Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #407304

Re: the LIGO signal

Show all headers | View raw

On 31/01/2017 1:46 PM, RichD wrote:
> On January 29, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>> How do they know the binary radiated 3 solar masses?
>>
>> The received waveform gave the masses, and theory gives the amount
>> radiated.
>
> You mean:
> i)   They measured the masses separately prior,
> ii)  measured the mass after collision,
> iii) and used arithmetic to calculate the difference?
>
> Seems doubtful.
>
> What they detected was a pair of orthogonal, 1-D time
> waveforms.  My question is really computational:  can
> their mathematicians verify that the signal is uniquely
> invertible?  That is, they have models of an inspiraling
> binary, and the waveforms those would generate, but can
> they prove this is the only type of event which could
> produce the actual observed data?

No such thing could ever be proved, even in principal.

But they have a model, derived from general relativity, the describes 
the collision of black-holes. The model predicts a waveform that is 
dependent on the individual masses. A waveform is then seen which is 
consistent with a collision between black-holes of two particular masses.

It's not proof, but it is quite strong evidence, and that's all you ever 
get in physics.

Sylvia.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

the LIGO signal RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-29 16:35 -0800
  Re: the LIGO signal Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-30 13:03 +1100
    Re: the LIGO signal RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-30 18:46 -0800
      Re: the LIGO signal Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-31 14:10 +1100
        Re: the LIGO signal mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-01-30 23:36 -0800
          Re: the LIGO signal Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-31 18:47 +1100
      Re: the LIGO signal Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 07:07 -0600
        Re: the LIGO signal "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-31 09:16 -0800
        Re: the LIGO signal RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-31 15:01 -0800
          Re: the LIGO signal Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 17:33 -0600
  Re: the LIGO signal "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2017-01-31 00:04 -0800
    Re: the LIGO signal "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-31 00:27 -0800
  Re: the LIGO signal numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 16:30 -0800
    Re: the LIGO signal Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-06 11:40 +1100
  Re: the LIGO signal numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-06 15:15 -0800
    Re: the LIGO signal Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-07 20:20 +1100
      Re: the LIGO signal benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 17:23 -0500
        Re: the LIGO signal Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 05:27 +0100
  Re: the LIGO signal numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-07 13:42 -0800
    Re: the LIGO signal benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-07 18:06 -0500
      Re: the LIGO signal Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-08 10:58 +0000
  Re: the LIGO signal numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 11:27 -0800

csiph-web