On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 7:01 AM Lawrence Crowell <
goldenfieldquaterni...@gmail.com> wrote:

*>  I am going to think about this. The problem I see is that LIGO detects
> information in a gravity wave and converts that into our electronic
> information. If this information really drops as 1/r then from a Gauss' law
> perspective it means a gravitational wave propagating from its source
> produces information a the rate I(t) ~ r, for r the radius of the wave
> front. I have some problems with that.*

I don't see the problem with transferring information that way, you could
even do it with light although with a different method than LIGO's. The
inverse square law applies only for isotropic emitters, so with a perfect
zero divergent Laser beam the intensity of the beam would be constant and
independent of distance. Of course a real Laser will always have some
divergence and the intensity is proportional to the width of the beam, so
if it went far enough eventually it would start to follow the inverse
square law, but that distance could be large even by cosmological
standards. Blazars are a especially bright type of Quasar and some have
been spotted over 10 billion light years away. But Quasars are not
isotropic emitters and it is now thought that Blazars are fundamentally no
different from regular Quasars it's just that Blazars are so positioned
that we just happen to be looking straight down the throat of the Quasar's

LIGO gets around the inverse square law in a entirely different way, it
doesn't detect the RMS power of a wave it detects the peak to peak
displacement of a wave.

John K Clark

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to