I assume, that any merging event would trigger a gravitational wave even if too weak to detect over any distance. but Assuming that two neutron stars would start to merge, that hard surface with its max gravity would trigger the first tremor in the newly forming surrounding g field, propagating outward at the same speed than the accompanying photon shower. of different wavelength.
That's the first correct thing you've said in thirty pages. Well, except for the highlit part. But still, mostly correct.
R: to make the surface interacting believable, I thought perhaps they were on a collision course at near c, the masses nearly touching before the message of rising gravity forces reaches the surface to disrupt the clean fun of just a touch first. I guess with their red line constant total gravity they would find themselves attracted sooner or later. (if not bound to another stronger, nearer partner.)
in the newly forming surrounding g field D: I have the vision of two or more gravitational fields merging like soap bubbles do , - through surface tension. Looking at the " Ultima Thule" duo, post 597, It would be interesting to see the new iso g "bubbles"surrounding it develop.
The energy from the original gentle touch is probably dissipated, but with this pair, rotating about the common center of gravity, that is not in the plane of contact, some continuous tidal action could happen there account for the brighter image. The 2 separate zero Gravity field strength points, would have moved to one center one, on n the axes of rotation . (many of these things tumble).
Or just frictional contact . Gravity is a very , very , very weak force , to the point of irrelevence .
R: R. Here I refer you to post #937 of the 'Alma" thread in alternative theories; Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! In the model of the universe moving out into time from the start in the big bang#4, spherical membrane #3 is thought to contain all the matter, energy of the universe, in a zero thickness bubble that started in the point of time #4, which is embedded in infinite time #1, which existed before that point, and still is part of the infinite future #1, outside the expanding membrane#3. now, since The object of the diagram post #579 (not clickable, will re-post it below) with the red line is deemed to be inside that bubble # 3, and there is no gravitational field force (per shell theorem), in the past timespace #2, the action pictured by the red line or the area below it, can only act inside the membrane #3 (everything happens there) but also project into the future #1. As was pointed out, the red line representing a total gravitational field could not reach infinity in a finite universe so i offered this scenario.
But zero thickness bubble , is the equivalent to nothing . So the bubble can never exist , therefore this bubble becomes irrelevant .
River, in a model, a spherical membrane can be an abstract and of zero thickness, it is done all the time, a point in geometry has no area in mm^2, yet we recognize it as an entity of an intersection of 2 lines that have no width either. My assertion is though, that laws apply both inside that bubble and also outside. Energy still is uncreated even prior to the appearance of the "created" universe #3(a partial conversion from energy to matter really, at the "Big bang") so Gravity, as in any shell would not have field strength "inside" , the past #2 but membrane #3, having all that mass and Energy would possibly have a gravitational field on the outside, surface, future time#1. that field comprising all, and of course the total gravity field the red line. symbolizes. You can read more in the "Alma" thread on this:http://www.sciforums.com/threads/al...fore-they-merged-two-ways-to-look-back-into-t
It is incorrect. A field, by definition, has a value at every single point (even if that value is zero). You cannot have two fields. Any reference to gravity is referring to a part of that one field.
Geometry , mathematics . Mathematics does not create , anything . It is tool used to understand , things . You are creating a Universe based on mathematics . Because you think mathematics creates this Universe . Wrong . Why ? Because without the physical ; mathematics would not , could not exist .
Dave, good point. but earlier in the discussion there was the query, when, in the center of an entity, where the point is surrounded be equal mass[es] on all sides, whether that it is an s priori cancellation, or an overlap of opposing fields that result in the zero reading on the graviometer. anyway, where there where at one point in time , or separation -- 2 bodies with their distinct gravitational fields , upon approach, at some juncture, the distinction seen from the outside will appear as one surface, similar to the process where the wall between 2 soap bubbles vanishes, melds into the single outer membrane.
So now we've got a weirdly contrived scenario, with two neutron stars merging inside a very large hollow sphere. But OK. It will simply appear (inasmuch as it could be seen at all) as two waves on a pond interacting with each other. There's no "one surface" any more than there is a "line" between these two concentric ripples: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
dave: that is a great contribution. All those standing waves, and any moment after this snapshot the waves will become concentric. but look at this in two contexts: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/planets-orbit-like-their-stars-vibrate.158906/ and: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/mo...ly-days-the-universe-as-a-wave-rolling-throug