generalrelativity Posted November 18, 2017 Posted November 18, 2017 (edited) LIGO stellar electromagnetic gravitational waves that are formed by a black hole are detected using Michelson's laser interferometer based on Einstein's general relativity. "The essence of general relativity is that mass and energy produce a curvature of four-dimensional space-time, and that matter moves in response to this curvature. The Einstein field equations prescribe the interaction between mass and space-time curvature, much as Maxwell's equations prescribe the relationship between electric charge and electromagnetic fields. Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2). "Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10-21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10-18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton." (LIGO Collaboration, § 4). The Caltech-MIT LIGO detected celestial gravitational waves that originate from a 1.3 billion light year black hole. The LIGO interferometer's armature contracts based on Einstein's general relativity but Michelson's experiment and Einstein's general relativity are based on an ether that does not physically exist (vacuum). Also, the LIGO gravitational wave mechanism is based on the interferometer's armature length contraction of 10-18 m but the diameter of the atoms that compose the surface of the interferometer reflection mirror is 10-10 m. Plus, Michelson's interferometer is based on an interference effect yet LIGO does not present photographs of the interferometer's interference effect. Furthermore, Einstein's relativity is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity. Example, using the armature length of L = 4,000 m and Lβ = L' where β = (1 - v2/c2)1/2 the variable L' represents the contracted interferometer armature length which would require a translational velocity v of less than 1 m/s to form a armature contraction of 10-18 m. Einstein's translational velocity is formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions yet at the surface of the earth, at the time of approximately 6:00 pm, the earth yearly velocity is zero and the minimum translational velocity v formed by the earth's daily motion is 462 m/s. Is the LIGO experiment a hoax or something because they are assuming that we are all completely stupid or something. What do you think? Are we all stupid? Or is stupid is what stupid does? I once made pasta with urine and Accidentally served it to everyone on a camping trip and everyone ate it but complained about it and afterward would not let me cook anymore but I would never accidentally use fecal matter. Everyone was really upset and one of the ladies even called me "stupid" when I was honest and said I may have accidentally used urine that I was storing in a Nagel bottle to be good to the environment to make the pasta but I notice that no one talks about my little mistake anymore and some even glare it me when I bring it up when reminiscing about our great camping trip that some say I ruined. Now no one will let me cook pasta anymore for them and I certainly like to cook pasta. Don't you think they are unfair? BO HO Edited November 18, 2017 by generalrelativity -1
Strange Posted November 18, 2017 Posted November 18, 2017 13 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: LIGO stellar electromagnetic gravitational waves They are not electromagnetic waves. Apart from that, I'm not sure what you are asking. Why would translational velocity be relevant? Also, could your provide a reference for your quoted text.
Mordred Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 (edited) Also can we apply any of thee correct equations that actually apply to a GW wave. IE the superposition state of the transverse and traceless guage under the Einstein field equations specifically that correspond to the calculations involved in determining the length of the arms required to detect the quarter wave of the GW wave frequency? If your going to argue against something it might help if you actually study the correct mathematics that correspond the the h+ and hx polarities which is precisely why the wave is a quadrupole (spin 2) and not dipolar spin 1 as per the electromagnetic. All too often we see posters argue that science is stupid yet those same posters don't even know the correct formulas. So by all means lets see the correct formulas being examined in this case please lets start with the the correct equation [math]A^{\mu\nu}=h_+e^{\mu\nu}_++h_x e^{\mu\nu}_x[/math] there is your two polarizations which arises from [math] h_{\mu\nu}-A_{\mu\nu}e^{ik_ax^a}[/math] via the wave equation [math](\frac{\partial^2}{\partial t^2}-\nabla^2)h_{\mu\nu}=\Box h_{\mu\nu}=0[/math] the box is the D'Alemburtion operator from the Einstein field equation [math]g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu}+\mathcal{O}h^2_{\mu\nu}[/math] now show you can calculate the wavelength hint the geodetic deviation equation to the above...though you will also require the correct flux formula...to derive the arm sensitivity... SO use the above to prove LIGO is lying to us. After all these formulas is how LIGO derived the required arm length and design in the first place.... by the way a quick google search will give you the wrong geodetic deviation equation.. [math]\frac{D^2\,\delta x^{\alpha}}{D\tau^2}\ =\ -\,R^{\alpha}_{\ \mu\beta\sigma}\,V^{\mu}\,V^{\sigma}\,\delta x^{\beta}[/math] you will need to derive the correct one. You might start with learning how the quadrupole formula is derived from the above https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrupole_formula A good GR textbook will have the proof of the equation in the wiki link. Edited November 20, 2017 by Mordred
Mordred Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 Funny how I don't see any Ether in these equations. Did you forget that the M and M showed a null result for the Ether in the first place?
swansont Posted November 20, 2017 Posted November 20, 2017 On 11/18/2017 at 3:46 PM, generalrelativity said: Plus, Michelson's interferometer is based on an interference effect yet LIGO does not present photographs of the interferometer's interference effect. http://ligo.org/science/faq.php#gw150914-bh Looks like an interference pattern to me. Why would it have to be a photograph? Quote Furthermore, Einstein's relativity is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity. Example, using the armature length of L = 4,000 m and Lβ = L' where β = (1 - v2/c2)1/2 the variable L' represents the contracted interferometer armature length which would require a translational velocity v of less than 1 m/s to form a armature contraction of 10-18 m. Einstein's translational velocity is formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions yet at the surface of the earth, at the time of approximately 6:00 pm, the earth yearly velocity is zero and the minimum translational velocity v formed by the earth's daily motion is 462 m/s. Why would the earth's velocity matter? The interference comes about because of the translation of the test mass of the interferometer arms, relative to the source. Having the whole thing move has no effect. And the arms are effectively more than 1,000 km long, because the light makes more than 250 passes before it's collected. Quote Is the LIGO experiment a hoax or something because they are assuming that we are all completely stupid or something. What do you think? Are we all stupid? Or is stupid is what stupid does? I think they assume that people doing a deeper dive on the subject have read about LIGO's details and understand them.
generalrelativity Posted November 29, 2017 Author Posted November 29, 2017 (edited) LIGO Collaboration. LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2009. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/72/7/076901/meta;jsessionid=E93547E3EE7CAD2CDA5A1E2A89EBE2B8.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org The LIGO paper and Weber's gravitational theory are based on Einstein's general relativity that use Maxwell's equations (section 20) that depicts an electromagnetic wave which implies gravitational physics is based on electromagnetic gravitational waves. Einstein, Albert. The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity. Annalen der Physik. Königlich Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften. 1916. The positive result of the LIGO experiment using Michelson interferometer justies the existence of Fresnel's ether composed of matter yet vacuum proves the propagation of light does not involve an ether. Your link of the interference effect produce by Michelson's interferometer does not resemble the interference effect of Michelson's experiment. https://www.google.com/search?q=michelson+experiment&safe=active&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS773US773&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjc243p4uTXAhUT9mMKHRo_CCgQ_AUICygC&biw=1600&bih=769#imgrc=e4yruCp8tLVP_M: The reason that the translation velocity is important is because Einstein uses the reversal of the negative result of Michelson's experiment based on Lorentz's theory to justify the existence of Fresnel's ether (section 9). Lorentz uses the translational velocity produced by the earth's daily and yearly motions to reverse the negative result of the negative result of MX.Einstein, Albert. Relativity: Special and General Theory. Brauschweig. 1917. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Relativity:_The_Special_and_General_Theory Edited November 29, 2017 by generalrelativity mistakes
Strange Posted November 29, 2017 Posted November 29, 2017 5 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: The positive result of the LIGO experiment based on Michelson experiment suggests that Fresnel's ether, composed of matter, exists yet vacuum proves the propagation of light does not involve an ether. Your link of the interference effect produce by the interferometer does not resemble the interference effect of Michelson's experiment. It isn't based on Michelson's experiment so it is not surprising that the results don't look the same. It shows nothing about the ether (because there is no such thing). You might as well claim it suggests that phlogiston exists.
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 From all your great comments I rewrote the original post to: LIGO stellar electromagnetic gravitational waves that are formed by a black hole are detected using Michelson's laser interferometer based on Einstein's general relativity.... "The prediction of gravitational waves (GWs), oscillations in the space–time metric that propagate at the speed of light, is one of the most profound differences between Einstein's general theory of relativity and the Newtonian theory of gravity that it replaced." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, "In about 300 million years, the PSR 1913 + 16 orbit will decrease to the point where the pair coalesces into a single compact object, a process that will produce directly detectable GWs. In the meantime, the direct detection of GWs will require similarly strong sources—extremely large masses moving with large accelerations in strong gravitational fields." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, "The essence of general relativity is that mass and energy produce a curvature of four-dimensional space-time, and that matter moves in response to this curvature. The Einstein field equations prescribe the interaction between mass and space-time curvature, much as Maxwell's equations prescribe the relationship between electric charge and electromagnetic fields. Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, "Gravitational radiation is produced by oscillating multipole moments of the mass distribution of a system. The principle of mass conservation rules out monopole radiation, and the principles of linear and angular momentum conservation rule out gravitational dipole radiation. Quadrupole radiation is the lowest allowed form and is thus usually the dominant form." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2)."As illustrated in figure 1, the oscillating quadrupolar strain pattern of a GW is well matched by a Michelson interferometer, which makes a very sensitive comparison of the lengths of its two orthogonal arms. LIGO utilizes three specialized Michelson interferometers, located at two sites (see figure 2): an observatory on the Hanford site in Washington houses two interferometers, the 4 km-long H1 and 2 km-long H2 detectors; and an observatory in Livingston Parish, Louisiana, houses the 4 km-long L1 detector." (LIGO Collaboration, § 3). "Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10−21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10−18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton." (LIGO Collaboration, § 4).,, "On September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC the two detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory simultaneously observed a transient gravitational-wave signal. The signal sweeps upwards in frequency from 35 to 250 Hz with a peak gravitational-wave strain of 1.0 × 10-21." (Abstract).,, http://dutchdikes.net/history/"For this figure the data were also low passed with a 380 Hz cutoff to eliminate out-of-band noise. The whitening emphasizes different frequency bands for each detector, which is why the reconstructed waveform amplitude evolution looks different in each column. The left ordinate axes are normalized such that the physical strain of the wave form is accurate at 130 Hz. The right ordinate axes are in units of whitened strain, divided by the square root of the effective bandwidth (360 Hz), resulting in units of noise standard deviations." (Abbott, FIG. 1. p. 141101-2).,, The Caltech-MIT LIGO detected celestial gravitational waves that originate from a 1.3 billion light year black hole. The LIGO interferometer's armature contraction is represented with Einstein's general relativity but Michelson's experiment is based on an interference effect that is formed by the motion of Fresnel's ether, composed of matter, that does not physically exist (vacuum). Also, the LIGO gravitational wave mechanism describes the interferometer's armature length contraction of 10-18 m but the diameter of the atoms that compose the surface of the interferometer reflection mirror is 10-10 m, and the LIGO does not present photographs of the interferometer's interference effect. Einstein's relativity is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity that is used to contract the length of the interferometer's armature. Using the armature length of L = 4,000 m and Lβ = L' where β = (1 - v2/c2)1/2 the variable L' represents the contracted interferometer armature length which would require a translational velocity v of less than 1 m/s to form a armature contraction of 10-18 m yet the minimum value of the translational velocity v formed by the earth's daily motion is 462 m/s. In addition, the LIGO experiment is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity ( v << 1 m/s) of Einstein's relativity but Einstein's translationtal velocity formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions is not constant. At the surface of the earth, for the time of 6:00 pm, the magnitude of the earth's tangential velocity vector v that forms Einstein's translation velocity is 462 m/s (fig 7) and increases to 5,077 m/s at 7:00 pm. At midnight, the translational velocity is 30,462 m/s; consequently, the magnitude of Einstein's translational velocity increases from 462 m/s to 30,462 m/s (6:00 pm - 12:00 am) yet Einstein's general relativity is based on the constant magnitude of the translational velocity., Time velocity ___________________________ 6:00 pm 462 m/s , 7:00 pm 5,077 m/s 8:00 pm 10,154 m/s, 9:00 pm 15,231 m/s , 10:00 pm 20,308 m/s, 11:00 pm 25,385 m/s , 12:00 am 30,462 m/s, _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 4 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: LIGO stellar electromagnetic gravitational waves that are formed by a black hole are detected using Michelson's laser interferometer based on Einstein's general relativity.... Still wrong. Not electromagnetic. Nothing to do with Michelson. What is the point of this thread if you don't know what you are talking about and aren't interested in learning?
Outrider Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: LIGO stellar electromagnetic gravitational waves As Strange said they are still not electromagnetic. We wouldn't need LIGO if they were. BTW the waves are not LIGO either.
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) "The essence of general relativity is that mass and energy produce a curvature of four-dimensional space-time, and that matter moves in response to this curvature. The Einstein field equations prescribe the interaction between mass and space-time curvature, much as Maxwell's equations prescribe the relationship between electric charge and electromagnetic fields. Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, "Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10−21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10−18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton." (LIGO Collaboration, § 4).,, "As illustrated in figure 1, the oscillating quadrupolar strain pattern of a GW is well matched by a Michelson interferometer, which makes a very sensitive comparison of the lengths of its two orthogonal arms. LIGO utilizes three specialized Michelson interferometers, located at two sites (see figure 2): an observatory on the Hanford site in Washington houses two interferometers, the 4 km-long H1 and 2 km-long H2 detectors; and an observatory in Livingston Parish, Louisiana, houses the 4 km-long L1 detector." (LIGO Collaboration, § 3). "The prediction of gravitational waves (GWs), oscillations in the space–time metric that propagate at the speed of light, is one of the most profound differences between Einstein's general theory of relativity and the Newtonian theory of gravity that it replaced." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, Einstein's general theory of relativity uses Maxwell's equations. Edited December 1, 2017 by generalrelativity
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Outrider said: BTW the waves are not LIGO either. Good catch. They are not stellar either. So that makes four three errors in the first sentence. No point reading any further. 2 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: "The essence of general relativity is that mass and energy produce a curvature of four-dimensional space-time, and that matter moves in response to this curvature. The Einstein field equations prescribe the interaction between mass and space-time curvature, much as Maxwell's equations prescribe the relationship between electric charge and electromagnetic fields. Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2).,, "Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10−21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10−18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton." (LIGO Collaboration, § 4).,, Please provide a link for your quotes. But, you are right, I will accept that. So we are down to three errors in the first sentence. Getting better. Edited December 1, 2017 by Strange
Outrider Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 Just now, Strange said: Good catch. They are not stellar either. So that makes 4 errors in the first sentence. No point reading any further. Well I can't call you wrong. And I didn't read most of it for the reason you stated.
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 "GWs remained a theoretical prediction for more than 50 years until the first observational evidence for their existence came with the discovery and subsequent observations of the binary pulsar PSR 1913 + 16, by Russell Hulse and Joseph Taylor." (LIGO collaboration, Intro). LIGO Collaboration. LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2009. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/72/7/076901/meta;jsessionid=E93547E3EE7CAD2CDA5A1E2A89EBE2B8.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 What is the point of these random quotes? Are you interested in discussing anything?
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Strange said: Good catch. They are not stellar either. So that makes four three errors in the first sentence. No point reading any further. Please provide a link for your quotes. But, you are right, I will accept that. So we are down to three errors in the first sentence. Getting better. Name the errors, please. 5 minutes ago, Strange said: What is the point of these random quotes? Are you interested in discussing anything? Yes, these "random quotes" (these quotes are not random since they have a purposed of stopping someone like you) are contradicting you, if you haven't noticed it yet and are extremely embarrassing since I thought that this was a science discussion and repeatedly making contradictory statements is not scientific, old girl. I really think that you are out of your league (your in T-ball whereas ) and should find another thread that would be easier for you to understand and appreciate. Edited December 1, 2017 by generalrelativity -1
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 13 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Name the errors, please. I did. Gravitational waves are not electromagnetic. They are not stellar. And the waves are not LIGO. So do you want to try rewriting your first sentence?
Outrider Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 30 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations Thanks for providing the link but your quote does not say gravitational waves are electromagnetic. "Just as" was your first hint.
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 38 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Yes, these "random quotes" (these quotes are not random since they have a purposed of stopping someone like you) are contradicting you Except they aren't. That last one doesn't appear to say anything relevant. Maybe you need to provide some explanation or justification for your quotes, as well as the source.
Outrider Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 50 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: LIGO Collaboration. LIGO: The Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2009. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0034-4885/72/7/076901/meta;jsessionid=E93547E3EE7CAD2CDA5A1E2A89EBE2B8.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org I think thats the source Strange. Or maybe not. I haven't clicked on it.
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, Outrider said: I think thats the source Strange. Or maybe not. I haven't clicked on it. I think it is. But he usually doesn't provide one. And, in this case, he should have explained why he thought it was relevant (e.g. the bit you quoted - even though, obviously, it doesn't support his view).
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 1. Gravitational waves are not electromagnetic. 2. They are not stellar. 3. And the waves are not LIGO. "LIGO and Virgo make first detection of gravitational waves produced by colliding neutron stars" "Each electromagnetic observatory will be releasing its own detailed observations of the astrophysical event." https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/ that takes care of 1 and 2. If you haven't notice everything is electromagnetic (gauge). The name Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) prove LIGO is representing LIGO GW. "And the waves are not LIGO." Your statements are inferior and strange in that they are ridiculous via the facts the quotes imply. Are you a robot? 26 minutes ago, Strange said: I think it is. But he usually doesn't provide one. And, in this case, he should have explained why he thought it was relevant (e.g. the bit you quoted - even though, obviously, it doesn't support his view). You are questioning the source yet you are stating that you have not yet click on it? Are you a robot?
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: LIGO and Virgo make first detection of gravitational waves produced by colliding neutron stars" "Each electromagnetic observatory will be releasing its own detailed observations of the astrophysical event." https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/ that takes care of 1 and 2. Nope. First, lets sort out the source. I assume you meant this: https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/press-release-gw170817. Correct? (I had to google for that, so I can't be sure it is what you were referring to. Your link is useless.) Second, the "electromagnetic observatories" referenced in that sentence are the various optical, radio and gamma wave observatories (not LIGO) that were looking for visible counterparts to the gravitational waves. This was expected (and found) in the case of neutron stars. LIGO does not detect electromagnetic waves, it detects gravitational waves. Quote If you haven't notice everything is electromagnetic (gauge). Gravity isn't. The strong nuclear force isn't. The weak nuclear force isn't. So, no. Not everything. Edited December 1, 2017 by Strange
generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) "The essence of general relativity is that mass and energy produce a curvature of four-dimensional space-time, and that matter moves in response to this curvature. The Einstein field equations prescribe the interaction between mass and space-time curvature, much as Maxwell's equations prescribe the relationship between electric charge and electromagnetic fields. Just as electromagnetic waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to Maxwell's equations, gravitational waves are time dependent vacuum solutions to the field equations." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2). In Einstein's paper, "The Foundation of the Generalised Theory of Relativity" (1916), Einstein represents gravity with Maxwell's equations. dh/dt + rot e = 0...............................................69 div h = 0...........................................................70 rot h - de'/dt = i................................................71 div e' = p"........................................................72 (Einstein, § 20). Is the LIGO theory of gravitation based on General relativity? Does Einstein general relativity paper (1916) include Maxwell's equations? Are you a robot? Edited December 1, 2017 by generalrelativity
Strange Posted December 1, 2017 Posted December 1, 2017 3 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Is the LIGO theory of gravitation based on General relativity? Of course. 3 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Does Einstein general relativity paper (1916) include Maxwell's equations? I have no idea.
Recommended Posts