Colliding Neutron Stars, Gravity Waves, and the Origin of the Heavy Elements

[@jenniferburlet7358]

Back to watch again after about 3 years ago. Fascinating subject. Great lecture, Professor.

[@pipertripp]

Eliot is moving like a simple harmonic oscillator when he's behind the podium. Very hypnotic.

[@badiucosmin2966]

Thank you for posting these public lectures.

[@dudeonbike800]

Fantastic discussion. Thank you SVA, Foothill College, Dr. Fraknoi and everyone else contributing to this wonderful series.

[@keybutnolock]

Nicely done Eliot, and thanks SVAL, great Q&A at 57:23 , will watch again !

[@coastwalker101]

Cracking public talk with lots of interesting details and ideas that some educators might leave out. Well worth everybodies time - terrific stuff.

[@Markle2k]

1:14:30 10^42 ergs/sec is about 260 million times our Sun's steady output of 3.826 x 10^33 ergs/sec. Abs mag = 4.77 - 2.5 log (2.6 x 10^5) = -16.2 -15 was a good guess

[@rubenanthonymartinez7034]

*A Case against Neutron stars* and the things withheld to the general public. Neutron stars are relatively small objects and exhibit tremendous gravitational energy which implies high matter density and the only matter candidate would be the neutron, reasoning goes, in order to achieve the densities required the neutron to have these necessary properties: 1 Neutrons have a net charge a zero, therefore neutralizing repulsive coulombs Forces. 2 The Neutron also have two quantum state spin which also contributes to the packing concentration. Following the Heisenberg principle! Both of these properties give the potential for these neutrons to be able to be packed together in the densities required. Now the question becomes, what force drives them to be compacted, the answer given is the force of gravity. Gravity is the ultimate compressive Force which causes the formation of this extraordinary material called *Neutronium*. *"Houston we have a problem"* Neutron decay; this works against the formation of Neutronium. The unstable Neutron would work against achieving the density requirements, so this instability must be neutralized. Neutrons are known to be unstable, neutrons will decay into its constituents, which are proton and electron + neutrino *(N-> p+e+v)* or using the standard model of quarks, *(ddu--> dud)* which is the propensity of a down quark to flip into an up quark, now we need a mechanism to inhibits this flip from occurring, which would be needed to stabilize Neutronium! The answer again is gravity. *The missing Link; The formulation of Quantum Gravity theory* But due to the fact that we're dealing with a quantum Dynamics, gravity must be explained in terms of quantum mechanical rules, unfortunately *the theory of quantum gravity does not exist!* The introduction into the narrative of *hyperons* particles, does not resolve the issue because they *are also unstable.* *Chicken and the egg problem in neutron stars* In order to create the Neutronium you must have the gravitational field, but the gravitational field is generated by the Neutronium. Which came first, a classic conundrum of the chicken and the egg problem. Considering these facts, you can actually call the Neutron star a hypothetical object, but don't call it real.

[@sent4dc]

32:23 hmm. So if two colliding black holes can lose mass as gravitational energy, then why are they saying that nothing can escape the black hole? Some mass clearly did.

[@sharkvader6092]

I think the gravity waves were generated outside the Schwarzchild radius of the black hole, something like that .

[@frankblack1185]

@Fred Cink A mirror image of the information within a black hole is absorbed into another dimension. The remaining information gets discharged as Hawking radiation as the black hole evaporates. At the end the negative energy (mirror image) & the positive energy (Hawking radiation) balance each other out perfectly to zero. Meaning the black hole was as everything is in the Universe, mearly an illusion. All be it a very persistent one according to Albert Einstein.

[@tigertiger1699]

Man he’s great to listen to.., he really expresses how he sees it, what understands it to be👍, really enjoyed this, how do I learn more

[@deereboy8400]

Lecture @ 2:19

[@protoword10]

I don’t think, graviton exists, only space/time field. “Jelly” of vacuum reacting to every event in universe like planet to sun or merger of black holes occurs with waves instead with particles (of course not with the same frequency of gravity and of gravitational waves). That is way speed of gravitational waves and gravity itself action is equol to speed of light! Or it is just good to say, masses are correlated to configuration of space/time!

[@richardvernon7019]

don't pay attention to anything written hear about moving arms or about the stage, nonsense! This guy is one of the most coherent speakers I've ever heard, great lecture....

[@rubenmartinez2994]

He said "we did theoretical calculation without any observation" but “If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science.”- Richard Feynman Then he takes unrelated astronomy pictures, and makes up a story! This guy is hack!

[@GH-oi2jf]

At about 26:35, the word should be “forte,” not “forté,” which is pronounced like “fort.” “Forté” is a musical term.

[@AS-cy1jt]

it really would be nice if these audio visual "professionals" would focus on what's important , you know like the slides, rather then the speaker

[@HieronymousLex]

acs451 idk, I thought they did a pretty good job

[@sprink88]

I agree with Hieronymous Lex - this is far better than most - the slides appear on-screen when appropriate and for a good amount of time, they are informative and evocative, and tell the story very well. It is HUGELY frustrating when the opposite happens, but this is a good show, all in all. NOTE: acs451 - you realise that it is the speaker, NOT the AV Professionals, who create/design these slides, so if you're disappointed in the graphic/motion design, (and I have seen better and worse), you can't blame the people filming and editing the lecture.

[@Hecatonicosachoron]

These public lectures are really fun. It's great that they are posted here as well.

[@goldoil1131]

Jason93609 it’s all mythology

[@Hecatonicosachoron]

Physics and astronomy actually.

[@cristinapugh831]

What a remarkable speaker and a fascinating topic for anyone who loves learning about our universe. Watch it and you will learn so much about the latest research in astrophysics.

[@BladeRunner-td8be]

One thing about the elements that make up our universe which interests me is how much more complex it will get before the end comes. Stars will continue to be formed by more and more complex elements and those elements which haven't been created yet might bring complex life far beyond what exists now. Thousands of years from now if humans are still around it is conceivable that they will be able to re-create similar pressures safely of a supernova thereby "artificially" decreasing the amount of time it would otherwise take to generate more and more complex life.

[@jimlahey5354]

Lol That's not how it works. Thanks for the laugh though

[@Sylvianisme]

20:21 : And with one sentence this man finally made me understand gravitational waves!

[@frankblack1185]

@@Russ0107 What are they then?

[@teashea1]

very articulate and organized......

[@Titus-as-the-Roman]

Two questions, 1st: Does the type of neutron star change the outcome of mergers, for example would 2 upper end Magnetars have different gravity waves and element formations than 2 old non-pulsating neutron stars. 2nd: Due to erosion and tectonic forces most of Earth's heavy metals are erased from the surface from asteroid and comet impact. The Moon however has no erosion and very little tectonic activity, other than a slow covering of dust, so why isn't the Moon covered with metals like Iridium, Platinum, Gold, Etc...?

[@sharkvader6092]

No, actually I believe that most of the gold and heavy stuff sunk to the core of the Earth when it was formed. Almost all of the gold and heavy stuff we do have on the surface/in the crust, came from the Late Heavy Bombardment, from comets and asteroids themselves. I assume the same thing happened on the Moon when it was in a molten state. Not sure about the first question but I think magnetars are relatively short-lived, I would guess the gravity waves are some function of the mass.

[@mikecummings6593]

It is

[@caesarabdos568]

is useful about gravitational waves and black holes

[@caesarabdos568]

replied

[@rubenmartinez2994]

Describing the loss of the mechanism .. Strange, but this is never considered, that is, if the star explodes it also loses mass, in doing so weakens gravity, because gravity is proportional to its mass, so when losing mass through this explosion would hinder the concentration of mass density that would be needed to form a neutron star. And another fact that must be taken into account, the mass that is lost is the outer layer of the sphere, which is responsible for the high concentration, that is, the density in the core, that would be required (Density = mass / volume) in the center of the sphere or orb. Then, by ejecting this shell, the mechanism required to achieve this would be lost, by stopping the process, in other words, a neutron stars or a black hole could never be created.

[@manabouttongue]

you know, I wonder about that too. If mass is ejected prior to the collapse and subsequent explosion, why do we still get black holes?

[@rubenmartinez2994]

This is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg of scientific argument against the formation of a neutron star or Black holes. These stars are supposedly made of Neutron, but Neutron are unstable particles, they will decay into proton and electrons plus a neutrino, this substance is called Neutronium or neutrite which is a hypothetical substance and there is no known physics which stabilize Neutron in mass, and yet they present this as fact, and there is more!

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

ruben martinez ll

[@frankblack1185]

Im 10 minutes in and we are still in junior school science mode. But then it did pick up. It's the warping of time that creates gravatons that react with the Higgs Boson field. The most probable shape of an object from higher dimensional space pushing it's way slightly into our dimensional space is a sphere. Ergo gravity or in other words the warping of time tries to fully push what we see as a sphere back to it's higher dimensional space from where it came. Also water is produced in abundance in interstellar space. Water has memory. So what does this say about the Universe being an ultra high conscious entity? Especially when one considers a possible electrical plasma driven Universe and the Cosmic web.

[@TheBinaryUniverse]

I have a question;- As a star collapses to a black hole, which forms first, the event horizon, or the singularity at the center?

[@listerdave1240]

It has to be the event horizon. An event horizon can easily exist when a massive object still has a finite volume. Any mass has a Swarzschild radius. All you need for an event horizon is for the radius of the object to be smaller than the Swarzschild radius for its mass. A singularity has zero radius but non zero Swarzschild radius, so a singularity without an event horizon cannot exist at all. What all this means is that as an object shrinks under gravity it will at some point become smaller than the Swarzschild radius, forming an event horizon. It can then continue to shrink until it forms a singularity.

[@TheBinaryUniverse]

Thank you Dave. Yes, I agree but it was a loaded question. So the next question is;- When the event horizon forms before the singularity, and time stops at this horizon, how can any more events happen in a region with no time? Namely, how can the star continue to collapse to a central singularity. I don't believe it can. Any comments?

[@tonikotinurmi9012]

Ah, after event horizon has formed every timeline leads to singularity. Google that in pbs space time in youtube-not that they're always correct (umm... haven't yet found out one they're not correct though) but it's worth your while !

[@michaelcoffin9092]

Wow Ken great question.. the singularity in the center forms first it exists as the sun itself is collapsing..

[@caesarabdos568]

I like it

[@caesarabdos568]

replied

[@anthonymannwexford]

Great talk. Thank you for the upload...

[@flu611]

Best video! This guy is great.

[@rubenmartinez2994]

Neutronium is a hypothetical substance composed purely of neutrons. Neutronium which would be the constituents of a neutron star is actually a hypothetical substance, composed purely of neutrons, and yet, he presents this as real. He broke the first rule, which is ,“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.” -― Richard P. Feynman.

[@jimtwisted1984]

The earths atmosphere is dragged down into the mantle! Maybe he could have explained that a little.

[@TheRodmena]

great lecture.

[@kevinowenburress2435]

So gravity is an interesting way for energy to be carried.. and how that works..

[@AndreaCalaon73]

I am not sure everyone is convinced that the problem of the origin of heavy elements is completely solved... Anyway it is a GREAT talk

[@terrywallace5181]

Very good; information and presentation.

[@roundearth2619]

IN THAT EXAMPLE, THE WAVES WENT FLAT ONCE THEY MERGED. SHOULDN'T THERE BE SOME GROOVE FOR THE PLANETS?

[@HieronymousLex]

ROUND EARTH 😬

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

A case against neutron stars.The following is hypothetical scenario based on known physics, which would explain the Improbability of neutron stars ; Neutron is made out of an electron and proton and neutrino, (neutrons are Known to be unstable due to Beta decay) they say Neutrinos escapes because of nuclear decay and low mass or close to Zero mass the neutrinos would be lost Or radiated out, it must be remembered that neutrino is part of the ingredients of a neutron . After losing a neutrino what would be left is a proton and a electron, which would constitute the ingredients of a hydrogen atom, and not a neutron , being that the protons Is heavier (1800 x) then the Electron it is quite possible that the interior will become a large Proton like object, but only if there is enough gravity , there for, it should be called a proton star and not a neutron star,. The core would be of pure hydrogen nuclei. Between these two scenarios the most plausible would be proton star, because it is based on known physics. Neutron star Scenario just doesn’t make sense ! The fact is that a neutron stars is actually Hypotheticals objects and the physics that is suppose to supports this is vague . The Pauli exclusion principle Is introduce because it helps explain the density packing, but there are other forces That will inhibit these high densities ever being achieved. So there is no credible explanations about how the Neutron star would be kept together. This hypothetical neutron star explantation is one dimensional thinking, which ignores other factors in physics. So don’t be fooled!

[@rubenmartinez2994]

He mentions the law of angular momentum, but this would also produce centrifugal forces, which would counteract any contraction or increase in the density of the core of the spinning object, he also forgot to say that the increasing orbiting speeds of the object (star's) will inhibit the merging by the orbital centrifugal forces or create a slingshot effect. These principles are part of classical world and there are other laws in quantum domain that would not allow the creation of such monsters. But let's not mention that, it will spoil the lie

[@Just.A.T-Rex]

You must not realize how complex these subjects are. To suggest the presenter doesn’t know what he’s talking about is one of the most hilarious things I’ve ever read. Don’t like it? You research it, devote your life and past 40 years to cosmological comings and going’s and then you can resent the “truth.”😅😅😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@m.syassin5774]

Glorifying Einstein has become a law for lecturers, even if the lecturer does not mention all scientists and philosophers, “not even God!” throughout history.

[@RealWoutLies]

And to think, there are people who think this is all fake and planet earth is flat. They're missing out on amazing things.

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

Neutron stars are hypothetical objects ! And the signal is a hypothetical interpretation, based on the existence of this hypothetical object.

[@5Andysalive]

Ironically he has a kinda wavy way of delivering.

[@taek_flyte]

He talks with an upward inflection at the end of his sentences. Reminds me of a family guy episode.

[@bosleylukongo6343]

IF God created the universe, then he would have sent somebody to tell us about that the collision will happen. I have searched online and realized that one man gave the description of what will happen accurately even before it started. The prophecy is real. No doubt.

[@pacajalbert9018]

Kreslím pre Afriku nové bublinky ktoré dvakrát rýchlejšie než útočná strela

[@82spiders]

Anything heavier than iron was made ion a supernova. Anything up to iron most likely comes from the sun.

[@manabouttongue]

the sun cannot fuse iron, it's too small and light.

[@endless_universe2023]

if he wasn't oscillating so much, would be much easier to actually watch )) very nice lecture and Q^A

[@ianian8022]

ow!-urr boyf-rennsdss, who-pudzzdza guh-hold rhiingz on our fin-gerrrrzzz....gra-hav-iddy whahey! vez...

[@jimjackson4256]

The atmosphere is dragged into the earth !

[@anam.caballerowilson9421]

12 billion light years from the end.

[@rubenanthonymartinez7034]

LIGO is a quantum seismic detector.

[@samsund8329]

The way you keep tilting your body is very disturbing

[@caesarabdos568]

everything iteristing & nice

[@caesarabdos568]

replied

[@caesarabdos568]

I know more about stars and black holes and many things from lessons in video everything in space universe

[@caesarabdos568]

replied

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

These two chirps from the LIGO were out of synchronization by a few milliseconds which should have disqualified the signal being the same source, in addition to this the amplitude was less than the diameter of a proton, but of course he doesn’t mentions this fact. These signals is more likely a collisions between two hummingbirds. for goodness sake‘s. But of course you have to justify the $1 billion cost for These bogus instruments.

[@martinzitter4551]

The two detectors are a few light milliseconds apart.

[@jamesdrew8826]

An unfortunate sing song way of voicing the lecture, really annoying and distracting from the interesting info.

[@executivesteps]

James Drew Exactly correct. I gave up on what seemed a lecture with good content. He spoke tediously in a style like a Shakespearean sonnet.

[@anam.caballerowilson9421]

If no light means dark and beyond in space time

[@frankblack1185]

Hu?

[@Aluminata]

The Earth is not falling in to the sun: The Sun is loosing mass due to cosmic mass ejection. The planets are slipping away.

[@clayrocks3]

So would the theory that the earth is falling towards the sun based on the assumption that the sun maintains constant mass?

[@samw1501]

Unless you consider the fact that orbital mechanics has Earth and other planets accelerating towards the sun in order to maintain an elliptical orbit.

[@Aluminata]

@@samw1501 That's what's kepts the show on the road these 4 or 5 billion years.

[@alangarland8571]

It's spin, that's what it is, charge and mass, well meh. Spin is your man.

[@jontheman3527]

The suns in our universe are actually part of a living universe that serve a purpose.In a universe time scale the sun only exists for a brief second.that's hard to comprehend for a human being.The life of a sun is to create once the job is done the sun dies and again is reborn into a nova to expel its components to seed.The universe that we see and experience is simply a micro second of actual existence.

[@Just.A.T-Rex]

You’re forgetting all the other types of “subs” (stars.) something like a dull smaller cooler star can last magnitudes longer than our basic type of star, the sun.

[@anam.caballerowilson9421]

Black star

[@Sylvianisme]

Neuutrooonnnnnnn..... sss.

[@rubenmartinez2994]

He mentions the law of angular momentum, but this would also produce centrifugal forces, which would counteract any contraction or increase in the density of the core of the spinning object, he also forgot to say that the increasing orbiting speeds of the object (star's) will inhibit the merging of these two objects by the centrifugal forces by creating a slingshot effect, or at best, will produce stable mutual orbital system. These principles in the classical world and others laws in quantum domain, will not allow the creation of such monsters. But let's not mention that, it will spoil the lie. This guy is a hack!

[@tigertiger1699]

Arrrrrrrrgh! My understanding/ comprehension of these matters ..., is in waves..😞😬 I m getting it n getting it... then I seem to just get to my turn off/ loss/ overloaded point😪 just want to comprehend to retain, mind you .. 🤔 not bad for a primate child of earths bio evolution 😂👍

[@davidknapp5224]

Don't your G.W. detectors need a third leg to see in 4D???

[@foffjerkholes4995]

They do, it's called TIME.

[@tonikotinurmi9012]

Also, third dimension is in other GW detectors working now...

his rocking is kinda disturbing

[@circuitboardsushi]

We are all nuclear waste. :-)

[@hmaiorino]

Incredulous Ape kzbin.info/www/bejne/bHLUZpann7p5hdE

[@rayagoldendropofsun397]

If GAS BONDING is a fact, Gravity/ Gravity Waves/Black Holes are not . All downward falling motion, including Newtons apple, begins when rising gas molecules becomes trapped gas molecules, known as GAS BONDING, which take on a state of solid mass, blocking out it's electrons motion, it's fire power, thus becomes ENERGY LOCK lifeless gas molecules, and falls downward in real time, following it's electrons unlimited potential velocity, at the speed of light, connecting with the earth ENERGY CONSERVATION SYSTEM, establishing a downward falling path for trapped lifeless gas molecules /solid objects only. Equating the above fact with the physical universe, same as Einstein E = MC2 equates with the physical universe. E = ENERGY = MM = MOLECULE MOTION = Molecules in motion within star flames earth gases birds and balloons plains and rockets, even us humans rise from molecules in motion, creating an ENERGY FLOW, the ruling force of the universe. M = MASS = GB = GAS BONDING = Gas Binding take on a state of solid mass, blocking out it's electrons motion, it's fire power, thus becomes ENERGY LOCK lifeless gas molecules, and falls downward in real time. C2 = LIGHT SPEED = E = ELECTRONS = Electrons Unlimited Potential Velocity, at the speed of light, connects with the earth ENERGY CONSERVATION SYSTEM, establishing a downward falling path for trapped lifeless gas molecules/solid objects only. This they should've known ! Gravity is a mythical concept that's mentally applied, with guaranteed results to it's point of origin, the BRAIN !

[@maurpine]

theoretical entities colliding? The Electric Universe offers a simpler and more comprehensive model of the cosmos. I'm tire of hearing stories based on assumptions upon assumptions!

[@foffjerkholes4995]

No, they have been observed. When your watching a video on the internet with your computer, you tear apart your thoughts on this subject. Sorry bub, if we didn't make discoveries like this, your ass would be sitting with the Amish shoveling pig shit with a pre arranged marriage. Don't bite the hand that feeds you, idiot.

[@HieronymousLex]

Just because it’s easier for your stupid mind to comprehend doesn’t mean it’s how the universe works. The universe is under no obligation to be simple or comprehensive to you. In fact, I’m sure most things in life aren’t simple or comprehensive for you, let alone astrophysics

[@anam.caballerowilson9421]

😀

[@goldoil1131]

The black holes happened to collide the minute they measured? What?!

[@foffjerkholes4995]

Trump tells you the electric universe is lies. Electric Universe is all lies. Trump tells you electric universe is all lies.

[@cokeforever]

He's moving right-left all the time is very distracting and makes you think he needs to pee rather than of wave nature of his motion ;-)

[@k.t.k.9781]

Agreed, but I think that's a sign of great intellectual unrest, hinting at his awesome thinking processes.

[@Sylvianisme]

Yeah I think HE was the origin of those gravitational waves LIGO picked.

[@k.t.k.9781]

hehe, who knows.

[@foffjerkholes4995]

If your smart, you walk back and forth. If your drooling retarded, you stay in one place.

[@teashea1]

you are pathetic

[@stevenunua2118]

When I see gravity wave I'm done.

[@ianian8022]

i'd rather listen to the electric people than this bloke - i'd rather listen to paint dry - and the paint would be dry before he'd finished telling us it is.

[@yrebrac]

Please stop trying to make things easier to understand by using simple words and talking sloooowlyyy

[@RobocopNathanInc]

However the subject is interesting, I just can't listen to this lecturer. His intonation really starts to annoy me after a while.

[@goldoil1131]

This is all lies. Electric universe is real.

[@foffjerkholes4995]

Electric universe is lies. All lies.

[@tonikotinurmi9012]

eu is just for ppl who didn't finish high school. I don't even bother to spell correctly / use capital letters with them any more, they're so... oh, and here I am using too many letters too.

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

Toni Kotinurmi I suspect you know nothing!

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

Foff Jerkholes , The Tribunal in the Vatican against Galileo; “your hypothesis are all lies!”

[@goldoil1131]

Distance between mirrors is measured to the accuracy of a proton yet random atomic motion doesn’t mess up the result. This guy is such an idiot.

[@nicholashylton6857]

Gold & Oil Yes, there is unavoidable noise in the data that they collected but the signals they detected were clearly above the background noise created by the LIGO experiment itself. The LIGO observations where in turn supported by other measurements across the entire electromagnetic spectrum made by other instruments. Both ground-based and orbiting experiments.

[@tonikotinurmi9012]

@Gold & Oil - I've measured distances between (spinning) mirrors and lasers, having done basic science. I miss your point. Might be my education ?

[@cymoonrbacpro9426]

He says we are nuclear waste, well I think this lecture is a waste!

[@moirasmith]

Noone has ever observed a neutron star or a black hole. Instead of listening to this guy I recommend checking out the electric uñiverse at Thunderbolts.info. truly exciting!

[@LeonidasRex1]

lol no

[@dudeonbike800]

Thousands of published, accomplished collaborators at numerous international established universities, publishing peer-reviewed data, but all of it debunked by someone with a KZbin channel. Sure!

[@Cindy-ls3dj]

Moirasmith, why do you act like a neutron star is an impossibility within an electric universe? In an electric universe what prevents a neutron star from existing?

[@thecosmologist]

MkYoung666 lol, yes

[@joeroganjosh9333]

moirasmith I think you’re missing the point. The LIGO data IS an observation. Much of what we are now doing (and have been for decades) is not done at visible light wavelenths.