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. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

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

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >muh spacetime
      do you realize how retarded that sounds

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Whats your answer then?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        then what instead? are you saying einstein is wrong?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

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

      • 1 year 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).

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Newtonian gravity also predicts lensing without any spacetime curving.

        • 1 year 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.

    • 1 year 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. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I thought
    doubt it

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Read up on gravitational lensing

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

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

  5. 1 year 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. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

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

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

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

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Wrongo

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Wrongo
          Why

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

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

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

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

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

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

  8. 1 year 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. 1 year 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. 1 year 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. 1 year 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.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      no. photon's mass = 0
      read a book

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No, you're wrong.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

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

    • 1 year 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. 1 year 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. 1 year 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

    • 1 year 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.

      • 1 year 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.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

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

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Thanks anon 🙂

  15. 1 year 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. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Implying is hard to change light path

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      retard

  17. 1 year 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.