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

Nobel Prize for Noise Correlation



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 2nd 17, 06:24 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Nobel Prize for Noise Correlation

LIGO conspirators did not need Einstein's relativity to fake the gravitational waves. According to Rana Adhikari, professor of Physics at Caltech and a member of the LIGO team, LIGO conspirators have no theoretical knowledge about the signals they have measured (Einstein's relativity did not tell them anything) - they only know, empirically, "the delay that the light's on":

Rana Adhikari: "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/

Breathtaking! LIGO conspirators, as "true empirical persons", had no idea what they were measuring (faking) and produced signal correlation but also noise correlation that they are unable to explain even now:

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

In a world different from our post-truth world this would mark the end of the LIGO project and the beginning of an interrogation. In the post-truth world the grandeur of the fraudsters can only increase - if the absurd noise correlation cannot topple them, nothing can! LIGO conspirators felt encouraged and quickly "detected" a fourth black-hole collision - just to remind the Nobel committee members what they should be doing.

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old October 2nd 17, 09:44 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Nobel Prize for Noise Correlation

There have been honest reactions all along:

"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

However in the post-truth world people telling the truth become unpersons, and that's what happened to Kiriushcheva:

"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
  #3  
Old October 3rd 17, 06:44 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Nobel Prize for Noise Correlation

The most disgusting part of the LIGO conspiracy are the rehearsals - conspirators spread rumors and fake news, study the reactions and fix possible Achilles' heels. Only a brainwashed scientific community can be fooled in this way:

LIGO conspirators: "The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration completed an end-to-end system test of their detection capabilities at their recent joint collaboration meeting in Arcadia, CA. Analysis of data from LIGO and Virgo's most recent observation run revealed evidence of the elusive signal from a neutron star spiraling into a black hole. The collaboration knew that the "detection" could be a "blind injection" - a fake signal added to the data without telling the analysts, to test the detector and analysis. Nonetheless, the collaboration proceeded under the assumption that the signal was real, and wrote and approved a scientific paper reporting the ground-breaking discovery. A few moments later, according to plan, it was revealed that the signal was indeed a blind injection. 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 and Virgo scientists are looking forward to observations with the advanced detectors which are expected to contain many real signals from the distant reaches of the universe." http://www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection.php

In a world different from our post-truth world it would be obvious that there was no "compelling demonstration of the collaboration's readiness to detect gravitational waves". Rather, there was a compelling demonstration of the collaboration's readiness to accept the fake as a real discovery of gravitational waves.

The 2010 event was the dress rehearsal. "A select few expert administrators" deceived everybody, misled astronomers into wasting time and money on the fake, and "this became particularly useful starting in September 2015":

"...a blind injection test where only a select few expert administrators are able to put a fake signal in the data, maintaining strict confidentiality.. They did just that in the early morning hours of 16 September 2010. Automated data analyses alerted us to an extraordinary event within eight minutes of data collection, and within 45 minutes we had our astronomer colleagues with optical telescopes imaging the area we estimated the gravitational wave to have come from. Since it came from the direction of the Canis Major constellation, this event picked up the nickname of the "Big Dog Event". For months we worked on vetting this candidate gravitational wave detection, extracting parameters that described the source, and even wrote a paper. Finally, at the next collaboration meeting, after all the work had been cataloged and we voted unanimously to publish the paper the next day. However, it was revealed immediately after the vote to be an injection and that our estimated parameters for the simulated source were accurate. Again, there was no detection, but we learned a great deal about our abilities to know when we detected a gravitational wave and that we can do science with the data.. This became particularly useful starting in September 2015." https://www..researchgate.net/blog/p...-not-a-failure

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old October 3rd 17, 01:25 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Nobel Prize for Noise Correlation

LIGO conspirators before the Nobel prize:

http://dreamheron.files.wordpress.co...fraud_take.jpg

Kip Thorne is one of the most blatant liars in Einstein cult. Here he teaches that Newton's theory predicts no deflection as starlight passes near the sun:

Kip Thorne: "A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas NEWTON'S LAW PREDICTED NO DEFLECTION. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity." http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcont...ss-proceedings

Brothers Einsteinians don't rebuke Kip Thorne - they admire his breathtaking dishonesty and are trying to catch up to him.

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
Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. chrisv Astronomy Misc 0 August 21st 17 01:04 PM
Nobel Prize and I G=EMC^2TreBert Misc 4 July 13th 14 02:55 PM
correlation of noise from blackbody radiaion Joseph Warner Research 0 October 30th 08 09:26 PM
Nobel prize or academic fraud? [email protected] Astronomy Misc 4 June 7th 08 11:51 PM
How to win a Nobel Prize jacob navia Research 0 May 29th 06 09:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:52 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.