Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 00:07:54 UTC No. 16440498

did you make a wormhole bomb or something?

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 00:11:16 UTC No. 16440501

>>16440493
gotta assume it would be like the ocean when there's a subduction earthquake

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 00:22:46 UTC No. 16440511

If you, hypothetically, introduced a significant enough energy density to a region of space, over some interval of time, then subsequently removed it over a smaller interval of time, wouldnt that theoretically force spacetime restore equilibrium "at a sharper rate" then it was deformed, this created momentary states of opposite curvature, and therefore repulsive gravity?

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 00:46:56 UTC No. 16440529

>>16440493
Space would flatten out quickly and the gravitational ripples would propagate out at the speed of light.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 10:27:55 UTC No. 16440993

>>16440493
>vanished
not possible, therefore your hypothesis is unphysical

🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 10:29:05 UTC No. 16440995

It would go negative and overdrive that way before the scene wobbled out.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 10:47:46 UTC No. 16441009

>>16440493
>suddenly vanished
This would violate energy-stress conservation. Einstein’s field equation fundamentally work under the assumption of conservation. That’s how the Einstein tensor is constructed. So, the question is nonsensical in GR context.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 11:07:28 UTC No. 16441019

>>16440493
Don't care for impossible scenarii. Any inconsistent hypothesis can lead to any consequence you choose.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:13:38 UTC No. 16441071

>>16441009
Can you not be a homosexual male-lover for once and just go with the hypothetical? Thanks.

🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 12:14:59 UTC No. 16441074

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 13:04:10 UTC No. 16441114

well they detected gravity waves, so those may be generated like and undersea landslide, but I haven't heard anything about spacetime bouncing "upward" That would imply a region of space where mass is repulsed from. Not even anti-matter is repulsed by gravitational fields. It's a good question if after spacetime recoils, does it recoil some more but only in the "downward" direction? What dampens spacetime recoil?

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 13:05:53 UTC No. 16441116

>>16441009
what about a sudden mass Hawking radiation scenario? Granted that is probably as rare as all the air particles gathering in one corner of my room right now.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 14:05:37 UTC No. 16441202

>>16440493
Can't this be understood rather easily? Take a flat robertson walker space. Put one mass in it. Then add a negative mass term, equal in mass to the amount that existed. Then modulate the negative term via the heaviside step function for t ≥ t'. So the metric would instantaneously spring back to flatness the moment the mass was deleted. This isn't a terrible difficult calculation.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 15:00:55 UTC No. 16441263

>>16441071
Sure. A giant penis-shaped gravitational wave will hurl towards you in this universe.
If you don't like the answer, please prove why it's bad. And dont forget to show how a mass can instantly disappear from existence along the way.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 15:21:59 UTC No. 16441284

>>16441071
>ask what GR would tell us about this situation
>say GR wouldn’t even work
>get a salty response
>>16441116
Hawking radiation is semiclassical. And it conserves energy, just not quantum numbers like baryon numbera. So again, not GR.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 15:23:12 UTC No. 16441285

>>16441202
negative mass doesn’t exist. The proof of that is probably the only useful thing Witten has done in his career.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 15:54:19 UTC No. 16441318

>>16441285
It's a mathematical tool you nonce. It's used all the time in electrodynamics. Take a conducting sphere with a cavity carved out. Use superposition of it having some charge across a full sphere + the cavity having the opposite charge
>DUUURRRR THAT DOESNT EXIST ITS A CAVITY
No shit. You get the same results.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 16:37:49 UTC No. 16441357

>>16441318
Electromagnetism has opposing charges. GR doesn’t. There is no negative energy.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 16:39:25 UTC No. 16441359

>>16441357
1. Set up the field equations with mass term modulated by heaviside t ≤ t'
2. Set up field equations with mass (all time) and negative mass with heaviside t ≥ t'

You'll get the same results.

Anonymous at Sun, 20 Oct 2024 17:07:36 UTC No. 16441381

>>16441359
Once again. There is no negative mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_energy_theorem

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Oct 2024 01:50:22 UTC No. 16442026

>>16441381
Breakfast question playing out in real time. Lmfao

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Oct 2024 04:06:48 UTC No. 16442145

>>16440529
The Gravity field is a different entity than the EM field.
Why is it assumed (/how is it known) the Gravity field warps at light speed?

What is the magnetic field made of?

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Oct 2024 04:12:01 UTC No. 16442148

>>16441009
>>16441116
merging with an object of equal mass in antimatter.

Antimatter instantly destroys matter. I've heard of the (probably debunked by now?) idea of a quantum fluctuation having no theoretical limit on it's size, just that there is an inverse relationship with size and probability. I heard someone theorize that our universe is one such nearly infinitely improbable universe sized fluctuations that could have an antimatter twin, and could be instantly deleted if that's the case. Anyway, probably not. But theory can lead to discovery in theoretical physics.

Anonymous at Mon, 21 Oct 2024 09:59:38 UTC No. 16442352

>>16442148
>merging with an object of equal mass in antimatter.
The energy doesn't just vanish. The annihilation will create an absurd amount of photons, electrons, neutrinos, etc