|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
"Androcles" wrote in
: | | How long are you going to ignore me? Until you answer my questions, moron, instead of providing a list of experiments you copied from the FAQs. Only a ****ing lunatic would claim... *snip* You are a troll, only interested in name-calling. Looks like he's not the only one interested in name calling, eh? |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul Lawler" wrote in message . 125.206... | "Androcles" wrote in | : | | | | How long are you going to ignore me? | | Until you answer my questions, moron, instead of providing a list of | experiments you copied from the FAQs. Only a ****ing lunatic would | claim... | | *snip* | | You are a troll, only interested in name-calling. | | Looks like he's not the only one interested in name calling, eh? How conveniently snipped not to display his. *plonk* Androcles. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:50:43 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote: "Paul Lawler" wrote in message .125.206... | "Androcles" wrote in | : | | | | How long are you going to ignore me? | | Until you answer my questions, moron, instead of providing a list of | experiments you copied from the FAQs. Only a ****ing lunatic would | claim... | | *snip* | | You are a troll, only interested in name-calling. | | Looks like he's not the only one interested in name calling, eh? How conveniently snipped not to display his. *plonk* Androcles. *snicker* You put yourself in an argument in which you cannot hope to win because you are hopelessly ignorant regarding the topic. Your only way out is through namecalling and killfiling. Tell me again, Androcles. Why do you feel you can measure the effect of a gravitational wave using Newton's force law? The exact analogy to EM is using the static charge force quation to judge the 'effect' of an EM wave. Of course, though, you are stupid and will not understand what I just wrote. But it is still funny. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"Androcles" wrote in message ...
"Paul Lawler" wrote in message . 125.206... | "Androcles" wrote in | : What is the sensitivity of a gravitometer? I understood that it was possible to detect the mass of something as small as a fridge in a room. If that is the case, a change in gravity (wave) should be able to be detected by moving two masses in opposite directions on the x axis, with the meter off set on the y axis. The vector nature of the forces would create a peak as they passed each other (pulse) but not much help in finding the speed of the wave. Jim G c'=c+v |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message m... | "Androcles" wrote in message ... | "Paul Lawler" wrote in message | . 125.206... | | "Androcles" wrote in | | : | | What is the sensitivity of a gravitometer? I understood that it was | possible to detect the mass of something as small as a fridge in a | room. Ok, let's use a fridge in a room. Let's even extend to a fridge being detectable at say one kilometer, which will require much more sensitivity, but we'll assum it possible. That's going to need 4 fridges at 2 kilometers, 8 at 3k and 16 at 4. How many refrigerators are needed at 1 kiloparsec? If that is the case, a change in gravity (wave) should be able | to be detected by moving two masses in opposite directions on the x | axis, with the meter off set on the y axis. The vector nature of the | forces would create a peak as they passed each other (pulse) but not | much help in finding the speed of the wave. | | Jim G | c'=c+v |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 15:44:27 GMT, "Androcles"
wrote: "Jim Greenfield" wrote in message om... | "Androcles" wrote in message ... | "Paul Lawler" wrote in message | . 125.206... | | "Androcles" wrote in | | : | | What is the sensitivity of a gravitometer? I understood that it was | possible to detect the mass of something as small as a fridge in a | room. Ok, let's use a fridge in a room. Let's even extend to a fridge being detectable at say one kilometer, which will require much more sensitivity, but we'll assum it possible. That's going to need 4 fridges at 2 kilometers, 8 at 3k and 16 at 4. How many refrigerators are needed at 1 kiloparsec? Is this how you estimated things as an engineer? *snicker* If that is the case, a change in gravity (wave) should be able | to be detected by moving two masses in opposite directions on the x | axis, with the meter off set on the y axis. The vector nature of the | forces would create a peak as they passed each other (pulse) but not | much help in finding the speed of the wave. | | Jim G | c'=c+v |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"Androcles" wrote in news:TmuVc.3953
: "Paul Lawler" wrote in message . 125.206... | "Androcles" wrote in | : | | | | How long are you going to ignore me? | | Until you answer my questions, moron, instead of providing a list of | experiments you copied from the FAQs. Only a ****ing lunatic would | claim... | | *snip* | | You are a troll, only interested in name-calling. | | Looks like he's not the only one interested in name calling, eh? How conveniently snipped not to display his. *plonk* Androcles. Plonking was irrelevant to my comment. I was not commenting on the quality of the arguments, merely pointing out that he is not the only one engaging in ad hominem attacks. Unless, of course, you are a licensed psychiatrist who has examined him and are able to accurately diagnose that he is, in fact a moron and a lunatic. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Lawler wrote in message .125.202...
"Androcles" wrote in news:TmuVc.3953 : Risking showing my naivitie, what is REALLY being discussed- a "one of" change in gravitational field strength (pulse/wave), or a SERIES of equal strength waves emanating from a static body? Jim G c'=c+v |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message om... | Paul Lawler wrote in message .125.202... | "Androcles" wrote in news:TmuVc.3953 | : | | | Risking showing my naivitie, what is REALLY being discussed- a "one | of" change in gravitational field strength (pulse/wave), or a SERIES | of equal strength waves emanating from a static body? | | Jim G | c'=c+v Jim, this discussion is not about the existence or non-existence of gravity waves, but about their amplitude being great enough to be detectable. Simply spinning the Earth in the lunar gravity produces tides and when we include solar gravity we have neap and spring tides. If the lunar orbit were highly elliptical we'd have higher tides at perigee than at apogee. Thus we would have a detectable gravity 'wave'; they do exist, and can be detected. LIGO, however, is about detecting a gravitational field from a supernova at a distance of a kiloparsec = 3260 light years, where some quantity of matter is completely converted to energy (E= mc^2) and the resultant gravity field is reduced. That would be a step pulse. Or it could be the field from a pulsar in orbit about a neighbour that is periodically approaching and receding from us, and that would be a sinusoidal wave. So the answer to your question is : both. However, the supernova (which may produce a pulsar as a remnant) is the greater. If you want to express the problem mathematically: let delta be the smallest amplitude detectable by the instrument used. Let a pulse (or wave) of amplitude A be emitted at 0 and the amplitude at r where the instrument is placed be A/r^2 = delta. Then the amplitude at A/(r+epsilon)^2 (epsilon 0) is less than delta and is not detectable. LIGO has a real delta, so from that estimate the greatest imaginable A and calculate A/r^2 = delta r^2/A = 1/delta r = sqrt(A/delta) Androcles. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Beyond Linear Cosmology and Hypnotic Theology | Yoda | Misc | 0 | June 30th 04 07:33 PM |
Empirically Refuted Superluminal Velocities. | EL | Astronomy Misc | 22 | October 31st 03 04:07 PM |
Oceanographers Catch First Wave Of Gravity Mission's Success | Ron Baalke | Science | 13 | August 7th 03 06:24 AM |