Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Ligo

LIGO

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 18 March 2019 - 02:02 PM

The LIGO detected celestial gravitational waves that originate from a 21,000 binary pulsar (PSR 1913+16) that produces a ΔL = 10-18 m disturbance of the interferometer mirror but Creswell-Jackson (2017) discredited the LIGO experimental results as background noise (Creswell-Jackson, Abstract) since the mirror displacement of ΔL = 10-18 m is less than the diameter of an electron which is to small of a displacement to experimentally measure. The formation of a wave requires a medium, composed of matter yet gravitational waves propagate in the vacuum of celestial space that is void of matter. Einstein uses a space-time curvature to justify the formation gravitational waves using the varying relativistic time-space translational velocity v that is formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions but gravitational waves that are propagating in stellar space are not effected by the earth's daily and yearly motions.
 



#2 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2569 posts

Posted 19 March 2019 - 01:01 AM

You talking about this paper? https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.04191 "On the time lags of the LIGO signals - James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, Pavel Naselsky"



#3 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • 2488 posts

Posted 19 March 2019 - 07:01 AM

The LIGO detected celestial gravitational waves that originate from a 21,000 binary pulsar (PSR 1913+16) that produces a ΔL = 10-18 m disturbance of the interferometer mirror but Creswell-Jackson (2017) discredited the LIGO experimental results as background noise (Creswell-Jackson, Abstract) since the mirror displacement of ΔL = 10-18 m is less than the diameter of an electron which is to small of a displacement to experimentally measure. 
 

This is how it works: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

 

It was expressly designed to be able to measure displacements 10⁻⁵x the proton diameter. 



#4 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 19 March 2019 - 02:19 PM

Abbott , B.P. LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory. 2009. https://arxiv.org/abs/0711.3041  

 

"Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10-21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10-18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton."  (Abbott, § 2).


Edited by alright1234, 19 March 2019 - 02:19 PM.


#5 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 19 March 2019 - 04:50 PM

Do you agree that the LIGO experimental results are doubtful. 



#6 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 670 posts

Posted 19 March 2019 - 08:42 PM

"The formation of a wave requires a medium, composed of matter"

 

Absolutely false. Light is a wave, it has no material medium.


  • exchemist likes this

#7 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 12:53 PM

Not according to Maxwell.

 

"If we adopt either Fresnel's or Maccullagh's form of the undulatory theory, half of this energy is in the form of potential energy, due to the distortion of elementary portions of the medium, and half in the form of kinetic energy, due to the motion of the medium. We must therefore regard the aether as possessing elasticity similar to that of a solid body, and also as having a finite density." (Maxwell, Part XCVII, p. 767). 



#8 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 670 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 01:04 PM

Oh my, another Moronium. Yes the equivalence of inertia and elasticity in a material medium is capacitance and inductance in an electromagnetic medium. Light is an electromagnetic wave that propagates using an electromagnetic medium. The properties of space, permittivity and permeability,  are electromagnetic. Maxwell only assumed a material aether that was disproved by the Michelson Morley experiment. The Fizeau experiment proved that light moving through moving water's electromagnetic medium gave the results of the relativistic velocity combo law in that the motion of the water added to the .75c velocity of light through water relativistically. 


Edited by ralfcis, 20 March 2019 - 01:10 PM.


#9 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 01:15 PM

Was Einstein also a Moronium?

 

 

"As to the mechanical nature of the Lorentzian ether, it may be said of it, in a somewhat playful spirit, that immobility is the only mechanical property of which it has not been deprived by H. A. Lorentz. It may be added that the whole change in the conception of the ether which the special theory of relativity brought about, consisted in taking away from the ether its last mechanical quality, namely, its immobility. How this is to be understood will forthwith be expounded.........More careful reflection teaches us, however, that the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether." (1920, Lecture)


Edited by alright1234, 20 March 2019 - 01:16 PM.


#10 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • 2488 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 04:05 PM

Not according to Maxwell.

 

"If we adopt either Fresnel's or Maccullagh's form of the undulatory theory, half of this energy is in the form of potential energy, due to the distortion of elementary portions of the medium, and half in the form of kinetic energy, due to the motion of the medium. We must therefore regard the aether as possessing elasticity similar to that of a solid body, and also as having a finite density." (Maxwell, Part XCVII, p. 767).

Maxwell died in 1879. That is almost a century and a half ago now.  



#11 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 04:21 PM

Most if not all of modern physics is based on Maxwell's theory.



#12 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2569 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 04:50 PM

Most if not all of modern physics is based on Maxwell's theory.

Do yourself a favor; update your knowledge base. Maxwell's equations hold true in MANY things, so do Newton's, but modern science has gone well past them. Neither of them had access to the blessings and curses of computation we now do.



#13 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • 670 posts

Posted 20 March 2019 - 05:34 PM

"But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it." -Barry Einstein on "Mach's ether"

 

ponderable as in material. The ether is not material but it is an electromagnetic medium that allows the propagation of electromagnetic waves. Empty space has electromagnetic characteristics which  correspond to a mechanical medium's inertia and elasticity. It must also have 2 corresponding gravitational characteristics to create a medium for gravitational waves to propagate. So far as I know, these characteristics have not yet been identified by science.



#14 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 21 March 2019 - 01:45 PM

Einstein uses the reversal of MMX to justify the existence of Fresnel's ether composed of matter.

 

 

"On the other hand, all coordinate systems moving relatively were to be regarded as in motion with respect to the æther. To this motion against the æther ("æther-drift") were attributed more complicated laws which were supposed to hold relative to. Strictly speaking, such an æther-drift ought also to be assumed relative to the earth, and for a long time the efforts of physicists were devoted to attempts to detect the existence of an æther-drift at the earth's surface....Although the estimated difference between these two times is exceedingly small, Michelson and Morley performed an experiment involving interference in which this difference should have been clearly detectable. But the experiment gave a negative result — a fact very perplexing to physicists. Lorentz and FitzGerald rescued the theory from this difficulty by assuming that the motion of the body relative to the æther produces a contraction of the body in the direction of motion, the amount of contraction being just sufficient to compensate for the difference in time mentioned above." (Einstein6, § 16).



#15 alright1234

alright1234

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 49 posts

Posted 26 March 2019 - 01:35 PM

Is LIGO a Hoax like the Apollo 11.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: LIGO