Major astrophysics discovery to be unveiled on Monday.

[John Connor]

I don't understand why this is a surprise. It's like reading about God, but not believing and then you see him. Personally I always knew it existed. I'm John Connor after all....

Imagine the engine you could make with this.

 

[MongGrel]

My will to post things in general is hard not to do some days.

The special rules and all...

It's like a little PC safe zone, while some people run around carte blanche.

 

[Ruptga]

I don't understand why this is a surprise. It's like reading about God, but not believing and then you see him. Personally I always knew it existed. I'm John Connor after all....

Imagine the engine you could make with this.

Nobody "always knew" they existed, because before now there was no reason to assume Einstein had it exactly right. Betting that Einstein was right is generally safe, but it's still just a bet; anyone that thought they *knew* was only assuming.

I'm also not sure how an engine could be made that involves merging neutron stars and/or black holes, but if one is ever made I'll be sure to keep my distance. That sounds terrible.

 

[John Connor]

\

I'm also not sure how an engine could be made that involves merging neutron stars and/or black holes, but if one is ever made I'll be sure to keep my distance. That sounds terrible.

Think beyond the scope of what we know here and now and use your imagination.

 

[pcgeek11]

Thought this was a new thread, saw the OP's name on the thread list, pooped a little.

I also freaked out for a second...

RIP

 

[Fritzo]

Do they refract through or reflect off of massive objects?

Neither. Gravity is essentially the "dimple" made in the fabric of space/time. All matter creates a dimple, and the more massive an object, the deeper the dimple. This dimple is why smaller objects orbit around larger objects in space. We've not found a process that can reflect or refract gravity.

Einstein predicted that the fabric of space-time should act like a fluid, and with a big enough disturbance, you would see ripples in that fluid (like throwing a rock in a pond). The fabric of space-time is very rigid and difficult to manipulate though, so it would take VERY massive objects to make a detectable signal. There's nothing more massive than black holes, so they became the first target to test. In theory, all matter should make gravitational waves to some degree, but the signal from these waves would be much to faint to detect. As we refine the technology, we may be able to see waves from smaller sources. These signals can be used in a similar way that submarines use sonar, meaning we've just gained a brand new sense to study distant objects. It's sort of like being able to see, touch, and taste something, but suddenly you grew ears and are now able to hear it.

 

[brianmanahan]

It's like a little PC safe zone, while some people run around carte blanche.

i'm sure there's a quantum physics explanation for this phenomenon

it might just take 100 more years to prove it

 

[Ruptga]

Think beyond the scope of what we know here and now and use your imagination.

uh huh. Obviously I can't get on your level, so what do you have in mind?

This has obvious applications for a new kind of telescope and maybe as an extremely long-range radio, but that's about it. They move space, not matter, so you can't use them to do any mechanical work like moving a rocket. They also move at or very near the speed of light, so using them to compress the space ahead of a rocket isn't realistic either. They are also extremely faint, to the point that the waves produced by Earth and the sun would have a magnitude of 10−26, so unless your engine is going to be many times the mass of the sun it won't have a chance of making a measurable wave.

Bottom line: if we're ever able to use gravity waves for anything other than telescopes it will only be because of something even more amazing, like matter with negative mass or a fusion reactor the size of a moon.