Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 213 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by Marchimedes
Yesterday at 02:35 AM
Do we have a moderator?
by Marchimedes
Yesterday at 02:25 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
Marchimedes 2
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#55199 - 01/13/16 09:27 PM Gravity Waves
pokey Offline
Member

Registered: 08/22/07
Posts: 84
Gizmodo:

"Excited rumors began circulating on Twitter this morning that a major experiment designed to hunt for gravitational waves—ripples in the fabric of spacetime first predicted by Albert Einstein—has observed them directly for the very first time. If confirmed, this would be one of the most significant physics discoveries of the last century."

[Alan Weinstein, who heads the LIGO group at Caltech, had this to say via email: “My response to you is no more or less than the official one, which is the truth: ‘We are analyzing 01 data and will share news when ready.’ I’d say that it is wisest to just be patient.”]

Top
.
#55201 - 01/14/16 03:20 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: pokey]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
This needs extreme care before getting to excited.

Yes we are all expecting to see gravity waves and due to that, the experiment has a testing protocol.

The full rumour is they saw the predicted chirp of two black holes merging. Such an observation means not only direct observation of gravity waves but direct evidence of black holes and the ability to merge
http://phys.org/news/2015-09-black-holes-collide.html

However good scientists are wary they don't fool themselves.

Originally Posted By: http://www.nature.com/news/has-giant-ligo-experiment-seen-gravitational-waves-1.18449
A team of three collaboration members has the ability to simulate a detection by using actuators to move the mirrors. “Only they know if, and when, a certain type of signal has been injected,” says Laura Cadonati, a physicist at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta who leads the Advanced LIGO’s data-analysis team.

Two such exercises took place during earlier science runs of LIGO, one in 2007 and one in 2010. Harry Collins, a sociologist of science at Cardiff University, UK, was there to document them (and has written books about it1). He says that the exercises can be valuable for rehearsing the analysis techniques that will be needed when a real event occurs. But the practice can also be a drain on the team’s energies. “Analysing one of these events can be enormously time consuming,” he says. “At some point, it damages their home life.”

The original blind-injection exercises took 18 months and 6 months respectively. The first one was discarded, but in the second case, the collaboration wrote a paper and held a vote to decide whether they would make an announcement. Only then did the blind-injection team ‘open the envelope’ and reveal that the events had been staged.

Whoever tweeted it broke protocol because this could be nothing more than a test. As you can see the analysis will take a couple of months before even the staff are told if it was a test or not.

This is one of those experiments where there is no easy background test open to it so "blind injection" protocol.

The result being in the category almost too good to believe has many guessing it was a test. However it will be massive if the result rumour is correct.

Watching all the crackpots either deny such a result or try to invent some reason their theory predicted it will be funny. Even on this forum there will be a couple with explaining to do smile


Edited by Orac (01/14/16 03:50 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55202 - 01/14/16 11:29 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
I don't see any reason for the excitement myself.

personally I don't think gravity has waves , there may have
been a wave generated for some undisclosed reason , but I
have always considered that gravity has a field and does not
travel much like a magnetic field.

its field may be increased or decreased by the amount of mass that makes up the field , so at that point of increase or decrease of mass the field intensity would move outwards or inwards but it shouldn't move like a wave moves.

more like a intensity increase or decrease at any given point
along the radius of the field.



_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55204 - 01/14/16 11:41 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
its field may be increased or decreased by the amount of mass that makes up the field , so at that point of increase or decrease of mass the field intensity would move outwards or inwards but it shouldn't move like a wave moves.

more like a intensity increase or decrease at any given point
along the radius of the field.





An increase or decrease in a field? Isn't that pretty much the definition of a wave?

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55205 - 01/14/16 11:55 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
your thinking about the intensity of a wave that moves like
a sound wave or light wave or a ocean wave.

Im saying that gravity does not have waves and does not
move , its like a magnetic field.


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55207 - 01/15/16 04:05 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Bill]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill
An increase or decrease in a field? Isn't that pretty much the definition of a wave?

You are technically correct but because its such a slow rate and hence a very low frequency we tend not to call it a wave and a layman never would.

For example the earths magnetic field is weakening, you will find many articles on it. However none will describe it as a wave.

Technically the magnetic field itself is also composed of localized EM waves but again that is simply playing with descriptions as it is clear Paul is talking about field strength variation over time like the earth field variation.

I guess in the same way, a sound is made of waves but it may get louder or softer. We don't describe that as a wave just simply louder or softer sound.

For Paul you question is, if they find gravity waves does that mean your physics is wrong. You seem pretty adamant they won't find them. If they find one, they will will find a lot just based on the size of the universe (I think the predicted rate is around 1 per month, it may even be higher not my area).

For Pokey I read this in your link
Quote:
"Caveat earlier mentioned: they have engineering runs with blind signals inserted that mimic discoveries. Am told this isn't one," Krauss tweeted.

This guy sounds like a dipstick, as per the previous tests no-one in the team would know that. If the blind testing protocol was broken then the whole result comes into doubt and the "blind test" officers would be instantly sacked. Those test officers will no doubt be admin staff not involved in the analysis teams. There will be some questions asked by the LIGO team who Krauss has been speaking too because he is undermining the whole blind protocol. The protocol is well established in detail here (http://www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection.php).

Quote:
The Blind Injection Envelope was opened on March 14, 2011 at a joint meeting of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration in Arcadia, CA. There were 300 people in the room and another 100 connecting through a video teleconference.

Krauss is implying someone has already opened the letter before the analysis is complete ... a serious NO NO. I seriously doubt anyone in the analysis team even has access to the letter and so I think Krauss is full of it.


Edited by Orac (01/15/16 05:09 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55216 - 01/18/16 06:55 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
AR2 care to delete the above from Marosz, we are showing a glimmer of hope by insisting Marosz post just one image and then write about it.

Marosz: nobody understands that group of drawings, it's just a pile of unrelated things. The airplane wing was in a discussion on time and now here it is about gravity waves?. Are you are saying airplane wings make gravity waves that travel backwards/forwards in time?

Just posting more and more images wont help us, and everyone ends up just ignoring you. Then they start asking AR2 to delete the drawing spam because it's length interrupts the thread.


Edited by Orac (01/18/16 07:15 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55221 - 01/19/16 01:38 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: newton]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
So planes fly underwater but their propellers cavitate because of force Va, and the metal bars pit because of EM waves and pressure?

That is what those children drawings seem to indicate.

Apparently now we aren't allowed to talk about time now even when you use the same drawing.

Marosz, all that makes absolutely no sense to anyone but you, it's just a bunch of unrelated things. All I get is completely confused.

More and more drawings isn't helping, you have been told that by many many people. Try one drawing and write about it.

Marosz do you know what ONE DRAWING means?


Edited by Orac (01/19/16 01:58 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55227 - 01/20/16 02:54 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
For Paul you question is, if they find gravity waves does that mean your physics is wrong.


they wont find waves of gravity , there may have been some
slight wave produced for some undisclosed reason but gravity
is due only to mass and its density
. <---( PERIOD )

look at the planet Mercury.

Mercury surface area is 0.147 earths.
Mercury mass is 0.055 earths
Mercury density is 5.427 g/cm^3

Mercury gravity is 3.7 ms^2 vs earths 9.8 ms^2

earths density is 5.514 g/cm^3

gravity is not due to the space that surrounds a planet
even if the pictures and illusions seem to point in that
direction.

else the planet Mercury would have a gravity field much
weaker than the 3.7 ms^2 because of the volume of space
that it occupies.

Quote:

You seem pretty adamant they won't find them.


Yes, I am.

Quote:

If they find one, they will will find a lot just based on the size of the universe (I think the predicted rate is around 1 per month, it may even be higher not my area).


they may find loads of things that seem to be a wave of
gravity , that does not equate to those things being waves
of gravity just because they name them gravity waves , and
with all the false doctrine that is constantly being applied
to prop up the magician and his theories I highly doubt
that many in actual science will see these newly thought
up things as anything more than more lies , illusion
and parlor tricks coming from the illusion of the magicians supportive foundation.

of course there will be those who must suck butt against
their better judgement if they still have any in order
to retain their position within the modern (puke) science
community.

mass and its density does not fluctuate the way that light
and sound fluctuates.

with no fluctuations in mass or its density there can be
no fluctuations in gravity and therefore no gravity waves.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55229 - 01/21/16 02:17 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Paul, that is all fine I understand your belief and position.

You have however sort of backed yourself into a corner. So if they do find Gravity waves will you re-evaluate your beliefs, or are you going to go for a giant science conspiracy path?

However just a side note, there is no point discussing things like a planets gravity both GR and Classical physics predict EXACTLY the same answer. This is a throw back to the Space Station problem .. either framework gives the same answer. It is only worth discussing situations in which GR and classical physics predict different things. The whole example with Mercury given above is a waste of time, it can't settle the argument.


Edited by Orac (01/21/16 02:36 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55232 - 01/21/16 11:06 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
You could be in trouble Paul the physics rumour mill has gone into over-drive that LIGO has seen another event. That would be about right as it was predicted it would see roughly one event a month. A release date of February 11th has been suggested for the first event and the rumour still persists that it is indeed a two black hole merger.

So if announced as indicated how do you intend to deal with it?

For science the result would not be on the same scale as say the Higgs discovery as the gravity waves have already been already largely detected by indirect means. Really all it does is put numbers to the direct measured behaviour of the waves which will help with full theories of gravity.

For crackpots, anti-relativity and anti-Einstein crowd however they will be looking for the excuses smile

Krauss has taken some blowback for his first up rumor-mongering with most complaining he is damaging scientific credibility by undermining the blind injection process. As I suspected no one in the analysis team knows if the event is a test or not, so his tweet that it wasn't a test is complete BS.


Edited by Orac (01/21/16 11:41 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55233 - 01/22/16 01:18 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
So if announced as indicated how do you intend to deal with it?


if two black holes merge then that would cause a merger of
the two gravity fields of the two black holes.

that would increase the intensity of the resultant gravity
field and that increase is a one time event not a wave that
is anything like a light wave or sound wave.

and the increase of a gravity field shouldn't be called
a wave at all.

wave your hand , notice there is an repeated up and down motion in a wave.

you have no down motion to complete the first oscillation of
a wave you only have the increase / up motion.

if this is reported as a wave then it will not affect my
brand of physics and I will deal with it the same way I
have dealt with modern science , I will consider it some
prop job to pacify some person not science.

are they even certain that it is a merger of two black holes?

and not a merger of two atoms that have had their electrons
stripped away or two atoms whose electrons have been drained of energy and have collapsed and orbit really close to the nucleus.

if the proposed gravity waves increase in magnitude as they are seen over time it might not be that these are isolated events but a reoccurring event that is feeding
on a unknown food source.

if so then at that point it may be necessary to build a spaceship for it and send it chasing the voyagers as slow as possible.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55234 - 01/23/16 03:41 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
So now all you need to do is what they have done, show the mathematics of your waves, frequency and amplitude relative to black hole masses ... please smile

Get in early like they did show the working before the observation.

Now while you are at that can you show how a black hole forms under your physics, I mean a black hole is a creation of GR and only predicted by GR.


Edited by Orac (01/23/16 03:41 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55235 - 01/23/16 02:21 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Orac
I mean a black hole is a creation of GR and only predicted by GR.

That isn't 100% true. There had been speculation about light not being able to escape from extremely massive stars under Newton's gravitational theory. I don't think anybody gave much heed to the idea, but it had been suggested.

Wiki:Dark star (Newtonian mechanics)

As pointed out in the article it does not involve the actual collapse of the star so you are mostly correct.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55236 - 01/23/16 04:24 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
So now all you need to do is what they have done, show the mathematics of your waves, frequency and amplitude relative to black hole masses ... please smile


why would it have to come from two black holes , I asked you
if they were certain if it was black holes and you then asked
another question without answering.

Quote:
Now while you are at that can you show how a black hole forms under your physics,


...

Quote:

I mean a black hole is a creation of GR and only predicted by GR.


a creation of gr?

So illusion gives birth to more illusion.

I guess the illusions would be generally related.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55239 - 01/24/16 12:59 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
why would it have to come from two black holes , I asked you if they were certain if it was black holes and you then asked another question without answering.

They would be certain because they have calculated the frequency an amplitudes that you would see if black holes exist and they merged

layman discussion: http://www.ligo.org/science/GW-Inspiral.php

So the odds of you seeing a random gravity wave matching the prediction are high enough as is. Then they will track the wave back to the binary star system creating it. It will continue to make the chirp on a repeat rate based on the binary star revolution rate, allowing you to do even more checking.

So they will be more than a bit certain.

Quote:
a creation of gr?

Yes Newtonian physics doesn't predict black holes it predicts a different beast all together which Bill G gave the link to.

I can't speak for Paul physics so was curious how this all worked for your physics.


Edited by Orac (01/24/16 01:47 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55264 - 01/25/16 06:32 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
Quote:
They would be certain because they have calculated the frequency and amplitude that you would see if black holes exist and they merged


then you follow with this...

Quote:
Then they will track the wave back to the binary star system creating it. It will continue to make the chirp on a repeat rate based on the binary star revolution rate


that's still not a wave , just increasing and decreasing due to the gravity of
the two stars causing a fluctuation in the gravity field of the binary system ...

neither stars gravity would fluctuate but because of the rotation there would be a fluctuation observed from outside the binary system.

think of it as a planetary alignment in our solar system ...

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55265 - 01/26/16 01:02 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul
that's still not a wave , just increasing and decreasing due to the gravity of the two stars causing a fluctuation in the gravity field of the binary system ...

neither stars gravity would fluctuate but because of the rotation there would be a fluctuation observed from outside the binary system.

think of it as a planetary alignment in our solar system

Now you are doing what Bill G did to you with waves. Yes technically that is a wave but we tend to call them orbital resonances. It does get frustrating using these stupid layman terms which have such wide meaning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance

Using your layman concepts that effect would be felt as a change in the local value of gravity here and you describe it as such. LIGO measures the expansion and contraction between two fixed points on earth. That sort of effect you are describing would just role thru the detector sort of not noticed (there is a hand waving in that statement it does require analysis). What they are measuring directly is the expansion and contraction of space itself which is what a GR gravity wave is.

If you prefer we could use the term ripples in space and time rather than gravity waves which is more accurate to what they are measuring and gets rid of the layman wave concept.

To a degree your sort of gravity wave is self evident by the fact we have tides on our oceans etc. The irony is Earth/Moon must make GR gravity waves according to GR but it's to small for even LIGO to detect. So if GR is right both your sort and the GR ripple in time and space wave are created by the moon/earth movement, the second being to small to measure with our current instruments.

So I guess all I can say is your sort of gravity wave is way off topic since we are talking about GR and LIGO detection.


Edited by Orac (01/26/16 02:31 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55274 - 01/27/16 12:11 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4136
All right , I guess this is where I leave then.

I don't have a belief that space expands or contracts
nor do I believe that time exist.
so that stuff is below my intelligence level and since I
don't feel compelled to lower myself I wont really say much
more than that ... peeking behind the curtain watching the
wizard pressing the buttons and pulling the levers that
make him look fearless , amazing and possibly important.

Quote:
What they are measuring directly is the expansion and contraction of space itself which is what a GR gravity wave is.


according to my non beliefs in the above requirements of
your brand of physics I will now state that the LIGO machine
is some crackpot device based on fakery and false physics.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55409 - 02/11/16 04:37 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
And its official we have direct gravity wave detection of a two black hole merger detected on two independent LIGO units at exactly the same time stamps ( September 14, 2015 at 5:51 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time). The have only released the area of sky for the event is southern hemisphere but they would know the origin closer than that.

The 7 millisecond difference between the signals in Louisiana and Washington sets the speed of the detected gravity waves at or very close to the speed of light c.

http://phys.org/news/2016-02-scientists-glimpse-einstein-gravitational.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithab...s/#5e1367f64b15

Lots of crackpots will be wheeling out the excuses or going the whole conspiracy path I guess.

Apparently there is also another event under investigation which had also been leaked. The likely detection rate with the current detectors will be one every two-three months, if we have the black hole numbers right. I guess what all the scientists hope for is the gravity wave from an exploding star as it will give data on the metric under completely different conditions.

So we have the first physical proof that black holes exist and that the theory of relativity is the only theory that correctly describes them. I suspect we will see a lot of improvements in black hole physics as the discovery rules some stuff in and lots of stuff out.

There will be lots of countries scrambling to build there own versions of LIGO, Italy will be the next as it has an old LIGO which just needs detector upgrades. Everyone is expecting China to announce plans sooner rather than later.


Edited by Orac (02/11/16 05:49 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.