tar

Swansont, Well you have changed the waveform you are looking for from the GR based template, to the actual waveform you received during that two second period on Sept. 14. Once the two LIGO data streams, during that particular 2 second period, including the close rotations and ringdowns, has shown the same characteristics in both datastreams, those characteristics can be directly expected to show up on a third LIGO online at the time. It would not matter if that third LIGO was matched to GR simulations, all it needs to match is the pattern actually registered during the two seconds in question. The match will be automatic. You know what to look for and you know where in time, in terms of the datastream from the third , to look for it. Why would you need to match the third to a GR simulation, when you have the actual signals to match to, and you know exactly when they should show up in the data of the third? And I am talking about the next GW. You have 4 LIGOs. You collaborate with the everybody with the data from three, and ignore the data from the fourth. You use the GR templates that know how BHs and NSs should behave and what kind of waves they should put out and match the noise against these simulations until you find a period of time in which all three have received the same event. You concentrate on that 2 second period in the data from the three and figure from which direction the wave came and what its strain was and what that means in terms of the mass and spin of the two objects that merged so many eons ago. This process has taken two months to put together, but everybody agrees what kind of wave passed through, and what it did in terms of deforming the space on Earth. Knowing exactly how the now known wave should have affected the space in which detector 4 was located, you now can look directly at 4's data during the time period when the GW passed and compare it, not with your simulated model, but with the pattern documented in the signals from 1,2 and 3. At this point, the goal would be not to find a GW amongst a bunch of noise, but to compare the known signal from three with a fourth detector, to learn something about how gravity waves look and act when seen from various vantage points. As in, learn what gravity is, not just what it does. Regards, TAR

SwansonT, OK I will bow out. Regards, TAR

swansont, You are misrepresenting my case. I am assuming the GWs are real and passed through the detectors when they are proported to pass through the detectors. But if they did, they also had to pass through every other detector on the planet built to register the passing of a GW. There should be corraberating evidence galore. But if the tininess of the signal is to slight as to only be detectable by a finely tuned LIGO experiment, then only another LIGO experiment of the same fineness can corroborate. One should not have to rely on statistical methods to milk the signal you want to see out of the data, it should be in the data to be seen, as soon as you know what to look for. So once the same signal is visible in two LIGO experiments, you know what to look for in a third. Once you have three you can process the data to build a simulated waveform with characteristics and a directional source. This simulation would be a model of the wave as it actually passed through Earth, with NO consideration of whether or not it complies with GR. There would have been evidence that a GW passed through, and since we already know what it does to the signals of the three, we can predict what it is going to do to the fourth. Without any supercomputers involved. I take offense at being turned away from enjoying this discovery of GWs as if it has no practical use but to verify Einstein's equations. I feel like the scarecrow in front of the Wizard of OZ. Regards, TAR Pay no attention to the man behind the curtains.

Mordred, Understood, the LIGO was built to only pick up gws and It picked something up that looked exactly like what it was predicted a gw would look like, so the experiment worked. I am not arguing that that is where we are. What I am trying to picture, is what else had to be the case if a GW passed through. What effect would a GW have on another GW. What should it look like if we looked at the same wave half way between the two LIGOs. Based on the actual noise, the actual reading, with no matching of computer simulations, could a trained eye look at the fringe pattern and say, there, there is another one? Or look. there is a NS/NS event? Regards, TAR For instance, if we had four LIGOs up could we use the three to triangulate on a GW and use the fourth as a blind. That is record the data on all four, but seal the results from LIGO 4. Search the data from the three and match it against the templates and supercomputer models and GR simulations and discover an event thought to be a GW. Then, knowing the direction from which the GW came, its strength and frequency, reconstruct the wave, in detail across the space that included LIGO 4, and determine exactly what the data on 4 should look like, across a specific 2 second time frame, before we unsealed the data?

beecee, "this means that the signal cannot be too different from the GR prediction or we wouldn't have seen it at all!" Not sure I see Prof. Isi's logic here. If I had a theory about the magnetic effects created when a jet liner circles an airport, and theorized that this would effect the electromagnetic waves in LIGO in a certain pattern and I made such a template showing the pattern I expected, and searched the noise from LIGO with super computers and found the pattern that aligned with the template in the data from both experiments around the same time...I am not sure why that means, my theory is not falsified. Regards, TAR

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=klg3FiII&id=8605C8042591BB5A8BA014F91596FC4CAB4BF957&thid=OIP.klg3FiIIOMbvYsV1kJvUmQEsDf&q=ligo&simid=608024743366887719&selectedIndex=13&ajaxhist=0 Thread, Is someone here able to tell us what we are looking at, when we see these waves? That is, the waves in the charts do not look like fringes. What do the fringes, the actual undoctored signals look like? I have been, as you are aware attempting to visualize what a GW does to space as it comes through, to try and figure what one gw would do to another gw as it passes through. But I am not finding anywhere to see raw data, as in what did the GW150914 actually "do to" the equipment in the two locations. It might be easier to visualize once a third LIGO is on line and direction and size can be better visualized, but in the link above are the high points of the curve where compression of space is increased and the low points where expansion of space is at a local max? That is if I count 20 high points in .2 of a sec, the distance of about 20,000 miles, does that mean as this series of waves comes through a spot 500 miles from a spot undergoing stretching is undergoing squishing? Does this tiny gravitational gradient actually exist and does it "flip", that is go from stretching one way to stretching 90 degrees the other way, 20 times in .2 secs? Regards, TAR that is if you are standing on a spot, looking toward the black hole merger, do you flatten out and bulge out the width of a partial proton 20 times in .2 secs? important to me because the amplifying mirrors are bouncing laser beam into a gw headed right down an arm on the way out and going with a portion of the gravity wave on the way back, and this happens again and again, and each leg out is taken while a different half mile section of the gravity wave is in the experiment, and the next half mile of gravity wave that the laser goes through, or that comes through the space where the mirrors are, is of a different strain than the previous half mile worth of wave as well as different than the next

dimreepr, I suppose I am allowing an obvious truth that you are for some reason not ceding. That is, somebody IS objective reality to anyone else. So If I, for instance, am wondering if objective reality can think, and reason, and you raise your hand and say "I can think and reason", then I have my answer. Regards, TAR

dimreepr, "Or, none of the above.​" Possibly, but how so are you saying that? Seems to me there is a 100% chance that objective reality wrote all books. Proof being all books are real and there is no magical way, unassisted by reality, that a book could come into existence. Regards, TAR

Dimreepr, Well yes, I do not think there is an anthropomorphic god, that feels and thinks and wants this and desires that. But that which is taken literally and that which is taken figuratively when suggesting that the objective world wrote the book, any book, is not the most important consideration. The fact that any writer is in and of the world, and concurrently is part of objective reality to any reader, is objectively true. Therefore, no matter if you are arguing that morality is informed by the genes, or if you are arguing that morality is informed by the writers, with genes, you are arguing that objective reality wrote the book. Regards, TAR

iNow, Mohammed rewrote the parables and stories from the bible, into the Koran, the various writers of the Bible, the different books, were informed by the legends and stories and civil situations they grew up with. The stories that worked to allow people to live together are the ones that survived through our civil development. Yes people chose the messages, and I am not in the slightest saying that God wrote the book, it has to be people that wrote it. But this discussion has to do with Einstein's use of the word religion. And since, according to reason and evidence there is no literal king of the clouds to talk to, in my philosophy and I am guessing in Einstein's use of the word religion, he is referring to the same overarching objective reality that you and I and Moses and Buddha and Mohammed and Plato and Shakespeare and Orge the cavepainter wrote about. Regards, TAR the extrapersonal, the superpersonal objective reality, that anybody here is responsible to and has come from is important...well its everything, and it includes iNow and TAR and our parent's and our laws and the agreements our groups have with other groups a single person cannot bypass all other people and have a morality of their own, and go to a personal god in that case they are talking to themselves Einstein's statement, that without Religion, Science is lame, says to me that science has no muscle, no motive force unless one's information is taking from and applied to an objective reality that you love and respect, feel a part of, responsible to, and responsible for. well maybe in the slightest I am saying God wrote the book If God is taken as standing for objective reality, and objective reality wrote the book. Spinoza God Spinozism (also spelled Spinoza-ism or Spinozaism) is the monist philosophical system of Baruch Spinoza which defines "God" as a singular self-subsistent substance, with both matter and thought being attributes of such. Spinozism - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinozism

dimreepr, Chicken and the egg here a little. But in either case, moralitiy developed differently in different groups, in different religions, in different civil laws, in different club agendas, in different family rules in different party platforms...but in all cases it developed and was not automatically present in the genes. Somebody wrote the holy books, but that does not mean they already knew the difference between right and wrong, that they had already eaten the apple and had wisdom and were good already. The whole idea of religion, in many cases I can think of, is to rise above sin, which would, in several cases make sin the natural condition, and rejecting sin the idea that developed over time, through the legends and stories and human consensus rules that "developed" prior the writing of the text. Regards, TAR

OK I don't have a very good plan here, but the idea, I think is worth keeping in the back of the mind, in terms of things to look for, in the signals. Whether we can see it or not will be answered if we look for it and don't find it.

SwansonT, The strain difference exists at the line of intersection between the two merge events. That is, the GW150914 is pulling and pushing point x in space for a second or so, at the same time GW151226 is pulling point x this way and that for a second or so. If, scalewise this size wave in space can delay and advance the light from a pulsar, enough to notice in the redshift and blueshift of a known steady repeating signal, then a second gw passing through a known gw that already passed through Earth would be affected, frequencywise to the same scale as an EM wave passing through a GW. Or so I would surmise. Regards, TAR the strain difference need not be measured, the frequency difference implies the strain on space where the wave actually is or was at the intersection like a sounding device of sorts you send out a GW and see what its affects are on an incoming wave You send out GW150914 and read its echo on GW151226.

"I've read nothing other than Mordred's comment that suggests that this happens. All other discussion of GWs say they only interact we wakly with matter​" SwansonT, Given that matter will not affect a gw does not preclude one gw from affecting another. If space is temporarily stretched and squished as a gw passes then a gw passing through that deformed space will not know the space is deformed and will propagate happily at C. The wave front will be delayed where space it stretched and advanced where space is compressed. Once the waves completely pass through each other, perhaps you can say that one was unaffected by the other, but the pass through is never actually completed, as we have expanding sphere shaped shells overlapping in what would be a circle or an ellipse, experienced more locally as two very slightly curved planes intersecting in a slightly curved line. I would think the scale upon which you would experience a million km wavelength event is in a periodic repetition of some pattern every 3 and a 1/3 seconds. (about the length of a breath ) Regards, TAR

maybe a better analogy than a pebble worn smooth (where abrasion wears material off) would be a lump of clay whacked with a board against a table and then set on the table at a different angle and whacked again...enough times at all the different directions and you get a smooth sphere, with evidence of the last whack, the most prevalent now make your table and board out of clay and keep turning your clay between and whacking, but the imprint of the last whack will be on the whacker and the table and will be evident on the lump come the next turn and whack the lump still has the same mass(original wave configuration), just deformed and reformed as other waves pass through here the gradient would be the mass it can not change change shape and design but will always be the same gradient, the same wave or impulse moving through space, just lessening in energy density as the spherical shell grows larger

Modred, Just wonder though whether the ripples might be of the same type frequency of a GW, its precursors and its after waves. That is, the billion near planes that the near plane of the shell of gw150914 passed through where oriented at a half a billion different angles, with the intersecting wave either coming from behind or in front, from the left or the right or from above or below, That is, perhaps after a billion taps from each direction, the pebble is, on average, worn smooth. And the original signal is preserved. Regards, TAR that means the most recent taps would be the ones whose marks would still be clear on the wave so it would be reasonable to assume that evidence of gw150914 might still be visible on gw151226 GW170104 would have evidence of GW151226 (imprinted with GW150914) strong on GW170104 with an obscure imprint of GW150914's direct impact on GW170104. In fact there would be something to be learned about the distance and direction and characteristics of gws just prior GW150914, before we detected any, because their imprint would be strongest on the first detected and noticeable again on the next in both their original tap and on the wave that tapped the next and so on. and if space is indeed like a rubber sheet, and a bit elastic, with a memory that returns to original shape, there is probably a little rebound, aftershock, settling that takes place​ which might account for some of the lesser events, unproved but obviously recorded (something must of been noticed between 150914 and 151226)

Strange, Well, I mean, what about the data that fits the model of hypothetical orphan waves? Could not that data be explained by the fact that passing through 1 billion GWs is going to leave a mark? Regards, TAR

Strange, What about the orphan waves? Can I not explain them by the effect on the one wave of the shape of space through which it traveled to get to LIGO? Regards, TAR Although my idea does not yield a testable claim, at the moment, it is a direction to look in.

strange, I would rather look at it the other way around. What do the signals look like? THAT is what a gravity wave looks like, after passing through 1 billion other GWs. The signature of 1 billion other gws has to be on each and therefore one should expect sort of a fractal situation. regards, TAR

iNow, But suppose good/bad are, by your own definition, formed by the group. You please the group, that is good, you displease the group, that is bad. This is not then morality being innate, but the impulse to please the group being innate. Some people do not feel abortion is proper, that it is bad to kill unborn babies. Other people feel it is good for the woman. Some people think a slice of bacon is really good, others think eating a pig is bad because pigs have the same diseases we have. Some people think a burger on the grill smells REALLY good. In India perhaps you would be thrown in jail. I think you have it backward, that innate morality informs religion. It is obvious that our morals and morays are informed by group consensus. And in this light we need to look at Einstein's consideration of superpersonal responsibility. Regards, TAR

strange, Well this is a new avenue of research as is expected since we only saw the first gw in Feb. 2016, so what information is already to be found in, gleened from, the fringes already recorded is still to be determined. https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.181103 This link, off of your link talks about orphan waves. This model has the space of the detector permanently malformed a little after the detection of a wave...indicating to me that there are ripples in the signal that are looking for a model to fit. It seems it is ok to suppose that the ripples can be from the source, or from the space at the detector, or according to my idea about crossing another wave, the ripples looking for a model, could be the other gw, or the many gws the gw crossed. We already have data fine enough to notice the ripples we are currently calling orphan waves. Now suppose we test my theory this way. We have the data from gw150914 taken from LIGO Sept.14th 2015. Because of the geometry of space, no future GW can get to Earth, without having passed through the space gw150914 was bending, stretching and compressing, so according to the theory, the signature of gw150914 should be on gw151226 data taken on Dec. 26th 2015. We know the direction each wave was traveling and how the waves were oriented h+, hx wise, as they came through Earth, so it would be possible to determine where each wave was in what orientation when they had to cross paths. (take into consideration the motion of the Sun around the center of the Galaxy to model a space of intersection of the two waves irrespective of the Sun's movements, and figure how GW151226 should have been affected by going through GW150914. Then see if the pattern of GW151226 is to be recognized on GW150914. It should be there. (according to the theory) Regards, TAR the other day I was in the bathroom and a shadow went across the blinds like a person had passed by the window on the outside my wife was inside, so I peeked out and saw no one then another shadow passed and it gave me a chill, again no one was there then I noticed the high boughs of the Maple where moving in the Sun, just right to cause the shadow on the blinds to move at the speed of a passing person, about the size and shape of a passing person

except the ripples are caused by one gw passing through another The ripple is potentially as strong as the wave. That is, if two waves intersect in space, that piece of space in which both exist could have portions that are double stretched or double compressed depending on the timing and incident angle. If 1 wave has crossed 1 billion other waves, why would there not be evidence of the many meetings. If you can tell by the fringes that a mirror got a width of a proton closer and from this discern the mass of each black hole, their spin and how many solar masses were turned to gravitational energy 1.3 billion lyrs away, I don't know why you couldn't tell where there was, in the fringes, evidence that the wave went through space that was warped this way or that already. Regards, TAR

the fact that each gw HAD TO have passed through others

SwansonT, I am thinking that a gravity wave is not pure and smooth with only one waveform on it. Like a stochastic in the stock market there are waves noticeable, cycling within a band at any time period you wish to study. The market can open 80 up and close 75 up one day and open 40 down and close 76 up the next day and it tells you little about the low or high of the day on either day or about the direction of the market over the week or the month or the year or the decade. Back when I was allowed to trade double shorts and double longs, I amazed my broker in being able to tell, by the stochastics, when the market was oversold and was about to turn up. The upturn would be proceeded by quick and strong downturns of the very short variety. If we are to "see" a gravity wave by looking at a pulsar, we are seeing either one that has already passed Earth or one that is hitting Earth about the same time as the light from the pulsar. That is geometrically speaking, any gravity wave that crossed the path that the light took from the quasar to Earth, had to first cross through Earth. So, at one a year coming through Earth, and 50,000lys between here and the pulsar, the light from the pulsar, should have on it, or embedded in it, the signature of every gw that passed through here in the last 50,000 years, including the last 3 we know about. The close stations were meant to pick up the less than millisecond variations in a wave, created by their previous intersection with other gws. Regards, TAR

had we been a little more countrified we would have praised the dog and had stew, rather then scolding her...she does not go by the ten commandments it turns out I don't think the superpersonal conscience is innate past the extended family. It is learned and taught and counters the we/they that is natural. In Islam you have for instance the we/they in the believers and non-believers and in the secular U.S over the last year we have formed the we/they with Fox on one side and CNN and CNBC and The Times on the other. Nationalism vs Globalism if you will. It takes some sort of religion to trump a nation, when it comes to looking out for each other. This weekend for instance there were demonstrations against Sharia law, as being incompatible with the constitution, met by opponents who considered it just cover for hate groups to hide behind. A we/they, with the others considered stupid or deplorable or hateful or whatever. Making me wonder whether humanism is a religion on the order that Einstein was talking. Superpersonal rules of behavior, enforced by some global consciousness. you can not have a superpersonal conscience by yourself you cannot love humanity while hating humans