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 (), 65 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by True
01/07/20 09:26 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
True 1
Page 6 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6
Topic Options
#55578 - 02/29/16 01:22 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
This is the problem with approaching complex problem in a layman simple ways is you are trying to ignore the reality that what your discussion has a massive flaw before you even begin.


Orac, as you are using SAGG to improve your English, may I make a suggestion.

Take several deep, calming breaths and re-write that sentence. smile
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
.
#55582 - 03/01/16 01:56 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Rather than me try to construct a sentence about a rather Marosz like crackpot idea why don't you deconstruct the bit you quoted. Pick out whats wrong and right with it.

The extension after your analysis is does he even remotely understand GR or gravitational waves and does he even get classical physics correct.


Edited by Orac (03/01/16 02:01 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55585 - 03/01/16 01:44 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: pokey]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Orac, I have nothing but admiration for those for whom English is not their first language, but who are brave enough to post on forums like this. I would certainly not comment on your English had you not insisted that improving it was your primary reason for posting here.

You will be aware that in post #55578 I made no suggestions for improvement, because I know you can make improvements yourself. All I was saying was; when you feel the frustration/annoyance that appeared in the sentence I quoted, steady yourself before writing and your English will be better and more easily understood by us mono-lingual characters.

The question must be: Do you want (possibly helpful) comments? If not, I promise I will not comment again.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55586 - 03/01/16 01:52 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: pokey]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Back to gravity.

I have, on more than one occasion quoted David Deutsch: “Today we understand gravity through Einstein’s theory rather than Newton’s, and we know that no such force exists”. That seems pretty clear. There is no such force as gravity.

Did Einstein really say that? I think not. In his theory of general relativity gravity is a force field, not much different from the electromagnetic field. It is not four-dimensional curvature. It was Hermann Minkowski who introduced the idea of four-dimensional space-time, which Einstein initially called “superfluous erudition”.

He did eventually accept Minkowski’s interpretation as an alternative mathematical interpretation of his equations. All this means is that his equations for the gravitational field are mathematically equivalent to a curvature of spacetime.

Mathematical equivalence is no guarantee of physical reality.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55587 - 03/01/16 03:46 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
You seem to want to avoid it so let me pull the LS rubbish apart
Originally Posted By: LS
Gravity affects everything that exists equally regardless of mass and this includes massless particles.

WRONG under no physics framework does gravity directly effect massless particles. Gravity lensing is an indirect effect but he makes it quite clear he believes it is a direct effect.

For LS is we fire a bullet and a laser horizontally along the same path they are both effected by gravity and slowly bend down until they hit the ground. Have you ever seen a laser beam do that because I sure haven't. Perhaps he should talk to Marosz.
Originally Posted By: LS
Both Newton and Galileo understood this centuries ago, even though relativists claim that they are the ones who figured it out. Go figure.

So no they didn't and nor do any relativists say that and LS is completely wrong ... GO FIGURE

Originally Posted By: LS
The problem is that this undeniable principle means that gravity also affect gravitational waves.

Oh now its an undeniable principle ... so a completely wrong thing is undeniable and its going to effect gravitational waves.

Originally Posted By: LS
Since these waves affect themselves, they either cancel themselves out or amplify themselves recursively.

What is he even talking about???? My best guess is saying they interfere constructively and destructively like a wave in a media and I can only assume he has got gravity wave and gravitational wave mixed up.

Originally Posted By: LS

The same objection applies to so-called curved space and to hypothetical intermediary particles such as gravitons. In other words, if it exists, regardless of its mass, gravity affects it. The infinite self-referential regress is too painful to even contemplate.

The self interaction part is correct we have discussed that before and it is not too painful to contemplate it creates the concept that space must have a pressure to oppose the runaway, something we have discussed.

Now dealing with your later posts your discussion of Einstein is pretty much correct. For all his brilliance he liked his classical world and struggled with what his own theories actually said.

Then finally you say mathematical equivalence is no guarantee of physical reality. Well that is a loaded statement and you need to explain what you mean? Perhaps if you could prove to me the other 3 dimensions exist so I get how your proof is based.

In mathematics if things can not be simplified from 4 dimensions down to 3 then the 4th dimension exists regardless of what you believe. The question of dimensionality is about simplification and concurrent access of phsyics quantities not what you believe or think reality is. You would end up saying to me I don't consider that a dimension it doesn't look like one and I would probably burst into laughter.


Edited by Orac (03/01/16 04:02 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55589 - 03/01/16 06:40 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
You seem to want to avoid it so let me pull the LS rubbish apart


Not avoiding it, was still thinking about it.

I had got as far as researching the possibility, or otherwise, of gravitational waves interfering with one another. You seem to be saying that they do not. Is that right?
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55593 - 03/02/16 05:08 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
I had got as far as researching the possibility, or otherwise, of gravitational waves interfering with one another. You seem to be saying that they do not. Is that right?

I am glad you are researching I want to help you to work out the answer and to do that lets give you a very real world example.

In any city you live in there are probably hundreds if not thousands of radio transmission from Radio, TV, CB's as well as unintentional electrical sources. These waves contain EB fields (electric and magnetic) and those fields interact with each other.

LS then gives us his statement
Quote:
Since these waves affect themselves, they either cancel themselves out or amplify themselves recursively.

So apparently communication in all major cities is impossible and can't be happening it is a clear prediction of LS.

So forget what gravitational waves use EM waves and went wrong for poor LS and all the signals amplifying or cancelling out?


Edited by Orac (03/02/16 05:12 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55594 - 03/02/16 05:16 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
This may help where Brian Greene demonstrated a toy ligo on the late show



You may want to contrast what he demonstrates and search
"What happens when two laser beams intersect each other"

If you are lazy the two laser beams will pass through each other, with no cancellation or amplification even if the same frequency unless they are related in a special way and lets help and give you the word coherence.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferometric_visibility) => The interferometric visibility (also known as "interference visibility" or "fringe visibility" or just "visibility") quantifies the contrast of interference in any system which has wave-like properties, such as optics, quantum mechanics, water waves, or electrical signals.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interferometric_visibility) => The interferometric visibility gives a practical way to measure the coherence of two waves (or one wave with itself).

There is a ghost buster joke in here for sure .... don't cross the beams Bill S.


Edited by Orac (03/02/16 05:43 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#55606 - 03/02/16 08:05 PM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: Orac]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
[quote]I am glad you are researching[quote]

I wish I had time to do more.

I'll come back to this when I've watched the video and followed the link.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#56062 - 06/16/16 12:59 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: pokey]
pokey Offline
Member

Registered: 08/22/07
Posts: 84
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/sciencefair/2016/06/15/gravitational-waves-einstein/85941882/

"For only the second time ever, scientists detected gravitational waves, the strange ripples in space-time first foreseen by Albert Einstein a century ago."

Top
#56064 - 06/16/16 06:32 AM Re: Gravity Waves [Re: pokey]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Yes that is the second, its official designation is GW151226 if you want to google it.

There are still at least 3 more smaller ones with higher uncertainty in pre-print.

Edit: I just checked Lisa Pathfinder mission also completed its testing on June 7 with success, I missed the announcement. So that sets the stage for eLISA to be sent to position and expand the detection capabilities and window.

As we discussed these events will be relatively common going forward in the same way the event data from radio telescopes are.


Edited by Orac (06/16/16 09:34 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 6 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.