Gravity Waves

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
gocrew
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 7:42 pm

Gravity Waves

Unread post by gocrew » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:42 am

https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... he-century

I feel quite certain this will unravel just like the Higgs "discovery". Does anyone know more about this?

Michael Mozina
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Michael Mozina » Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:57 am

Zyxzevn wrote:A paper with all the things that they looked at:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0007050v2.pdf
They clearly missed the Electromagnetic interference.
A spark between 2 moving objects has exactly the same signal pattern.

Something that is around 50-120 Hertz is suspiciously close to the frequency of the electric grid.
And I am certain that they did not consider an electric sun.
FYI, I had very similar thoughts while reading the paper, but.....

I don't really see any way for any local discharge process to produce the same signal in two different detectors that are spread so far apart, and the sun looked pretty quiet in SDO imagery at that time, on that date. It's also not clear how(if) any discharge process could make that signal in that equipment.

querious
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm

Re: Gravity Waves

Unread post by querious » Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:27 am

gocrew wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... he-century

I feel quite certain this will unravel just like the Higgs "discovery". Does anyone know more about this?
I just love the irony of those 2 sentences together.

User avatar
GaryN
Posts: 2668
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Gravity Waves

Unread post by GaryN » Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:53 am

So when did black holes become fact and not just a theory?

Physicist Says She Has Proof Black Holes Simply Don't Exist
At least that's the contention of Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton, a theoretical physicist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. In a new paper submitted to the non-peer-reviewed online research paper repository ArXiv, she offers what she calls proof that it's mathematically impossible for black holes ever to form.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/2 ... 85940.html
She's is not saying that there is nothing at the locations where some high energy event is detected, just that it not what is commonly accepted. There is at least one good alternative, but nobody wants to even consider it. But, they will likely use this supposed gravity wave detection to prove that black holes exist as massive objects!
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller

kevin
Posts: 1148
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: Gravity Waves

Unread post by kevin » Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:00 pm

Forgive them, for they could not know.
Their arrogance is enormous, their EGOs inflated to galatic size.

As above, so below, one simple system, with a heart centred reversal, no such substance called gravity.
Kevin

User avatar
Zyxzevn
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Zyxzevn » Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:05 pm

The finding smells like the magnetic monopole, that was detected many years ago.
Michael Mozina wrote: I don't really see any way for any local discharge process to produce the same signal in two different detectors that are spread so far apart, and the sun looked pretty quiet in SDO imagery at that time, on that date. It's also not clear how(if) any discharge process could make that signal in that equipment.
I had to think about that too. I have no idea how their equipment is shielded, or if the data of 2 different sites
are collected analog or digital. Anyway. I assume "perfect" shielding and a "perfect" recording.

Let me give you a simple scenario.
A solar flare triggers a small change in the magnetic field.
The field triggers the Aharonov–Bohm effect which changes the phase of the signal in the direction of the magnetic field potential. This effect ignores any shielding.
Bingo: we have a gravity wave.
This can not be avoided in any means. The phase changes when the beam goes through a higher energy potential, so going back does not change the phase back again (it increases the phase change instead).

Looking at the signal it seems that the hanford detector received a slightly bigger signal. And that the signal
is not purely sinusoid, more like a saw-tooth. A signal that is more common in electrical systems than gravity systems.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@

User avatar
FS3
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:44 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by FS3 » Fri Feb 12, 2016 12:10 pm

Hi Michael,..
Michael Mozina wrote:...but.....

I don't really see any way for any local discharge process to produce the same signal in two different detectors that are spread so far apart, and the sun looked pretty quiet in SDO imagery at that time, on that date. It's also not clear how(if) any discharge process could make that signal in that equipment....
Just look higher up in the skies! How's about ELTs as SPRITES or ELVES?.

Or even higher - as any discharge between two regions/bodies in space could produce such a boom. And in the LIGO paper they were only taking into consideration quakes, usual noise, airflows and temperature gradients.

No electricity, nowhere.

Strange, as it should be considered as the driving force of the universe.

Shshshtttt - don't chase away the donators.

FS3

333333333
In German: https://farsight3.wordpress.com/2016/02 ... -schaffen/

Michael Mozina
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Michael Mozina » Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:00 pm

FS3 wrote:Hi Michael,..
Michael Mozina wrote:...but.....

I don't really see any way for any local discharge process to produce the same signal in two different detectors that are spread so far apart, and the sun looked pretty quiet in SDO imagery at that time, on that date. It's also not clear how(if) any discharge process could make that signal in that equipment....
Just look higher up in the skies! How's about ELTs as SPRITES or ELVES?.

Or even higher - as any discharge between two regions/bodies in space could produce such a boom. And in the LIGO paper they were only taking into consideration quakes, usual noise, airflows and temperature gradients.

No electricity, nowhere.

Strange, as it should be considered as the driving force of the universe.

Shshshtttt - don't chase away the donators.

FS3

333333333
In German: https://farsight3.wordpress.com/2016/02 ... -schaffen/
I thought about magnetosphere activity, and maybe even a comet hitting the Earth's atmosphere and creating a sonic boom over the US.

It's really problematic when the claim being made depends on ruling out every other "natural" process in the universe, and only *then* does the claim have any merit. Bicep2 was based on that principle as well, but the elimination process was ridiculously childish and downright silly in that case. I think they devoted a total of three paragraphs in that Bicep2 paper to eliminating every other potential source of polarized photons in the universe, including dust and synchrotron radiation sources.

The LIGO team however seems like they've learned a lot about the potential for false signals over the many years they've been in operation, and they've never cried wolf in the past. They have obviously spent some time and effort trying to eliminate a lot of various potential contamination, so I'm included to give them the benefit of the doubt unless the alternative is pretty obvious.

What I do not really comprehend is why this signal would necessarily be so short in duration if it's actually related to two heavy moving objects spiraling into each other. The short duration and the wave signal sure has all the earmarks of an electrical discharge process, but I don't see how a discharge process could or would end up producing such a signal in their equipment.

If it is a "common" type of discharge process that's triggering the signal, I'd expect them to occur with some frequency, not as highly unique and isolated events.

The sprites and elves options never crossed my mind, but they would be more likely to be visible in both instruments since they occur higher in the Earth's atmosphere and could be line of sight with both detectors. That's a great idea that I'll have to think about.

querious
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by querious » Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:17 pm

Michael Mozina wrote:The sprites and elves options never crossed my mind, but they would be more likely to be visible in both instruments since they occur higher in the Earth's atmosphere and could be line of sight with both detectors. That's a great idea that I'll have to think about.
as you rack your brain trying to come up with an EM source, remember there was a 7ms delay between signals.

So the source can't be above them, but it can't really be closer to one detector than the other either, without the amplitude dropping off.

The amplitude not dropping off between detectors hints at a pretty distant source.

And EM would be shielded by the vacuum pipes, IMO. We're talking about a VERY fast, and tiny, shift in the distance between very heavy, vibration isolated, mirrors. Try to do that with EM. I bet they also have all kinds of EM monitoring equipment, too.

And no way is a ground tremor going to be able to produce such a signal in BOTH detectors.

You should really read about the experiment before trying to offer up refutations. Otherwise, you're just wasting your time.

Michael Mozina
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA
Contact:

The duration and waveforms are the key

Unread post by Michael Mozina » Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:24 pm

Assuming this has a more mundane explanation, the duration of the event, along with the signal form shape should match the observation.

Apparently this signal form was a "prediction" of black hole merger theories, but I fail to personally understand why they would predict such a short duration signal from two black holes merging. Can anyone explain that for me?

I certainly agree with querious that I have some serious reading to do on the recent LIGO experiments. It's been awhile since I've looked at their experiments.

In fairness to LIGO, I've been open to them finding gravity waves all along. At one point I had my computers at work processing data for that group during the evening. I'd personally be thrilled if indeed they found gravity waves. I'm just a little leery of the 5+ sigma confidence claim, particularly after Bicep2.

User avatar
Zyxzevn
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Zyxzevn » Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:47 pm

Michael Mozina wrote: The LIGO team however seems like they've learned a lot about the potential for false signals over the many years they've been in operation, and they've never cried wolf in the past.
They do not seem specialists in electromagnetism and quantum physics, which is more my area.
And as I said: Shielding does not always work!

It would be very interesting to know the position of the sun, and of other objects at the time of the
signal.

False signals are very easy. I remember the that CERN found a difference in some measurements due
to the passing of trains at certain times.

Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille explains that kirchhof's law is used inappropriately and that the CBR is not
what it seems. He clearly explained that the antennas were not shielded properly. This suggests that
even careful scientists can overlook certain things.

And still we have the mysterious magnetic monopole that has been spotted once, but never again.

And besides that, I have seen terrible (commercial) systems that received signals not from the detectors,
but from the circuits itself. That is why I see the 50-120Hertz signal and its short length as suspicious.

But we will soon know when they reveal their next gravity wave ;-)
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@

User avatar
Zyxzevn
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Zyxzevn » Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:13 pm

The time of the observation (at 15/9 9:50 UTC) and its directions (from south-east to north-west) looks compatible with a strong solar storm from the sun at 14/9.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3Ez9WspgyA
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@

User avatar
comingfrom
Posts: 760
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia
Contact:

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by comingfrom » Fri Feb 12, 2016 6:15 pm

This is all over the TV and radio news here.
The scientists interviewed are claiming to have a new method for imaging the cosmos.

No depth of explanation in any of the reports.
Just great headlines, and claims.
It is a big public relations campaign.

From the paper.
VIII. CONCLUSION
The LIGO detectors have observed gravitational waves
from the merger of two stellar-mass black holes. The
detected waveform matches the predictions of general
relativity for the inspiral and merger of a pair of black
holes and the ringdown of the resulting single black hole.
These observations demonstrate the existence of binary
stellar-mass black hole systems. This is the first direct
detection of gravitational waves and the first observation of
a binary black hole merger.
Provided all our previous assumptions, and gravity theory, is so far correct, what else could it be?

My personal conclusion is that they detected a blip, but their attribution of cause is wildly speculative, the only proof being math based on theory. Not having their confidence in standard gravity theory, causes me to also lack confidence in their explanation of the cause of their blip.

querious
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:29 pm

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by querious » Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:39 pm

comingfrom wrote:My personal conclusion is that they detected a blip, but their attribution of cause is wildly speculative, the only proof being math based on theory. Not having their confidence in standard gravity theory, causes me to also lack confidence in their explanation of the cause of their blip.
I know right! There's gotta be a million explanations for a "blip". Silly scientists. Yeesh.

Cargo
Posts: 294
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: Another claim of finding possible distant G waves

Unread post by Cargo » Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:22 pm

Greetings,
I have read the paper, at least briefly, and looked at a few of the references for how they deduced this vibration from all the noise. One scientists on the team expressed how small this signal was with the following gem, "the width of the milky way contracted by the width of your thumb".

And it goes something like this...

"they used a frequency-domain singular value decomposition-based surrogate reduced order model."

"A natural way to interpolate the projection coefficients over the parameter space is to use a tensor product expansion. The tensor product interpolant of a scalar function on the Cartesian product of intervals is given simply in terms of the product of one-dimensional basis functions. The points are taken from a rectangular parameter space grid and are the discrete expansion coefficients of f in terms of the tensor product basis . We consider either cubic B-splines or Chebyshev polynomials as basis functions . Tensor product interpolants of vector valued functions are simply defined by component and generalizations to higher dimensions are straightforward."

I kid you not
interstellar filaments conducted electricity having currents as high as 10 thousand billion amperes

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests