A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

LIGO's Gravitational Waves: Needles in a Haystack or Just Fakes?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 18th 17, 04:56 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default LIGO's Gravitational Waves: Needles in a Haystack or Just Fakes?

"On 18 March 2016, Harald Pfeiffer, Associate Professor at the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Physics, Toronto, will be honoured with a Bessel Award of the Humboldt Foundation. The award will allow him to stay at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute, AEI) in Potsdam where he will work closely with Prof. Buonanno's division on the prediction of the gravitational waves that are generated when black holes collide. Albert Einstein predicted the existence of gravitational waves 100 years ago. These tiny ripples in space and time are generated when black holes or neutron stars collide. In September 2015, the LIGO observatories detected gravitational waves for the very first time on Earth. The waves they catched from space originated from two black holes that merged 1.3 billion light-years ago in a distant galaxy. Finding the tiny waves, as well as deciphering what was seen, requires detailed knowledge of the expected signals. "We are looking for the needle in the haystack because the signals are buried in the noise", Pfeiffer explains. "But if we know how the needle looks like we have a better chance to find it." Pfeiffer's research on the construction of waveform models for gravitational-wave detectors focuses on numerical simulations — he solves Einstein's equations on supercomputers. Together with his collaborators he is not only looking for one single needle, but for lots of different looking needles: binaries of black holes and/or neutron stars of different masses and spins that generate different looking signals. Pfeiffer's research not only helps us locate black holes in the Universe and determine their size, but his calculations also teach us how space-time behaves when it is warped by black holes." https://astronomynow.com/2016/03/15/...g-black-holes/

This is a blatant lie. LIGO's detections (more precisely, fakes) are MODEL-INDEPENDENT, that is, LIGO conspirators don't use theoretically calculated waveforms in detecting/faking gravitational wave signals:

The Nobel Committee for Physics: "While these waveforms provide a reasonable match, further important improvements are obtained using numerical methods that are very computationally intensive [23]. The analytical methods are crucial to producing the big library of template waveforms used by LIGO. While the waveforms produced in this way are necessary for determining the detailed properties of the objects involved, as well as identifying weak signals, they were not essential for the very first detection of GW150914. This was a model-independent detection of a gravitational-wave transient." https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_pri...sprize2017.pdf

Rana Adhikari, professor of Physics at Caltech and a member of the LIGO team: "You split it in two and you send it in two separate directions, and then when the waves come back, they interfere with each other. And you look at differences in that interference to tell you the difference in how long it took for one beam to go one way, and the other beam to go the other way. The way I said it was really careful there because there's a lot of confusion about the idea of, these are waves and space is bending, and everything is shrinking, and how come the light's not shrinking, and so on. We don't really know. There's no real difference between the ideas of space and time warping. It could be space warping or time warping but THE ONLY THING THAT WE REALLY KNOW IS WHAT WE MEASURE. AND THAT'S THE MANTRA OF THE TRUE EMPIRICAL PERSON. We sent out the light and the light comes back and interferes, and the pattern changes. And that tells us something about effectively the delay that the light's on. And it could be that the space-time curved so that the light took longer to get there. But you could also imagine that there was a change in the time in one path as opposed to the other instead of the space but it's a mixture of space and time. So it sort of depends on your viewpoint."
https://blog.ycombinator.com/the-tec...ikari-of-ligo/

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old October 19th 17, 08:52 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default LIGO's Gravitational Waves: Needles in a Haystack or Just Fakes?

LIGO godfathers imposed total crimestop on the (fatal for them) noise correlation problem:

Sabine Hossenfelder: "Was It All Just Noise? Independent Analysis Casts Doubt On LIGO's Detections. A team of five researchers - James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, and Pavel Naselsky - from the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, presented their own analysis of the openly available LIGO data. And, unlike the LIGO collaboration itself, they come to a disturbing conclusion: that these gravitational waves might not be signals at all, but rather patterns in the noise that have hoodwinked even the best scientists working on this puzzle. [...] A few weeks ago, Andrew Jackson presented his results in Munich. A member of the local physics faculty (who'd rather not be named) finds the results "quite disturbing" and hopes that the collaboration will take the criticism of the Danes to heart. "Until LIGO will provide clear scientific(!) explanation why these findings are wrong, I would say the result of the paper to some extent invalidates the reliability of the LIGO discovery."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...os-detections/

James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, Pavel Naselsky, June 27, 2017: "As a member of the LIGO collaboration, Ian Harry states that he "tried to reproduce the results quoted in 'On the time lags of the LIGO signals'", but that he "[could] not reproduce the correlations claimed in section 3". Subsequent discussions with Ian Harry have revealed that this failure was due to several errors in his code. After necessary corrections were made, his script reproduces our results. His published version was subsequently updated. [...] It would appear that the 7 ms time delay associated with the GW150914 signal is also an intrinsic property of the noise. The purpose in having two independent detectors is precisely to ensure that, after sufficient cleaning, the only genuine correlations between them will be due to gravitational wave effects. The results presented here suggest this level of cleaning has not yet been obtained and that the identification of the GW events needs to be re-evaluated with a more careful consideration of noise properties."
http://www.nbi.ku.dk/gravitational-w...nal-waves.html

James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, Pavel Naselsky, August 21, 2017: "In view of unsubstantiated claims of errors in our calculations, we appreciated the opportunity to go through our respective codes together - line by line when necessary - until agreement was reached. This check did not lead to revisions in the results of calculations reported in versions 1 and 2 of arXiv:1706.04191 or in the version of our paper published in JCAP. It did result in changes to the codes used by our visitors [LIGO conspirators]. [...] In light of the above, our view should be clear: We believe that LIGO has not yet attained acceptable standards of data cleaning. Since we regard proof of suitable cleaning as a mandatory prerequisite for any meaningful comparison with specific astrophysical models of GW events, we continue to regard LIGO's claims of GW discovery as interesting but premature."
http://www.nbi.ku.dk/gravitational-w...-comment2.html

"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity." https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orw...hapter2.9.html

If Sabine Hossenfelder, Andrew Jackson etc. don't obey the crimestop, LIGO godfathers may convert them into unpersons, as has already happened to Natalia Kiriushcheva:

"Einstein believed in neither gravitational waves nor black holes. [...] Dr Natalia Kiriushcheva, a theoretical and computational physicist at the University of Western Ontario (UWO), Canada, says that while it was Einstein who initiated the gravitational waves theory in a paper in June 1916, it was an addendum to his theory of general relativity and by 1936, he had concluded that such things did not exist. Furthermore - as a paper published by Einstein in the Annals of Mathematics in October, 1939 made clear, he also rejected the possibility of black holes. [...] On September 16, 2010, a false signal - a so-called "blind injection" - was fed into both the Ligo and Virgo systems as part of an exercise to "test ... detection capabilities". At the time, the vast majority of the hundreds of scientists working on the equipment had no idea that they were being fed a dummy signal. The truth was not revealed until March the following year, by which time several papers about the supposed sensational discovery of gravitational waves were poised for publication. "While the scientists were disappointed that the discovery was not real, the success of the analysis was a compelling demonstration of the collaboration's readiness to detect gravitational waves," Ligo reported at the time. But take a look at the visualisation of the faked signal, says Dr Kiriushcheva, and compare it to the image apparently showing the collision of the twin black holes, seen on the second page of the recently-published discovery paper. "They look very, very similar," she says. "It means that they knew exactly what they wanted to get and this is suspicious for us: when you know what you want to get from science, usually you can get it." The apparent similarity is more curious because the faked event purported to show not a collision between two black holes, but the gravitational waves created by a neutron star spiralling into a black hole. The signals appear so similar, in fact, that Dr Kiriushcheva questions whether the "true" signal might actually have been an echo of the fake, "stored in the computer system from when they turned off the equipment five years before"." http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life/...s-collide#full

Natalia Kiriushcheva: "What is shown on this picture? The equation on this page is what will be left from Einstein's equations of General Relativity (GR) after linearization. i.e. after a certain assumption is imposed: the gravitational field is considered weak (is it a correct assumption for two black holes?). Moreover, this equation is similar to the wave equation of the Maxwell theory that (after some additional manipulations) describes propagation of electromagnetic waves in the absence of sources (absence of any source, including a system of two black holes!). Einstein pointed out in this paper that its result is not general, it is valid only under assumption that the gravitational field is weak and only linear coordinate transformations (a linearized version of the general coordinate transformations of GR) can be applied to these (linearized) equations. Einstein also did not predict in this paper "that two celestial bodies in orbit will generate invisible ripples in spacetime that experts call gravitational waves", as BI claims. He was talking about "the system" that radiates energy, without specifying what kind of system it is." https://gravityattraction.wordpress....s-involvement/

"Withers, however, was already an unperson. He did not exist : he had never existed." https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orw...hapter1.4.html

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Generic Problem with LIGO's Gravitational Waves Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 June 20th 17 08:17 AM
Why LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves Is a Fraud Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 October 27th 16 11:35 PM
Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 April 1st 16 01:15 PM
Did LIGO Lie About Gravitational Waves? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 February 27th 16 02:39 PM
LIGO's Gravitational Waves: Why the Sloppiness? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 February 24th 16 12:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.