0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
There is also a cosmic gamma ray background radiation. The sun produces gamma rays and so most if not all other stars and galaxies.
How many gamma rays are detected by Fermi satellite each second ?
You heard wrong. An attempt to detect differences in speed between high energy electromagnetic radiation and low energy electromagnetic radiation generated by a distant gamma ray burst failed to find any such difference: https://arstechnica.com/science/2009/10/quantum-gravity-theories-meet-a-gamma-ray-burst/
I don't have your relativistic faith to accept this paper as conclusive proof all photons travel at the same speed. My theory predicts gamma photons should travel faster than visible photons. I wonder if in gamma ray bursts gamma photons arrive before visible photons ?
My theory predicts gamma photons should travel faster than visible photons. I wonder if in gamma ray bursts gamma photons arrive before visible photons ?
I wonder if in gamma ray bursts gamma photons arrive before visible photons ?
I wonder if in gamma ray bursts gamma photons arrive before visible photons ?Observedly, no.You don't need to "wonder" about this- it's been checked.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRB_080319BSo, if you were interested in actual science, you would now ditch the idea (the one you keep lying about being a theory) but I predict that you won't because you are trolling.
No, your theory is wrong. Gamma radiation speed can be measured here on earth and is same as light - again as @Kryptid says, dont need to use relativity.
I don't have your relativistic faith to accept this paper as conclusive proof all photons travel at the same speed. My theory predicts gamma photons should travel faster than visible photons. I wonder if in gamma ray bursts gamma photons arrive before visible photons ?Relativity has nothing to do with it. Speed is distance divided by time. No relativity required.
And I had read Gamma ray photons usually arrive hours before visible photons.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_burst
I read the sun produces GeV gamma photons by interactions with cosmic rays. If the sun produces GeV photons most other stars also produce GeV photons. There are plenty of GeV photon sources.
What I meant you need a relativistic faith to conclude this single photon must have originated at the burst.
Please quote the part of that page which states that visible light arrives hours after the gamma rays do, because I can't find it.
You make it sound as if Fermi only detects gamma rays without any ability to tell what direction they came from. The 31 GeV gamma ray was detected using the Large Area Telescope instrument, which has several layers of silicon microstrip detectors. The direction of the photon can be determined by the way that the resulting electron-positron pair passes through these layers. So we know that the photon came from the direction of the gamma ray burst.
Relativity has nothing to do with determining where a gamma ray photon came from.
"After an initial flash of gamma rays, a longer-lived "afterglow" is usually emitted at longer wavelengths".
"The William Herschel Telescope identified a fading optical counterpart 20 hours after the burst".
"The following year, GRB 980425 was followed within a day by a bright supernova".
How many stars and galaxies are located inside angle of detection ?
Using the count rate in the LAT during the 200 s directly preceding T0 as a measure of the background rate, the probability that these three photons would arise by accident is 1.2 × 10−6
You so believe light travels at the same speed that you placed the origin of this photon were you wanted it.
"After an initial flash of gamma rays, a longer-lived "afterglow" is usually emitted at longer wavelengths".This says that the afterglow is longer-lived than the initial gamma ray flash, not that the visible light from the initial flash took longer to reach us.
How many stars and galaxies are located inside angle of detection ?Unknown, but also irrelevant.
So the odds of the 31 GeV gamma ray and two other burst rays (each above 100 MeV) striking the detector within the 0.2 second time span they were detected in by chance alone was 1,200,000 to 1. You're appealing to a miracle in an attempt to debunk the findings. Here is the paper that I got this information from, on page 7: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1005.2141.pdf
The odds are 1,200,000 to 1 for the origin to not be the burst.
The term "after" at the beginning of the sentence suggests to me a flash of gamma rays appear before longer wavelength afterglow.
I don't understand
Each star inside angle of detection is a potential source for a strayed GeV photon.
I don't understand this paper.
My theory predicts gamma photons from gamma-ray bursts should arrive before visible photons. The same arrival time of gamma and visible photons will disprove my theory. What's the odds on that ?
These findings mean that your hypothesis has a 1 in 1.2 million chance of being correct. At best.
Earthside measurements indicate gamma photons move at c:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.84.271http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995NIMPA.355..537F
I gather this is an indirect measurement.
Please quote the part of that page which states that visible light arrives hours after the gamma rays do, because I can't find it."After an initial flash of gamma rays, a longer-lived "afterglow" is usually emitted at longer wavelengths"."The William Herschel Telescope identified a fading optical counterpart 20 hours after the burst"."The following year, GRB 980425 was followed within a day by a bright supernova".
My theory predicts gamma photons from gamma-ray bursts should arrive before visible photons. The same arrival time of gamma and visible photons will disprove my theory. What's the odds on that ?These findings mean that your hypothesis has a 1 in 1.2 million chance of being correct. At best.
I searched the internet and found a few graphs showing optical signals appear seconds after the start of the burst. Check this link. I also noticed bursts are complex and no two are alike but wonder if several seconds delay between the beginning of the burst and optical signal is a common feature of bursts.https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1999/ast26mar99_1
In either case, that isn't evidence that the visible light arrived after the gamma rays did.
Quote from: Kryptid on 28/12/2017 00:21:16In either case, that isn't evidence that the visible light arrived after the gamma rays did.This is another diagram from a different burst showing an optical peak appearing several seconds after gamma burst.
In either case, that isn't evidence that the visible light arrived after the gamma rays did.This is another diagram from a different burst showing an optical peak appearing several seconds after gamma burst. This isn’t evidence that γ-rays travel faster that optical photons because you don't know the profile of the emissions. But you can make a reasonable assumption.In any explosion the emissions will depend on the temperature over time. For example with a nuclear bomb the initial exceedingly high temperature causes sudden release of a high energy γ-rays E=hν≈1-10 MeV, as it cools x-rays E=hν≈1-100 keV, and as it cools further then progressively lower temperature radiation is released UV, visible light, IR, microwave, radiowave. These latter frequencies are the ‘afterglow’ with the optical peak following the gamma peak.GRB in astronomy appears to be far more complex than the simple nuclear explosion.