On Monday, February 1, 2016 at 2:10:40 PM UTC, Sam Wormley wrote:
What are gravitational waves?

The 'theory of gravity' was originally a byword for the 'scientific method' which permits analogies to be used an an unrestricted cause applied to large scale motions and astronomical structures. It began as a 'Rule' but was quickly assigned a law of nature/motion/physics/gravity and so on by the followers of the originator -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

I would say that the overwhelming majority of readers here imagine astronomy began with a magnification exercise and the creation of celestial sphere RA/Dec modeling in the late 17th century and ignore anything that came before it including the methods and insights of the original heliocentric astronomers. I would assume that most innocent readers would buckle under the voodoo created by the empirical theorists and the take-my-word-for-it propaganda which implies an unrestricted correlation between the fall of an apple and the motion of the planet around the Sun as Newton's overarching statement implies.

At no time at I am a disadvantage, I actually can put into visual form what Newton tried to do and why it is toxic in the extreme, not just for researchers but for the wider population and especially students.

These 'gravitational wave' guys don't intentionally go out to scam the wider population but it is merely a consequence of the peer review system which forces them to continue with a worthless narrative conjured out of thin air and so the high end welfare scam goes on and more importantly, displaces the natural faculties which make sense of motions beyond the Earth.

If you want an education on the difference between an empirical cult with its voodoo of 'gravitational waves' and genuine astronomy then all you have to do is ask or engage in a discussion rather than be spectators in a grotesque spectacle.