Search for gravity waves

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0504/04gravwaves/

Ray Vingnutte wrote:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0504/04gravwaves/


And so what if the farthest flung, most accurate gravity measuring
satellite detectors cannot find any gravity waves?

Could this end up being the Michelson-Moreley Experiment of GR?

Double-A

On 4 Apr 2005 22:32:59 -0700
"Double-A" wrote:


Ray Vingnutte wrote:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0504/04gravwaves/


And so what if the farthest flung, most accurate gravity measuring
satellite detectors cannot find any gravity waves?

Then I expect theories and ideas will be put forward to suggest an
explanation ;-), that's what usually happens it seems


Could this end up being the Michelson-Moreley Experiment of GR?

Heh,


Double-A

From Doube A:

And so what if the farthest flung, most
accurate gravity measuring satellite
detectors cannot find any gravity waves?

And what if they are found to be predominantly longitudinal (analogous
to sound waves) rather than transverse as Zinni insists? oc

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...

And what if they are found to be predominantly longitudinal (analogous
to sound waves) rather than transverse as Zinni insists? oc

"If distinct evidence were found of any mode other than the two transverse
quadrupolar modes of GR, the result would be disastrous for GR."
6.2 Polarization of gravitational waves
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/...-4/node27.html


Hey BS

Haven't you spewed on many occasions that ...
"Wolter stated that the math is already in place in the equations of SR and
GR and that no further math is needed."

Hi oc I was waiting for your response to my gravity grid. It has lines
of force some what like wolters space theory. The search for gravity
waves will come up nil(zero) There will be no detector made that will
detect them. They are just as hard to detect as a vibrating string to
show string theory is just as real as QM. Bert

What if no matter how much time and money is spent on detecting gravity
waves we end up as we are now? We theorize when a massive star explodes
we should detect gravity waves hitting Earth at the same time as light
waves(photons),and neutrinos. We detect the last two but no gravity
wave.Trying to detect a graviton is still harder for they theorize it
would take an accelerator the size of the solar system. Lots of
problems with gravity such as its speed. EM waves you can flash a light
from Earth to the moon,and get its reflection back,(no problem) How do
you flash gravity? It is already there. Newton still can argue with
Einstien that gravity does not have to go with light speed. I
can live with gravity being instantaneous. It fits well with the great
size of our universe. It fits well with gravity as an intrinsic field of
space that has lines of force in every direction,and dimension. Bert

Bert asks,

What if no matter how much time and
money is spent on detecting gravity
waves we end up as we are now?

And what if, upon detection, GWs are found to propagate longitudinally,
exactly analogous to sound waves in air?
Johnboy(Zinni) argues that GWs must propagate as
transverse waves, from his reading of Einstein's old GR prediction given
in 1916. Jb apparently ignores the fact that in 1916, Uncle A wholly
recognized the spatial medium (or 'ether'), and did so until well into
the 1920s. The 'ether' was assumed to be rigid and immobile.

The math, of necessity, had to depict gravitational waves _as they would
propagate thru a rigid lattice_ . Propagation would indeed be
predominantly transverse. I.e., the math had to conform to the pre-held
premise.

Einstein later abandoned the 'ether' altogether in favor of the
'space-as-void' premise. But the old GR model of gravitational waves
remained carved in stone.

'What if' Uncle A, instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater,
had followed the alternate course and recognized the 'ether' NOT as a
rigid lattice, but as a dynamic fluid medium amenable to
expansion/compression, FLOW, and density gradients? He would have
amended his model of GWs, recognizing that they _must_ propagate
longitudinally (even if their mechanism of generation is transverse,
such as a co-orbiting binary pair).
Maybe jb can engage his giant brain and enlighten you as
to why Einstein suddenly flip-flopped on the 'ether' after wholly
endorsing it for 35+ years after the Michelson-Morley experiment. oc

Hi oc If gravity is a "flowing" force(like water) that begs the
question "What is flowing" My gravity grid uses lines of force(like a
field) so you see how nicely I can fudge. We know gravity's force is
real.We just don't know what makes it real. Bert

nightbat wrote

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Hi oc If gravity is a "flowing" force(like water) that begs the
question "What is flowing" My gravity grid uses lines of force(like a
field) so you see how nicely I can fudge. We know gravity's force is
real.We just don't know what makes it real. Bert

nightbat

The base sub Planck energy field attempting to renormalize to
uniform momentum.


the nightbat