58

No, gravitational waves cannot pass through a black hole. A gravitational wave follows a path through spacetime called a null geodesic. This is the same path that would be followed by a light ray travelling in the same direction, and gravitational waves are affected by black holes in the same way that light rays are. So for example gravitational waves can ...


49

Another way to answer this question is to apply the Equivalence Principle, which Einstein called his "happiest thought" (so you know it has to be good). The equivalence principle says that if you are in an enclosed box in the presence of what Newton would call a gravitational field, then everything that happens in that box must be the same as if the box was ...


31

There are a couple of ways one could approach your question: Black holes are regions of space that have been deformed by a sufficiently concentrated mass. Light waves/particles always travel in a straight line at a constant velocity ($c$). Although a photon approaching a black hole will continue traveling in a straight line through space, space itself has ...


28

No more than the observation of light waves disproves quantum mechanics. Light has properties of both a particle and a wave. At low energies, the particle nature of light is hard to detect: radio waves are made of photons, but individual radio wave photons are pretty hard to detect. I'm not sure that we have directly detected individual photons with ...


24

Since I like math, let's throw some math into this. I'll try to keep it as simple as possible though. Kerr Black Holes A rotating black hole is known as a Kerr Black Hole (named after Roy Kerr who found the numerical solution to GR equations for rotating black holes). In the case of a rotating black hole, there are two important parameters used to describe ...


22

The impact of this measurement on the status of quantum gravitation is exactly zero. The proper statement of the incompatibility of general relativity and quantum mechanics is that the quantum field theory of general relativity is not renormalizable. Renormalizability essentially means that the theory is well-defined at all energy scales, which seems like a ...


19

Another question, how can we identify the ripple's origin (let's say that if it's the result from the big bang or another big event)? (I'm just answering this part of the question, as James has already answered the main part about GR vs QM.) LIGO have produced an image which shows their best estimate of where these two black holes were: All they can say ...


18

The answer is yes time dilation does affect how much time an observer experiences since the big bang until the present (cosmological) time. However there is a certain set of special observers called comoving observers, these are the observers to which the Universe appears isotropic to. For example we can tell the Earth is moving at about 350 km/s relative ...


14

You are labouring under the misapprehension that how far we can see directly gives the age of the universe. Whilst it is true that the oldest light we can see was emitted some 13.7 billion years ago, the stuff that emitted that light is now roughly 46 billion light years away, thanks to expansion of the universe. The universe itself probably extends ...


13

Gravity doesn't affect the speed of light. It affects the space-time geometry and hence the paths of light. However, this can have a similar effect. Light emitted at source $S$ to pass a massive object $M$ that is very close on the otherwise (if M weren't there) straight path to an observer $O$ has to "go around" $M$, which takes longer than following the ...


13

There is no "up" direction within the event horizon. Most people get fixated on the speed of light, or energy or whatever. They're like, if light was faster, could it escape the black hole? If my rocket had bigger engines, could I escape? The problem is, all these questions make no sense. You can't get out because there is no way out. A black hole is ...


12

As Walter says, gravity doesn't bend light. Light travels along null geodesics, a particular type of straight path. Since (affine) geodesics don't change direction by definition, geometrically light trajectories are straight. Moreover, the speed of light in vacuum is $c$ in every inertial frame, regardless of whether or not spacetime is curved, although a ...


12

There is evidence that both black holes and their event horizons exist. The primary evidence for stellar-mass black holes arises from observations of the dynamics of binary systems. What has been found, for at least 20 binary systems, is that the optically visible star has a dark companion, that is usually more massive, and more massive than can possibly be ...


12

The scenario you describe may occur. On the other hand it may actually be that neutronisation in a white dwarf is the trigger for a thermonuclear type Ia supernova. You may be misunderstanding the Pauli Exclusion Principle (PEP).The PEP states that no two fermions can occupy the same quantum state, not that they cannot occupy the same space or be compressed ...


12

Cosmological parameters are measured in a variety of ways, and their values will depend on which measurements you trust the most. The paper you link to (Planck Collaboration et al. 2016) with the 2015 results from the Planck observations of the cosmic microwave background is probably the one that most people will accept, but even in that paper you will find ...


11

This has been considered long ago (Here's a paper talking about this). Wormholes are not forbidden by physics, but the creation of wormholes is iffy ground. THere are two possible paths one can take to create a wormhole: Choose a pre-existing wormhole in the quantum foam and "expand" it by feeding it exotic matter. "Tear and sew up" space — we're ...


9

It is correct that the Kerr black hole solution of GTR allows travel between universes. However, that does not mean that if you actually jump into any kind of black hole that you could go to another universe. To motivate the resolution to this conundrum, let's start off very easy: suppose you stand on the ground with a ball in your hand, and you throw it ...


8

Newtonian gravity of a point-source can described by a potential $\Phi = -\mu/r$. If we suppress one spatial dimension and use it to graph the value of this potential instead, we get something that looks very close to this illustration, and is indeed infinitely deep at the center--at least, in the idealization of a point-mass. And farther away from the ...


8

I will make a small calculation here, but please proceed to the results if you may like to. Calculation Stars are spherical and static, so metric near their surface (photosphere) and outside on is Schwarzschild. Hence time-time metric component on the surface is: $$g_{44}=1-\dfrac{R_{grav,*}}{R_*}$$, where $R_*$ is the radius of the star and $R_{grav,*}$ ...


8

In the standard model, the universe looks the same for all locations moving in the local rest frame. This includes its apparent age. You can tell if you are in the local rest frame if the expansion of galaxies around you is symmetric in all directions and the microwave background also is the same in all directions. Simply put, any civilization on any ...


8

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that quantum gravity "doesn't exist". But because this is the Astronomy SE, I will interpret your question as primarily asking why astronomy hasn't found evidence of quantum gravity. This is a reasonable question; after all, nineteenth-century astronomers have found evidence of funny business in the perihelion precession ...


8

The primary reason the Earth doesn't fall into the Sun is that it has a very large tangential velocity with which it is able to maintain an orbit. The physics is the same for describing satellites which we launch into orbit around the Earth. I've heard it described as such: "The ISS is falling towards the earth, but is moving forward so quickly that it ...


8

Gravitational waves should be lensed by massive objects in a very similar way to light. Light rays (and by extension, gravitational waves) from a distant object, that pass within 1.5 times the Schwarzschild radius (for a non-spinning black hole) have trajectories that take then towards the event horizon. Waves on such trajectories cannot escape from the ...


8

General relativity is only one cause of the precession of Mercury's orbit, and not the largest factor. Gravitational perturbation by the other planets and the non-spherical sun also cause precession. Newtonian gravity predicts precession of 532 arcseconds per century, but 575 arcseconds is observed. The discrepancy can be explained if one uses General ...


8

First, let's clear up a few misconceptions: The Hubble sphere The speed of light as an upper limit is valid in special relativity (SR). In general relativity (GR), which must be used to describe the expansion of the Universe, although locally (i.e. where SR is a good approximation) you cannot exceed the speed of light, there is no limit to the relative ...


7

Stellar clusters around supermassive black holes are systems in which relativity likely plays a role. Currently, only bright stars can be seen in our own galactic center because there is a ton of neutral gas between us and the galactic center that obscures it. As a result, we only have a few "test particles" out of the many stars that actually orbit the ...


7

The waves pass by at the speed of light. So you you would'nt see ripples, they would pass too fast, and remember the waves would be passing through you too. The wavelength was (relativly) long about 3000km. The wave doesn't pass you, you are inside the wave. The amplitude of the waves detected by LIGO was small, one part in $10^{21}$, Now while the ...


7

Andy Gould proposed a classical derivation of Hawking radiation in a somewhat obscure paper from 1987. The essential argument is that a black hole must have a finite, non-zero entropy (otherwise you could violate the second law of thermodynamics with a black hole). Moreover, the entropy of the black hole must depend only on its area (otherwise you could ...


6

Since the astronomers are using radio telescopes and not optical telescopes, I'd like to point out why they are doing so - The centre of the Milky Way is a very dusty place. Wavelengths from the millimeter to optical get easily absorbed by all this dust, so it's very difficult to see the centre of the galaxy in the optical spectrum. But radio waves do not ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible