[Kryptid]

If tides from the white dwarf do indeed heat up the neutron star, then the white dwarf has lost just as much energy (and mass) as the neutron star has gained in the process. Conservation of mass and energy won't allow anything different.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

If tides from the white dwarf do indeed heat up the neutron star, then the white dwarf has lost just as much energy (and mass) as the neutron star has gained in the process. Conservation of mass and energy won't allow anything different.

Sorry, tidal increases the heat also at the orbital object.
Jupiter' moon (Io) is an excellent example for that activity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Io_(moon)#Tidal_heating
"The tidal heating produced by Io's forced orbital eccentricity has made it the most volcanically active world in the Solar System, with hundreds of volcanic centres and extensive lava flows."
Hence, the Tidal forces heat the main mass/Planet/Pulsar and the orbital objects/moons.
Therefore, while the Pulsar gains Tidal heating, its orbital object (the white dwarf) also gains Tidal heating.
I wonder what is the added heating energy that the Pulsar gain due to this Tidal forces with that white dwarf?
If we could estimate the total energy that it gains per orbital cycle, we could calculate the total particle pair that it could generate with that energy.
Please be aware, that while one particle falls into the Pulsar, the other one is ejected into the White dwarf.
Therefore, the Pulsar and the white dwarf gain more mass over time.

[Bored chemist]

Tides allow energy to be transmitted in both directions.
But the conservation laws say that the total energy remains the same whatever the tides do.

On the other hand, the gravity waves produced mean that energy and therefore mass, is constantly lost from the system.
So, what you get is a system which has less mass as time goes on.

Eventually, the effects of tide etc will mean that the two objects collide.
If one of them was a BH then you end up with a bigger BH.
And in time, that evaporates by Hawking radiation.
And after a really long time, there's nothing left.

So it can not possibly be a basis for a steady stated universe.

So Dave the troll is still wrong.

[Kryptid]

Therefore, the Pulsar and the white dwarf gain more mass over time.

That violates conservation of mass.

[Origin]

That violates conservation of mass.

That is something you learn in your first semester of physics and Dave hasn't made it that far yet.

[Bored chemist]

He keeps on trying to plug a "steady state" model of the universe, so it's clear he's not troubled by energy conservation.
He doesn't seem to science well.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Tides allow energy to be transmitted in both directions.

Gravity force formula is as follow:
https://www.toppr.com/guides/physics-formulas/gravitational-force-formula/
F1 = F2 = G * m1 * m2 / r^2
That gravity force is absolutely identical for the main mass (F1) and for the orbital object (F2) and it is for free. No one really pays for that force.
Normally, in order to get a force you must invest energy, while force can be transfored back to work and energy.
However, Gravity force is there without any investment of energy.
Hence, gravity force is for free. As force can be transformed into work or energy, then also gravity force can be transforemd into work and energy.
Therefore, the Tidal heat is the energy that is created due to the free gravity force. As the gravity force is for free than the tidal heat is also for free.
Hence, Tides allow (heat) energy to be transmitted in both directions.
So, the tidal heat energy in both objects doesn't contradict the conservation laws as the gravity force is for free and it adds heat energy to both objects in the orbital system.

But the conservation laws say that the total energy remains the same whatever the tides do.

That is incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_law
"In physics, a conservation law states that a particular measurable property of an isolated physical system does not change as the system evolves over time."
So, the conservation law is related to isolated physical system without any external forces on it.
However, although the gravity force is due to the mass/radius of the objects in that isolated physical orbital system it is actually an external force.
It comes for free as it doesn't reduce the mass of any object in the system.
Hence, the gravity force should be considered as a force that comes externally into the isolated system.
As this gravity works the same on both orbital systems, it increases the Tidal heat of each object without any reduction of mass in any of the objects.
Therefore, we see the great impact of tidal heat on our planet and also on Io moon (without losing mass).
 

On the other hand, the gravity waves produced mean that energy and therefore mass, is constantly lost from the system.
So, what you get is a system which has less mass as time goes on.

I disagree
I still think that mass is mass and energy is energy.
So, please, for this discussion let's separate between the two.
Let's assume that in this gravity wave we discuss about BH + Neutron star.
Let's also assume that the internal energies (heat + rotation +..) in both objects is zero.
So, we only have their pure mass.
As those objects spirals inwards to each other they do not lose any mass. However in this process they are increasing their orbital velocity around their common center of mass. Just one moment before the last merging activity, their orbital velocity is Ultra fast, their internal heat is high while there is no change in their pure mass.
Therefore, this is an example of increasing the total mass energy of the objects due to gravity.
However, I can agree with you that at the merging moment, due to the impact between the two objects, some mass/energy might be dissipated.
In any case, the tidal heat increases the total Mass/energy in the orbital system.

[Bored chemist]

I disagree
I still think that mass is mass and energy is energy.

Then you are not doing science, are you?

The only question left is, are you a fool or a troll?

[Kryptid]

I still think that mass is mass and energy is energy.

So you reject E=mc²?

[Bored chemist]

I still think that mass is mass and energy is energy.

So you reject E=mc²?

Dave has spent 24 pages steadfastly ignoring science and claiming that all the scientists who accept the BBT are liars.
Did you expect him to suddenly change his policy ?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

I still think that mass is mass and energy is energy.

So you reject E=mc²?

No.
I discuss from the Gravity point of view.
Gravity formula is purely based on mass & radius..
 

F1 = F2 = G * m1 * m2 / r^2

The internal energies of the object as rotation and heat are just irrelevant when it comes to the gravity force.
There is no change in the gravity force if the rotation of the object or its heat are increasing or decreasing.
Tidal & gravity wave are direct outcome from gravity.
Therefore, as we focus on gravity, we must distinguish between mass and energy.

[Kryptid]

There is no change in the gravity force if the rotation of the object or its heat are increasing or decreasing.

Actually, it does. Rotational kinetic energy and heat energy are, of course, energy. That energy has mass as per E=mc². So if it loses rotational kinetic energy or heat energy, the mass associated with that energy is lost as well.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

There is no change in the gravity force if the rotation of the object or its heat are increasing or decreasing.

Actually, it does. Rotational kinetic energy and heat energy are, of course, energy. That energy has mass as per E=mc². So if it loses rotational kinetic energy or heat energy, the mass associated with that energy is lost as well.

Do you mean that if the internal heat of the Moon would be increased then its gravity force with the earth would also be increased?
Even if that is correct, don't you agree that the gravity comes for free?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_law
"In physics, a conservation law states that a particular measurable property of an isolated physical system does not change as the system evolves over time."
So, the conservation law is related to isolated physical system without any external forces on it.
However, although the gravity force is due to the mass/radius of the objects in that isolated physical orbital system it is actually an external force.
It comes for free as it doesn't reduce the mass of any object in the system.
Hence, the gravity force should be considered as a force that comes externally into the isolated system.
As this gravity works the same on both orbital systems, it increases the Tidal heat of each object without any reduction of mass in any of the objects.
Therefore, we see the great impact of tidal heat on our planet and also on Io moon (without losing mass).

As the isolated orbital system doesn't lose energy due to gravity force, then why that force that comes for free can't set a work and increase the heat in the Earth or Io Moon without losing mass/energy somewhere else for that specific work?

[Bored chemist]

Therefore, as we focus on gravity, we must distinguish between mass and energy.

Gravity does not make that distinction.

[Bored chemist]

don't you agree that the gravity comes for free?

No.
it is "paid for" by whatever produces this

the internal heat of the Moon would be increased

Again, you are ignoring established experimental results.
You need to stop trolling.

[Kryptid]

Do you mean that if the internal heat of the Moon would be increased then its gravity force with the earth would also be increased?

Yes.

Even if that is correct, don't you agree that the gravity comes for free?

Yes, but gravity is a force, not energy. The energy that a gravitational field can transfer has to come from somewhere. It isn't for "free".

As the isolated orbital system doesn't lose energy due to gravity force, then why that force that comes for free can't set a work and increase the heat in the Earth or Io Moon without losing mass/energy somewhere else for that specific work?

Because that would violate conservation of energy.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Do you mean that if the internal heat of the Moon would be increased then its gravity force with the earth would also be increased?

Yes.

Even if that is correct, don't you agree that the gravity comes for free?

Yes,  but gravity is a force, not energy. The energy that a gravitational field can transfer has to come from somewhere. It isn't for "free".

Thanks
Do appreciate your explanation and confirmation:
So you confirm that the gravity force is free but you also claim that: " but gravity is a force, not energy. The energy that a gravitational field can transfer has to come from somewhere. It isn't for "free"."
However, we know that force can set work.
For example, the car' eneine sets force that forces the car to set work. that work moves the car forwards or backwards.
Theoretically, if we could get a car engine that could set a force without any sort of external energy, then we could move the care for free.
In the same token the gravity force moves two objects around each other.
That force sets work as it holds those objects in that orbital path.
Try to eliminate the free gravity force and calculate the energy that is needed to hold those massive objects in their orbital path.
Do you confirm that the gravity force formula is as follow:

F1 = F2 = G * m1 * m2 / r^2

Do you confirm that there is no reduction in m1 & m2 mass or energy over time due to that gravity force?
So, we have gravity force free of charge and it also sets work free of charge.
If we have to set that work without gravity force, than we had to invest energy.
Therefore, the force that holds the objects is equivalent to energy that must be invested if the gravity force was not there.
In the same token, when an object is falling on earth it gain kinetic energy.
So, the potential gravity force is transformed into real kinetic energy.
Try to calculate the energy that a falling satellite is needed at its collision impact with the earth.
So, as gravity force is for free, the work that it generates is for free.
That work means energy. Hence, the gravity force generates energy for free.
If you still don't agree with that, then please show how much energy/mass m1 and m2 are losing due to the gravity force.
Please also show the energy that was needed in order to force/hold the earth in orbital path around the Sun (if there was no gravity force).

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 06:37:43
As the isolated orbital system doesn't lose energy due to gravity force, then why that force that comes for free can't set a work and increase the heat in the Earth or Io Moon without losing mass/energy somewhere else for that specific work?

Because that would violate conservation of energy.

No it doesn't.
I have already explained it.
As gravity force is for free, it is edded as an external force into the isolated physical system:

That is incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_law
"In physics, a conservation law states that a particular measurable property of an isolated physical system does not change as the system evolves over time."
So, the conservation law is related to isolated physical system without any external forces on it.
However, although the gravity force is due to the mass/radius of the objects in that isolated physical orbital system it is actually an external force.
It comes for free as it doesn't reduce the mass of any object in the system.
Hence, the gravity force should be considered as a force that comes externally into the isolated system.
As this gravity works the same on both orbital systems, it increases the Tidal heat of each object without any reduction of mass in any of the objects.

Therefore, as the gravity force is for free, its equivalent impact of work/energy is also for free.

[Kryptid]

So, as gravity force is for free, the work that it generates is for free.

Where does gravity get that energy from?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

So, as gravity force is for free, the work that it generates is for free.

Where does gravity get that energy from?

It is for free.
We have to ask Newton why the gravity force doesn't need any energy for its work and why the gravity formula is as follow:

F1 = F2 = G * m1 * m2 / r^2

If energy was needed for the gravity force then the works/energy due to that force was not free of charge.

[Kryptid]

It is for free.

I didn't ask if it was for free or not, I asked where it came from.