the sky, rather than single locations, from which meaningful quantities are derived. These probability distributions can have very complicated shapes, including severe fragmentation and spatially separated support. A thorough understanding of these distributions can inform the design of follow-up programs as well as the choice of which events should be pursued. Gravitational-wave source position uncertainties are very large

Not so many people are familiar with Orbital Decay with a light delay, Shapiro Delay with light and Einstein's General Relativity regarding the .12 second delay of light at 1.75 arc seconds. The information I have provided points to a Betelgeuse core collapse. I understand that many people need instant visible evidence yet due to the hard facts that work on the medium of light we will have to wait until the year 2025 to see evidence of Betelgeuse as a Supernova from a gravitational wave on January 14, 2020.

"Empathy, Compassion and Love and if every inhabitant of Earth thought like this at the same time every 24 hours, miracles would happen!" Thomas E. O'Neil

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.