Culture and Religion

A world view where the guide for society is based on human nature,
 not on ancient scriptures.  Home  or Topic Groups

Exchange about LIGO Data

The comment  in C & A to the post about LIGO Confirmation:

'
Let's say we can only detect something via radio waves and no other method of confirmation, should we reject it?
'

my response:

the difference here is a gravitational wave is theoretical and they are claiming it actually exists. If we accept theories without convincing evidence we run the risk of a diversion that could be difficult to overcome later. A stake in the ground is difficult to move later after much is built on top of that stake. LIGO uses a ridiculous design of capturing noise and looking for 3 theoretical patterns in that noise. There is no direct observation of anything, unlike radio in your example.

his response:

'
That's kind of why they keep running the experiment, planning better detectors, and gathering more data.
'

my response:

 - and never confirming each event actually happened...

his response:

ow would you confirm it or should we just not try?

my response:

I must ask: right now there could be hardware defects and software defects because we cannot verify the expected response. That means this accumulation of data could also be defective. How would you confirm we are getting valid data? Or do we just keep recording?

his response:

 Well currently we're using multiple detectors and fake signals are sent through to see if the physicists spot them as false signals. So, do you think we shouldn't bother learning more?
'

my comment to the post rather than a reply::

When pushed for answer for what to do with LIGO data, LIGO is a complete waste of time until they establish a valid event to detect. A black hole is fiction, where so much mass disappeared into a geometric point in the accelerating observer's space time geometry, called a singularity. In relativity all observers in their inertial reference frame (where normal physics applies) cannot see the accelerating observer's space time curvature. According to relativity we should still see the mass because we are not the special observer. Black holes exist only for that special observer.

In our universe we have X-ray sources, generating synchrotron radiation in a broad spectrum from radio to X-ray and gamma ray. That explanation is not allowed so a black hole with an accretion disk is proposed instead of a known electrical source that might not be seen in the visible spectrum for various reasons like galactic dust. Every X-ray source is ALWAYS a black hole though the black hole itself can never be seen.
We also have pulsars with a fixed period of oscillation in gamma ray. This is also synchrotron radiation except there is a capacitive behavior for the oscillation. That explanation is not allowed so a neutron star is proposed even though physicists know neutrons decompose when not in a nucleus with protons. This massive neutron star is proposed to have an incredible speed of rotation to explain the brief  period of oscillation.

The masses for both of these inspiral objects are assigned a value by their template generator model.
We are gathering data to look for objects that are not actually as claimed. With an invalid target I expect the data being gathered are worthless.
LIGO just builds on these other mistakes.

Hit back to go to previous page in history.

Here is the list of topics in this Cosmology Topic Group .

Ctrl + for zoom in;  Ctrl - for zoom out ;  Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit;  pinch for zoom change;  pinched for no zoom