Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–118 of 118 posts

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#111

Post by ben_w »

darkwater wrote: post #110
worewood wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I like to go on StackExchange, find questions I'm deeply knowledgeable in and where people are saying things like "it can't be done" and reply with a code example doing the thing.

I really don't understand how people can answer questions they are not 101% sure of the answer, on a public site like that. I mean, informal chat with a colleague? Sure. But to go on SO and do it, it's unthinkable for me.

If they're like me (I'm weird, but I think in this case it's likely), then they may be both confident and wrong at the same time.

My brain doesn't seem to index many examples of my own wrongness, even though I have more than once thought "this would be a good mistake to remember", and the worst that I can remember is under an NDA (very confident and very wrong), so the only example I can give is a currently ongoing personal error:

I've spent the last 5 years improving my German substantially, but the whole time I've been trying to estimate my current skill level and gotten the same answer, B1.

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#113

Post by rachofsunshine »

rakoo wrote: post #104
rachofsunshine wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked this out once! Gravitational waves obey the inverse-square law much like most radiation does (and subject to some constraints about weird spatial geometry, but most of their propagation is going on in open flat-ish space, so we can ignore that). GW150914, the first gravitational wave observed, had an amplitude of about 4 times 10^-22 [1], i.e., differences changed by a factor of about that. Typical sound dis…

This is the minimum for the drum to move, but sound is also about a frequency no ? Do gravitaional waves have the right one ?

They do. The signal in question peaked at around 250 Hz, so in the bass range of human hearing.

But as noted in other posts the post you're replying to was based on an incorrect assumption - there's a corrected value in one of the comment threads, and the distance for it to be audible is much closer than originally posted, roughly the Earth-Moon distance.

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#114

Post by marshray »

ElevenLathe wrote: post #106
marshray wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we do use crystals for generating a stable frequency reference, which is then used in tuning.

That's not what is meant by "crystal radio".

Yes, absolutely. I was referring to the part about "still usually done via a normal tuned LC circuit". Sorry for any confusion.

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#115

Post by meat_machine »

ben_w wrote: post #28
perihelions wrote: post #10

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…

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…

While LLMs and people are questionable in their ability for one-shot answers to complex things, with an LLM you can at least ask questions ad-nauseum all the way down the tree, ask for sources, ask it to be self-critical, think step-by-step, etc. From there, you'll at least be armed with more knowledge to ask better questions, whether to an LLM or a person. I think it's also a good exercise in figuring out how to break complex things down into smaller parts, and figuring out what questions to ask -- especially important if it's something where you barely know where to start.

Humans have a tendency to over-value their personal experience and cite their limited knowledge sets, beliefs, and intuitions as fact, and will probably tend to only show you the info that aligns with that.

I guess I'm biased, but for the most part, I don't think the error rates between people and LLMs are significant enough for me to want to deal with the human ego, versus an AI with infinite patience. There are certainly equally intelligent and gracious people, but I don't think they hang out much on Stack Exchange (or much of the popular internet, really)

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#116

Post by chiggsy »

ben_w wrote: post #28
perihelions wrote: post #10

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…

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…

Gravitational waves would "wiggle" all of you the same way, so not sure how they would do something different for one part of your body, so you could hear it.

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#117

Post by fasa99 »

rachofsunshine wrote: post #113
rakoo wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the minimum for the drum to move, but sound is also about a frequency no ? Do gravitaional waves have the right one ?

They do. The signal in question peaked at around 250 Hz, so in the bass range of human hearing. But as noted in other posts the post you're replying to was based on an incorrect assumption - there's a corrected value in one of the comment threads, and the distance for it to be audible is much closer than originally posted, roughly the Earth-Moon distance.

On this point I recall when the gravity wave detector first detected a black hole merge, which is of course a LOT of mass and power. It was in the hearing range so they played a .wav. It unironically sounded exactly like a "PLOP" drop of water falling in a bucket - an irony that such a big event and a small event sound so similar.

Re: What no one has seen before: gravitational waveforms from warp drive collapse

#118

Post by rakoo »

fasa99 wrote: post #117
rachofsunshine wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do. The signal in question peaked at around 250 Hz, so in the bass range of human hearing. But as noted in other posts the post you're replying to was based on an incorrect assumption - there's a corrected value in one of the comment threads, and the distance for it to be audible is much closer than originally posted, roughly the Earth-Moon distance.

On this point I recall when the gravity wave detector first detected a black hole merge, which is of course a LOT of mass and power. It was in the hearing range so they played a .wav. It unironically sounded exactly like a "PLOP" drop of water falling in a bucket - an irony that such a big event and a small event sound so similar.

This is both not surprising and surprisingly amazing
Post reply on HN