71–80 of 118 posts
Huh, so you can hear things explode in space, after all. If you're close enough to a warp field doing funny things, the gravitational wave strain would create audible-frequency artifacts, as it wiggles your eardrums at frequencies close enough to the audible. They derive an equation for estimated strain as a function of distance from the warp bubble collapse. How does strain translate to sound intensity, in the situa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine the sound of the hull + everything else shuddering would probably dominate the perceived sound from eardrums or direct excitation of the air.
The hull is in a vacuum, and so are the eardrums.
The hull and all other parts of the ship or suit around the eardrums would all also vibrate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A better form of moderation exists in the form of whatever they were doing before, when you could ask a question and get an answer. At one point SE was my most used resource. As of now I haven't used SE at all for I think four years. Why would you, when so much of the site's content is outdated and the moderators enforce that situation?
"Marked as a duplicate of an outdated post" has been a common complaint since the 2000s, the only "before" was when the site was brand new. I even checked to make sure I wasn't misremembering things - here's someone complaining about the same thing in 2011: https://old.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cm02a/you_cant...
Afaik, this is the policy since day one. It was aimed to be a FAQ site -- not just a question-answer site.. That's why it have community answer, allow the same poster answering his own question, encourage duping, allow other people to update/correct an existing answer,etc.
Back in those days:
1) Moderator knew the subject.
2) Most questions are "frequent" enough to qualify as FAQ.
3) When duped, the old answer is less likely to be outdated (because the site was new)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the reasons I no longer ask questions on Physics stack exchange: 1. I asked "how powerful" such waves would have to be to be audible. 2. I directly linked to another question whose accepted answer said "these waves can wiggle your ear drum" 3. Got my question closed as a duplicate but the link was to different question that only asked "is it possible" (and accepted the answer "yes") without there being any ans…
Why would you ever consider asking an LLM a question like this though? They just make plausible-sounding things up, even if sometimes they're correct.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it even wiggle the eardrums relatively to the rest of your head? Intuitively it seems that would only happen if the wavelength is exactly right, but at that wavelength the frequency would be inaudible because the speed of light is so high.
It can move soft tissues relatively to the skull bone, resulting in changes of pressure detectable by eardrums.
The skull shouldn't be able to resist gravity waves any more than soft tissues or 10km of lead?
Huh, so you can hear things explode in space, after all. If you're close enough to a warp field doing funny things, the gravitational wave strain would create audible-frequency artifacts, as it wiggles your eardrums at frequencies close enough to the audible. They derive an equation for estimated strain as a function of distance from the warp bubble collapse. How does strain translate to sound intensity, in the situa…
Pretty sure this is only true if the spaceship (or the disturbance it causes) is ~100 miles across, like neutron stars and black holes are. If it’s much bigger or smaller, the frequencies will be shifted correspondingly shifted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
4 times 10^-17 doesn't sound right... 2.5 times 10^14 I think?
EDIT: the CALCULATIONS are right, but they're based on an incorrect assumption. As a poster further down this thread corrects me, while the energy of a GW obeys inverse-square, the amplitude is just inverse. I can't edit my original post, but the corrected calc is here. There is also a typo in my post where there's 10^-7 instead of 10^-5, but the calculations are done correctly. That corrected assumption gives: d_aud…
> 10^-7, that is, 4 times 10^-17 times larger than the gravitational wave detected
which doesn't sound right. (Like saying "X is 0.1 times larger than Y" when X = 10Y.) The ear displacement is 2.5×10^16 larger than the gravitational wave, no?
(Also I think 10^-7 should be 10^-5 in the quoted phrase, as per your reply above.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Marked as a duplicate of an outdated post" has been a common complaint since the 2000s, the only "before" was when the site was brand new. I even checked to make sure I wasn't misremembering things - here's someone complaining about the same thing in 2011: https://old.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/cm02a/you_cant...
That doesn't really show that it was a common complaint given it accrued zero Reddit agreement points. The situation now is also much worse than it was, because answers could be two years out of date then and beyond a decade out of date now. I quit when I realised I would be scrolling by walls of jQuery answers for the foreseeable future if I kept using the site, not worth the waste of my time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EDIT: the CALCULATIONS are right, but they're based on an incorrect assumption. As a poster further down this thread corrects me, while the energy of a GW obeys inverse-square, the amplitude is just inverse. I can't edit my original post, but the corrected calc is here. There is also a typo in my post where there's 10^-7 instead of 10^-5, but the calculations are done correctly. That corrected assumption gives: d_aud…
Strain drops off as 1/r, not 1/r^2
For other readers, this poster's correction is right, here's an astronomy SA thread on it. https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/34761/why-does...
I swear, the one time I try posting outside my areas of expertise :D