Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 202 203 [204] 205 206 207

Author Topic: Space Thread  (Read 121260 times)

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3045 on: December 23, 2018, 12:36:47 am »

They're probably not getting back from that, certainly. If they are, you've got other problems!

I'm curious what way out from within the event horizon you see that justifies saying they only "probably" won't return.

There is a very (vanishingly!) small probability that 100% of their constituent particles will spontaneously quantum tunnel from inside the horizon, if they glance it JUUUUUUUUUUUUUST right.

Sure, the probability of that outcome is *SO* vanishingly small, that your odds of being destroyed by a spontaneously generated cloud of ionizing radiation powered exclusively by background fluctuations is orders of magnitude greater, but still not 100% certain.

So, only "Probably".  With very high confidence.
Logged

Trekkin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3046 on: December 23, 2018, 02:03:24 am »

from inside the horizon, if they glance it JUUUUUUUUUUUUUST right.

Therein lies the problem. (Or rather, therein lies the problem not associated with quantum gravity. Whether Hawking radiation is actually due to tunneling across the horizon is unknown, but in this case superfluous.)

You can't actually glance an event horizon from the inside, because you always proceed inward. That's why it's a black hole in the first place. Just look at a relevant Penrose diagram; you'll notice that, if you'll let me be imprecise, the geometry flips around at the horizon so the singularity covers the whole future light cone. (Here's one that shows it.)

Now, you could argue that our helpful vacuum fluctuations could just spontaneously spew out a perfect copy of our victim as he's flung in, but that's not really escape, and for that matter that could happen anywhere.
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3047 on: December 23, 2018, 02:25:57 am »

Indeed; It "could" happen anywhere.

Which is why I said that your chances of being randomly irradiated to death by same said fluctuations is orders more likely. (since the resultant cloud does not have a necessity for a well ordered composition/arrangement of the produced particles-- and the locale does not require a black hole.)

Now, arguing that such a duplicate is in fact a duplicate, and not the original, is a bit like the quibbling about star-trek transporters being death machines or not. :P

As for trajectory of entry being a factor, it depends on if you are an ardent true believer of general relativity, or if you think quantum loop gravity is a thing.  If you think the latter, then things like this paper offer interesting alternative solutions.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269316306037

This is because quantum loop gravity obviates the need for a singularity at the center of the event horizon.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2018, 02:39:37 am by wierd »
Logged

Trekkin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3048 on: December 23, 2018, 05:34:16 am »


Now, arguing that such a duplicate is in fact a duplicate, and not the original, is a bit like the quibbling about star-trek transporters being death machines or not. :P


This whole thing started because you decided to quibble about the difference between arbitrarily improbable events and impossible events, you know. You're technically right, but arguing that nothing is actually impossible is the secular equivalent of saying "God works in mysterious ways" (or, from upthread, Madman[numbers]' "you don't really KNOW anything") insofar as it's a rhetorical escape hatch with no actual predictive value. We're already well into quibble territory. :P

In any event, no, the impossibility of reaching the event horizon from within hasn't anything to do with the properties of the singularity;  technically such a region exists for any massive object, just like how anything has an innermost stable circular orbit. Black holes are just dense enough for it to be a region of space outside the object rather than a hypothetical region within the object (which of course doesn't exist because there's not enough of the object in it.)
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3049 on: December 23, 2018, 06:54:29 am »

Unlike a "God in the gaps!" rhetorical fallacy, we could, (arguably, and with quite a huge honking grain of salt) give a rough mathematical calculus on just *HOW* improbable it is/would be, for a complete quantum duplicate of a person to appear at some arbitrarily distant position in the universe (and use that same math to calculate the odds of a person spontaneously tunneling out from inside an event horizon).  The fact that we could conceivably do that, means they are not the same thing. (Just close enough that this is totally a quibble, and I will totally grant you that. :))
Logged

Il Palazzo

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Dude abides.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3050 on: December 23, 2018, 09:30:15 am »

When you say 'we could do that', do you mean you could do that? Can you show that it matters at all in calculating that probability whether there is or isn't a bloke beyond the horizon?
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3051 on: December 23, 2018, 09:38:33 am »

The argument was about prediction.

Having the ability to assert, with confidence (any confidence!) what the incidence rate would be, is a prediction.

We can collect data about "probability of a particle tunnelling", and we can collect data about "Likelihood of distance tunneled", and we should soon be able to collect data about tunneling of assemblages of associated particles, and retention rate of the assemblage's relationships. (We are getting better at producing on-demand entangled photons, for instance, meaning we can produce more complex patterns of photons, and test tunneling behavior.)

We cannot collect data about a non-interacting object-- which is what a "god in the gaps!" does.   Because we cannot collect data, we cannot predict behavior.

Logged

Il Palazzo

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Dude abides.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3052 on: December 23, 2018, 09:43:49 am »

So that's a no then.
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3053 on: December 23, 2018, 09:46:28 am »

Not currently, but there is a path to experiment.

There is not, and by definition, cannot be, a path to experiment to find the god in the gaps.

Thus, not the same thing.  Again, a quibble.
Logged

Starver

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3054 on: December 23, 2018, 11:59:08 am »

and use that same math to calculate the odds of a person spontaneously tunneling out from inside an event horizon
...feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give it a fresh cup of really hot tea... and turn it on!
Logged

Madman198237

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3055 on: December 23, 2018, 01:28:12 pm »

They're not some compact thing, they huge. Galaxy-sized. in fact, they were probably the precursors to modern galaxies.

Quasars top out at around 106 AU in diameter, which is about 1/19th the diameter of even the smallest dwarf galaxies and about 1/2000th the diameter of the average 104-parsec galaxy. It's kind of lazy to say they're "galaxy-sized"

More accurately they're brighter than an entire galaxy, not sure how much brighter off the top of my head. They're visually "larger than" / "the same size as" than the galaxy they're in due mostly to the way our detection systems (both eyes and telescopes) function.
Logged
We shall make the highest quality of quality quantities of soldiers with quantities of quality.

Max™

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CULL:SQUARE]
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3056 on: December 25, 2018, 06:30:23 pm »

They're not some compact thing, they huge. Galaxy-sized. in fact, they were probably the precursors to modern galaxies.

Quasars top out at around 106 AU in diameter, which is about 1/19th the diameter of even the smallest dwarf galaxies and about 1/2000th the diameter of the average 104-parsec galaxy. It's kind of lazy to say they're "galaxy-sized"

More accurately they're brighter than an entire galaxy, not sure how much brighter off the top of my head. They're visually "larger than" / "the same size as" than the galaxy they're in due mostly to the way our detection systems (both eyes and telescopes) function.
Last time I checked A GRB can be brighter instantaneously, this one was 1054 ergs~ or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRB_080916C while this one here was less energetic it happened to be a little closer and aimed exactly at us so it was VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE AT THAT DISTANCE, and if you put it where the sun is (abs mag -27) it would have been unbelievably brighter (abs mag -67!!!!) though they don't specify the energy, just noting that it's got a lookback time of ~7.5 billion years vs 12.2 billion years for the other: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRB_080319B, but these tend to be very brief events, and brightness can mean lots of things. If you're looking at it as energy over time, or power, then a GRB is a spike and gone, while a quasar in an active state can throw out GRB levels of power for thousands or millions of years.
Logged
Engraved here is a rendition of an image of the Dwarf Fortress learning curve. All craftsdwarfship is of the highest quality. It depicts an obsidian overhang which menaces with spikes of obsidian and tears. Carved on the overhang is an image of Toady One and the players. The players are curled up in a fetal position. Toady One is laughing. The players are burning.
The VectorCurses+1 tileset strikes the square set and the severed part sails off in an arc!

GPeter

  • Bay Watcher
  • Adequate forum poster.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3057 on: December 26, 2018, 06:42:26 am »

Ok, I need help with something here.

I was watching Interstellar (such a wonderful movie). And something caught my attention, when they were talking about the older mission, they said that they sent 3 scientists to 3 different planets. And overall, spent 50 years receiving signal and information from them (At least that's what I understand, there could be a problem with the dubbing as I watched it in Portuguese), but when our people arrive at the water planet, they state that "every hour in here means 7 years on earth" and thus, the scientist who got there, was there for maybe a couple of hours. Question is: How did earth receive 50 years worth of signal and info, if the scientists had such gravity distortions, in which one of the scientists didn't even have a day in his planet?

If you can answer this, you made my day, thank you.
Logged
Yeah, there's plenty of information out there, but you don't need that information to form an opinion and then defend it to the death.
Hey, don't be like that. Your life never had any meaning in the first place!

Max™

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CULL:SQUARE]
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3058 on: December 26, 2018, 08:05:58 am »

Just sounds like time dilation mixed with handwavium? Never seen the movie, but the basic trimmed down answer is that time is another direction you are moving around in, besides the three you think of as being directions (centered on you, up/down, left/right, forward/backward, future/past) and there is a limit to how much you can move along any of those directions . If you speed up enough along a spatial direction it reduces how far you move along the temporal direction, so your local passage of time is reduced and you end up experiencing less time than your buddy who stayed at home while you zipped around across the galaxy. When you return home he's been dead for 150 years and one of his great great grandkids or some shit is there to greet you, though it's only been a couple of years from your perspective.
Logged
Engraved here is a rendition of an image of the Dwarf Fortress learning curve. All craftsdwarfship is of the highest quality. It depicts an obsidian overhang which menaces with spikes of obsidian and tears. Carved on the overhang is an image of Toady One and the players. The players are curled up in a fetal position. Toady One is laughing. The players are burning.
The VectorCurses+1 tileset strikes the square set and the severed part sails off in an arc!

GPeter

  • Bay Watcher
  • Adequate forum poster.
    • View Profile
Re: Space Thread
« Reply #3059 on: December 26, 2018, 08:40:47 am »

Just sounds like time dilation mixed with handwavium? Never seen the movie, but the basic trimmed down answer is that time is another direction you are moving around in, besides the three you think of as being directions (centered on you, up/down, left/right, forward/backward, future/past) and there is a limit to how much you can move along any of those directions . If you speed up enough along a spatial direction it reduces how far you move along the temporal direction, so your local passage of time is reduced and you end up experiencing less time than your buddy who stayed at home while you zipped around across the galaxy. When you return home he's been dead for 150 years and one of his great great grandkids or some shit is there to greet you, though it's only been a couple of years from your perspective.

Yes, I do know that. My doubt is: The scientists at Earth, stated that they spent 50 years receiving signals and info gathered by the scientists on the planets. Now think about it, how much information would you gather in 50 years? A lot, right? So Earth knows a lot about the planets outside, but the thing is, it passed 50 years for people on earth, but mere days for the scientists on the planets. The scientists did not spend 50 years gathering info, so how did earth receive 50 years worth of data?
Logged
Yeah, there's plenty of information out there, but you don't need that information to form an opinion and then defend it to the death.
Hey, don't be like that. Your life never had any meaning in the first place!
Pages: 1 ... 202 203 [204] 205 206 207