Daryl Janzen (@CosmicDaryl) - Twitter Profili | Zamantika Mersobahis Locabet

Sabitlenmiş Tweet

Wait a minute! Are there physicists who think there are black holes in our universe that have already completed gravitational collapse in our causal past? You do all know when we look at Cygnus X-1 we are seeing the star—the whole system including the BH—BEFORE horizon formation?

English

1

0

65

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·19h

@star_stufff @CburgesCliff @Rafa_Schwinger @cosmicfibretion @skdh @Samuel_Gregson @Kaju_Nut @ThomasVanRiet2 @steinly0 @coreyspowell It’s the Sun thing all over again, but in reverse. When we look at the Sun some people imagine we’re seeing it as it is now rather than as it was 8 minutes ago. In this case people think the picture we get is of the black hole right now, not as it was when the light left it.

English

0

29

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·20h

@star_stufff @CburgesCliff @Rafa_Schwinger @cosmicfibretion @skdh @Samuel_Gregson @Kaju_Nut @ThomasVanRiet2 @steinly0 @coreyspowell That’s just false. That’s not what the geometry describes. The null line drawn back to the black hole intersects the collapsing object on its worldtube BEFORE the horizon formation, when the star was still larger than its event horizon. That’s indisputable.

English

1

0

32

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·20h

Wait a minute! Are there physicists who think there are black holes in our universe that have already completed gravitational collapse in our causal past? You do all know when we look at Cygnus X-1 we are seeing the star—the whole system including the BH—BEFORE horizon formation?

English

1

0

65

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

@miniapeur And logic. Sometimes done incorrectly: x.com/cosmicdaryl/st…

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl

Ok, help me stress test out this proof. Please tell me if you find it convincing, or if you see an error. Break it if you can. Claim: every black hole merger must occur before the collapsing star becomes smaller than its horizon. Before it becomes a “black hole”.1/9 🧵

English

0

4

Mathieu@miniapeur·1d

ZXX

6

20

431

6.4K

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

@Dostoevskyquot 100% this: x.com/cosmicdaryl/st…

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl

Ok, help me stress test out this proof. Please tell me if you find it convincing, or if you see an error. Break it if you can. Claim: every black hole merger must occur before the collapsing star becomes smaller than its horizon. Before it becomes a “black hole”.1/9 🧵

English

0

4

Fyodor Dostoevsky Collection 🪓@Dostoevskyquot·1d

Which opinion about philosophy has you going like this?

Fyodor Dostoevsky Collection 🪓 tweet media

English

23

10

68

8.5K

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

@star_stufff Here’s one: x.com/cosmicdaryl/st… I think it’s a good question. Maybe you disagree. But definitely it is a cry to understand the world.

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl

Ok, help me stress test out this proof. Please tell me if you find it convincing, or if you see an error. Break it if you can. Claim: every black hole merger must occur before the collapsing star becomes smaller than its horizon. Before it becomes a “black hole”.1/9 🧵

English

0

23

Akshat@star_stufff·1d

“There are naïve questions, tedious questions, ill-phrased questions, questions put after inadequate self-criticism. But every question is a cry to understand the world. There is no such thing as a dumb question.” — Carl Sagan.

English

2

5

31

834

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

Exactly. For instance, I checked the logic here six ways from Sunday because the conclusion stands starkly opposed to conventional wisdom. I think the upshot is airtight, Claude does too, but still nothing beats stress-testing on humans @ThomasVanRiet2 x.com/cosmicdaryl/st…

Thomas Van Riet@ThomasVanRiet2

The AI revolution means researchers will have to step up their game, not the other way around; checking the AI output for correctness will push people beyond their small bubble of knowledge since AI does not have such constraints and uses all human knowledge to answer questions.

English

0

39

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

@CburgesCliff @martinmbauer @Kaju_Nut @Samuel_Gregson @skdh I’m sure you all think the claim is false. You probably won’t even think the proof is worth reading. But can you actually point to a flaw? Where does the logic break?

English

0

19

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

Ok, help me stress test out this proof. Please tell me if you find it convincing, or if you see an error. Break it if you can. Claim: every black hole merger must occur before the collapsing star becomes smaller than its horizon. Before it becomes a “black hole”.1/9 🧵

English

2

0

86

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

While it’s valid to infer that a gravitationally collapsing star has “already formed a horizon” out there in the universe, it’s invalid to say that happened already in an event that’s entered our causal past.

English

0

11

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

An observed black hole merger is null separated when observed, and timelike separated after it happens. It therefore MUST have occurred BEFORE the horizon formation event.

English

1

0

12

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

Therefore every gravitational wave merger we have ever observed necessarily involved objects that had not yet reached their horizon radii at the time of collision. This follows from causality alone. No new physics required.✅ 9/9

English

0

13

Daryl Janzen@CosmicDaryl·1d

So if the merger lies in our causal past — and it does — it must have occurred while the object was still larger than its horizon radius. Not because of any frame choice. Because of what causal past means.8/9

English

1

0

15

Daryl Janzen

Keşfet