If light has no mass, how is it affected by black holes?

If light has no mass, how the fuck are they affected by black holes?

I thought gravity only works if a thing has mass

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    spacetime is curved so much the path of the light curves back on itself

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >muh spacetime
      do you realize how retarded that sounds

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Whats your answer then?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        then what instead? are you saying einstein is wrong?

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          maybe he was
          why do you think it's called a theory

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        That makes sense though.

        Space gets bent by black holes and stars, anything with mass, etc.

        And light doesn't have mass but it moves along space and so if the space is bent around the black hole, the light will also get bent around the black hole (which is exactly what happens in real life). Light gets bent by planets too, (but less than black hole of course). It gets warped in correlation with the intensity of the gravity (really makes you think).

        Although Einstein's theory is really good, it still fails to describe the movement of galaxies (unless there is "dark matter" which is potentially true, but unconfirmed).

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Newtonian gravity also predicts lensing without any spacetime curving.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          > fails to describe the movement of galaxies
          Completely wrong. General Relativity has never been disproved at those scales. It accurately describes the motion of galaxies which is why we know dark matter is there.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >spacetime is curved so much the path of the light curves back on itself
      But there is an inbound and an outbound Curve if it passes the black hole. Why did that not nullified the bend?

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >I thought
    doubt it

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Read up on gravitational lensing

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because the light keeps moving in a straight line along a curved spacetime giving

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >I thought gravity only works if a thing has mass
    Nope. Gravity refers to the field which determines the geometry of space (metric tensor field). The action for the EM field is not a topological one - it depends on this geometry.

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Light has no REST mass. How do you think solar sails work?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >How do you think solar sails work?
      Methink they work on solar wind.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Wrongo

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Wrongo
          Why

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            The pressure of light pushes them. Solar wind is not light.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              This only repeats the claim, is /sci a church?

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why the fuck can't you just google your retarded question instead of shitting up the board?

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Gravity doesn't physically exist in our dimension it exists in the 4th dimension, and as an up or down gradient is to 2 dimensional beings, gravity is to our 3 dimensional space.

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can derive black holes even in Newtonian gravity. Escape velocity is sqrt(2GM/r), where M is the mass of the body you are escaping from. It doesn't depend on the mass of the body that is escaping. If M gets so big that the escape velocity exceeds c, then you have a black hole.

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Black hole doesn't attract photon. It bend the photon container(aka space-time) therefore the photo got pulled into the black hole.

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Photons have no rest mass but since they're moving with light speed, they acquire mass through relativistic mechanics. Since [math]v=0[/math] in equation for relativistic mass, the result is [math]frac{0}{0}[/math]. I think they resolve it by using l'Hopital's rule of something.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      no. photon's mass = 0
      read a book

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, you're wrong.

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    What makes gravity different from EM? Why can't I say EM is a feature of spacetime geometry?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Well, any energy or mass as an excitation like a particle in a field will also bend spacetime, of course it would have next to no affect on anything.

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    this thread is mind numbing to LULZ as 1 kilogram of steel vs 1 kilogram of feathers

    i'm not shitting you

    explaining that gravity doesn't attract mass, just that anything that moves through space-time follows space-time's curves and gravity is just space-time curvature... is not something we should have to keep doing over and over

    people need to learn this one god damn time and not forget

    fuck

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's pretty clear that despite what mainstream physics says, photons must be particles with mass.

    I derived the mass of a photon in this paper here:
    https://vixra.org/abs/2102.0169

    It also turns out that if you calculate the distance at which two photons in their minimum energy state escape each other's gravitational attraction, you can use this to calculate the number of cavitation modes in radiating black-bodies. This demonstrates the relationship between gravity and quantum mechanics. (You can find that calculation in the same paper.)

    I also discuss the issues with the Michelson-Morley experiment (which led to relativity, and the erroneous belief that photons are massless) in more depth here:
    https://vixra.org/abs/2103.0149

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >cavitation modes in radiating black-bodies

      We're going to need some elaboration here, because this sounds like some shit a DC super villain would say, while developing a weapon to destroy metropolis.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        As objects are heated, they emit radiation at certain frequencies, forming a particular distribution. See this link for example:
        http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod6.html

        The blackbody radiation curve was one of the original observations that required quantum mechanics to explain. You can read more about the ultraviolet catastrophe here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe

        Generally, the derivation of the number of cavity modes at a particular frequency (which determines the shape of the distribution) requires some complicated and hand-wavy statistical arguments.

        However, I show in my paper that you can explain this quantum-mechanical effect by assuming that photons have mass, and calculating how far away from each other they need to be to exist as separate particles.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          I just wanted to say its nice to have a man of science here.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Thanks anon 🙂

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >Yet what does Hawking Radiation do after it radiates?
    Hawking radiation emission time is proportional to the cube of the mass of the black hole.

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Implying is hard to change light path

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      retard

  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >If light has no mass, how the fuck are they affected by black holes?
    the same way the observable universe is moving away from us, when you stretch space at extremes it becomes impossible for light to ever 'reach' a place. in a black hole space stretches faster than light can traverse across the hole.

Your email address will not be published.