Yes Sam I have read up LIGO since before it was finished in its original
form. I have read some of the papers (as far as my maths will take me)
and frankly if I were a funder of the project I would be getting more
than a little tired of the refrain "just a few million dollars" and "just
turn up the lasers until the mirrors almost melt".
After all the years of work, how many confirmed observations do we have?
ZERO to be exact.
NO I am NOT a Luddite, I have been involved with science for most of my
70 years in many fields such as Astronomy, Solid state physics and
Acoustics and am a serious Amateur astronomer.
If I am feeling that way then I guess politicians would be MUCH worse.
Clifford Wright.
Reality is we spent $25,000,000 each on those 5 shuttle toilets,and
that makes LIGO dirt cheap. Its so sad that USA is now under Mafia
control Fact is Godfather will not let TV,movies,congress and the
press say Mafia in vain. We owe China 1.7 trillion so its no more
"commie China" Shop at Walmart so USA workers have no jobs,other than
picking veggies. It begs the question will men give up their food
stamps to break their backs in the hot Sun,or stay home and watch TV
Get the picture TreBert
Sam Gravity makes large objects round and creates gravity rings.
Einstein rings make viewing the universe at great distance possible.
Accretion rings made by BH gives the BH reality. Get the picture>
Bean head Ha ha ha TreBert
> An important objection to your analogy of water waves and a pier obviously
> arises. The pier is relatively stationary relative to the waves and the
> waves do NOT move it perceptibly.
> However a theoretical "gravity wave" passing through LIGO or any other
> detector affects ALL local spacetime. This results in a situation where
> only ultra low bandwidth detectors could be used and enormously decreases
> the likely hood of the detection of anything.
There's a reason the LIGO arms are 4km long. Gravitational waves propagate
at c, not instantaenously. The effects are observable.
> A good analogy is Marconi trying to find the frequency of a modern vhf
> transmitter with 1900 equipment, without having any other transmitter.
> It would obviously be necessary to have a VERY good understanding of
> gravity and its likely effects BEFORE any sensible detection apparatus
> could be built. WE do NOT have that as yet!
> With early radio we had a good understanding of its theory, thanks to
> Clark/Maxwell and strong natural sources of signals (lightning), see
> Popov's work here.
> There is NO equivalent for gravitational radiation.
> Clifford Wright.
Only because its' hard to generate rapidly varying mass quadrupole moments
on Earth.
Gravity created all that is Gravity can not be blocked. G=EMC^2
Gravity will show us in 3 million years our parrallel universe.
TreBert
treBert... Eric•Gisse has become a solid contributor to Sci.Physics; I'm learning from him. In many ways, he's ·better· than me. LIGO's 4 kilo·meter arms pick up sound waves; sound waves that travel at the speed of sound. Likewise it will, hopefully, pick up gravity waves; gravity waves travel at the speed of light, accross the 4 km arm. The earth·moon system is like a rotating barbell; should something alter this rotation, accelerate it, it'd produce detectable gravity waves.![]()
> There's a reason the LIGO arms are 4km long. Gravitational waves
> propagate at c, not instantaenously. The effects are observable.
>
>> A good analogy is Marconi trying to find the frequency of a modern
>> vhf transmitter with 1900 equipment, without having any other
>> transmitter. It would obviously be necessary to have a VERY good
>> understanding of gravity and its likely effects BEFORE any sensible
>> detection apparatus
You said it Eric! No transmitter available so how do you test the
receiver?
A thought in passing, are we even SURE that gravity is exchanged as a
quadropole signal?
Also if you have no detectable signal source, how do you KNOW what the
progation velocity is?
If as many seem to think gravity is weak because of "interdimensional"
leakage, as in some string theories, why MUST it be subject to the
constraints of 4 dimensional space/time.
And of course in the final analysis, as yet, there have NOT been any
CONFIRMED signal detections by LIGO or any other gravitational wave
observatories.
The 4Km paths just give a "hopeful" delay function to help determine
direction of a "signal". The maximum sensitivity must be set by electro
mechanical reasonances in the mirror system, just like my analogy of
Marconi.
I didn't spend 50 years in science without picking up a bit of knowledge
about experimental problems.
I see space shuttle toilets have come up again! Well they are pretty
academic now anyway. The last US astronauts I heard of on the news were
in a Soyuz. In any event a zero gravity loo is NOt a trivial problem.
Why don't they spin up more space enviroments to at least a small
"gravity" field, it would solve a helluva lot of problems!
Clifford Wright.
<http://easytide.ukho.gov.uk/EasyTide/EasyTide/ShowPrediction.aspx?PortID=0110A&PredictionLength=7>
--
"Except I'm an honors graduate in Maths .. and was top result for my region
at end of high school" --Fartful
4cbd4267$0$30001$c3e8da3$5496...@news.astraweb.com
> http://easytide.ukho.gov.uk/EasyTide/EasyTide/ShowPrediction.aspx?PortI
> D=0110A&PredictionLength=7
Oh Dear! We are already getting back to cheap abuse I see.
What seems to escape some folks is that, sure we know the effects of
gravity that it is proportional to mass and that,at a cosmically local
level, it is always attractive with a force inversely proportional to the
square of the distance.
But tides are NOT gravity waves they are the effect of gravitational
forces on different states of matter as relative positions of bodies
change.
The sort of signal that LIGO is generally looking for is at what an
electronic engineer would call audio frequencies. They are sudden changes
in local gravitation as a theoretical "high frequency" gravity wave
passes through the apparatus.
It is these sudden changes that IMO either happen very much less often
than current theory suggests, or "radiate" either at a velocity or in a
manner which a LIGO type setup could not detect.
As I said we do NOT have a transmitter, nor even the theoretical basis
for one, or at least one which transmits often enough to be worthwhile
for cosmological research.
We have absolutely NO sensible theory of gravitation as yet, and we have
serious problems even with the inverse square law at great distances.
So it would make more sense to work on matter transmission or faster than
light communication for now, at least with matter transmission we might
be able to generate a signal for LIGO by "beaming in" and "beaming out" a
test mass.
Oh dear! Now I'm making weird suggestions too.
Clifford Wright.
You morons cant talk about time or gravity because your just too stupi
to comprehend NO two points in the universe is at the same time.
*We* never left it, Goosey Gisse is addicted to abusing others.
| What seems to escape some folks is that, sure we know the effects of
| gravity that it is proportional to mass and that,at a cosmically local
| level, it is always attractive with a force inversely proportional to the
| square of the distance.
How do *we* cosmically know that, then?
| But tides are NOT gravity waves they are the effect of gravitational
| forces on different states of matter as relative positions of bodies
| change.
Phuckwit Duck is master of saying what things are NOT.
Tides are NOT a dog's breakfast.
Tides are NOT a walk in the park.
Tides are NOT a symphony concert.
Tides are NOT ... but you carry on and complete the list of
all the things tides are NOT.
Do you even know what a wave is?
Do you even know what a state of matter is?
<http://tinyurl.com/3445yqe>
| The sort of signal that LIGO is generally looking for is at what an
| electronic engineer would call audio frequencies.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
20 Hz - 20,000 Hz?
Nah, Gravity waves have a MUCH lower frequency, twice a day as the Earth
turns in the Moon's and Sun's fields.
"Take, for example, the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a
conductor. The observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative
motion of the conductor and the magnet" -- Albert Einstein.
That's about all he did get right.
Tides are an observable phenomena that depend on the relative motion of the
Moon and the Earth and therefore ARE gravity waves.
| They are sudden changes
| in local gravitation as a theoretical "high frequency" gravity wave
| passes through the apparatus.
Oh, there are, huh?
There are sudden changes in armature windings as a REAL magnetic field
passes through them.
< http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/m.gif >
| It is these sudden changes that IMO
Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one and they all stink.
*WE* are not interested in your opinion.
| either happen very much less often
| than current theory suggests,
Whose current theory? You do like handwaving, don't you?
or "radiate" either at a velocity or in a
| manner which a LIGO type setup could not detect.
LIGO couldn't detect Alpha Centauri going nova and completely
vanishing in a puff of radiation, it's gravitationally field disappearing
with it.
<http://www.typnet.net/Animations/BarycenterBoogie.htm>
| As I said we do NOT have a transmitter, nor even the theoretical basis
| for one, or at least one which transmits often enough to be worthwhile
| for cosmological research.
So theory is crap and LIGO was a complete waste of time and money.
System Normal, All Fucked Up. SNAFU. What's new in that?
| We have absolutely NO sensible theory of gravitation as yet, and we have
| serious problems even with the inverse square law at great distances.
|
| So it would make more sense to work on matter transmission or faster than
| light communication for now, at least with matter transmission we might
| be able to generate a signal for LIGO by "beaming in" and "beaming out" a
| test mass.
| Oh dear! Now I'm making weird suggestions too.
Uh huh...
Light accelerates like anything else, as this clearly shows:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E>
Build a light accelerator, that isn't weird. Crackpot theories are weird.
| ... ahahahaha... your implied notion that radiation may
| travel at "c +/- v" instead of strictly "c" will lower Andro's
| blood pressure and its co-committant ire... ahahaha...
| Although, "c" other then being a fixed immutable "c"
| will open an enormous can of worms, since such a change
| will alter the size of all fundamental physical constants,
| actually make them not being constants at all, but turning
| them merely inot factors that are dependant on the local
| environment... ahahaha.... and "Adios Einstein"... ahaha...
A planet is a spherical gravitational field that happens to have a lump
of matter at its centre. (This is called observation.)
A star is a stronger spherical gravitational field that happens to have
a lump of very hot matter at its centre. (This is called observation.)
A black hole is a super-strong spherical gravitational field that has
nothing at its centre. (This is called "science".)
I'm all in favour of thinking outside the box but not so happy about
hallucinating inside the shorts.
When lumps of matter start to "propagate" I'll listen to the speed of
gravity waves with my arse, my ears are not sensitive to brain farts.
Gravity strength increase slows time down further.
Mitch Raemsch
Atoms push them selves ,,there is no pull of gravity ,,,evry atom
pushes its self as the atoms parts in orbit change mass in time and
slower time is eergy thats there longer thus more mass. The atom near G
is in a time slope and has longer time more mass on one side of its
center of G so tthe atoms mass moves to th center of its G and the atom
pushes its self.
No two points in the universe is at the same time.
NOTHING is faster then c ,,at that point TIME changes
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
c is constant ,,,but time is not .
The BB is just the point all time was at one point.
That happends evry 280 billion years when enouph time is at one point.
Time colides with time and is displaced my mass.
Time is Gods active force and your carbon atom soul will fall into the
black hole.
the second you die 4 billin years will pass lie the blink of an eye.
If tiue slows then it must have a starting point. That starting point
would be a definition of a kind of fastest fundamental time rate
which
corresponds to the speed of light.
Mitch Raemsch
What Hanson cant understand is time can be faster or slower but light
is at c and constant.
And faster then light is not faster then light its at c and time will
change ..trying to go faster then c wount happen because time will just
slow down the more you try.
Then the mass will change and very with time.
Mass is energy for a time and energy for more time is more mass.
Evry atom in the time slope of G has the same loss of masss near G
and gain in mass away from G ..evry atom pushes its self down the time
energy slope twards the center of G.
The energy is a matter of time.
Time is dark energy and diisplaced my mass and mass is time coliding
with time.
Its not the start of time but time is not a strait line inside the
visible universe.
If all time was the same rate then there would be no universe.
energy is time coliding with time ..
one rate of time hits another rate of time ..energy is exchanged at c.