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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380117 > unrolled thread

Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-25 00:59 -0700
    Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Bojana Kudryavtseva <bojkud@rtyn56h67i.org> - 2016-03-25 11:11 +0000
      Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-25 18:40 +0100
        Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Bojana Kudryavtseva <bojkud@rtyn56h67i.org> - 2016-03-25 21:06 +0000
          Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Bojana Kudryavtseva <bojkud@rtyn56h67i.org> - 2016-03-25 21:33 +0000
          Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-03-26 00:27 +0100
    Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Bojana Kudryavtseva <bojkud@rtyn56h67i.org> - 2016-03-25 11:12 +0000
    Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 16:28 -0700
      Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 00:48 -0700
      Re: Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-01 05:18 -0700

#380117 — Granting LIGO's Discovery of Gravitational Waves: Why?

No discovery of gravitational waves should be granted because the organization and atmosphere of LIGO are unscientific, to say the least:

http://nautil.us/issue/34/adaptation/the-gravity-wave-hunter 
 "I can tell you about Alan Weinstein’s reaction, and he’s a professor here at Caltech who works on the LIGO experiment. He said when they got the phone calls they were all incredulous because they couldn’t believe that it was real. They’ve been looking for gravitational waves for decades. He said at first he thought that it was a blind injection, that someone had put in a signal and they didn’t know about it and so they thought that they were going to have to go through this whole rigmarole again, to find out that at the end of the day it was a hardware injection. Then they thought that maybe it was double blind because no one seemed to know what was going on. Whoever did the injection didn’t tell anyone, and this is going to be a big secret, and then eventually it’s not going to be a real signal. But then everyone swore that they hadn’t done any injections, and so they were starting to think, “oh my gosh, maybe this is real!” And then Alan thought maybe it was a triple blind experiment, and that just means it’s a malicious hacker who somehow managed to erase all of their steps and get the perfect gravitational wave signal in the mirror, and then will announce that they’ve somehow engineered this in a few months, and embarrass the collaboration. But he also claims that a binary black hole merger is much more likely than someone with that level of computer hacking power who is interested in hacking LIGO."

The quotations below suggest that the hacker who performed the triple blind experiment had already rehearsed it in 2010, then improved the procedure, and on September 14, 2015 was just thinking what he would buy for the Nobel prize:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2076754-latest-rumour-of-gravitational-waves-is-probably-true-this-time/ 
 "In 2010, before LIGO had been upgraded to its present sensitivity, a textbook chirp that looked like two black holes colliding came through. The team drafted a paper and sent maps of where the signal may have come from to astronomers, who searched for a counterpart with other telescopes. There was just one problem: the signal was a fake deliberately injected into the data stream to make sure the team would be able to spot a real one. The dramatic opening of a sealed envelope revealed that fact to 300 team members in the room, with 100 more watching via a video link." [Note that in 2010 not only LIGO members were deceived - astronomers all over the world were misled into wasting time and money and looking for the non-existent black hole collision.]

http://motls.blogspot.bg/2016/02/ligo-journal-servers-behind-scenes.html 
 Luboš Motl: " On September 9th, the LIGO folks were already convinced that they would discover the waves soon. Some of them were thinking what they would buy for the Nobel prize and all of them had to make an online vote about the journal where the discovery should be published. It has to be Physical Review Letters because PRL (published by the APS) is the best journal for the Nobel-prize-caliber papers, the LIGO members decided. Five days later, Advanced LIGO made the discovery. Four more days later, as you know, they officially started Advanced LIGO. ;-) "

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#380121

Pentcho Valev wrote:

>  But he also claims that a binary black hole merger is much more likely
>  than someone with that level of computer hacking power who is
>  interested in hacking LIGO."

You are wrong. Those must be gravitational waves, because Reativity
predicts them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380144

On 25.03.2016 12:11, Bojana Kudryavtseva wrote:
 > []

It doesn't help to change your name,
the trolling idiot is recognized anyway.

One can but wonder what kind of mental disturbance make
a person constantly change his name and write nonsense only.

plonk

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380157

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> On 25.03.2016 12:11, Bojana Kudryavtseva wrote:
>  > []
> 
> It doesn't help to change your name,
> the trolling idiot is recognized anyway.
> One can but wonder what kind of mental disturbance make a person
> constantly change his name and write nonsense only. plonk

You are doing this senseless obvious insanity to so many people, and
it is me the mental?

This is what happens when the poorest country in Europe is
allowed to play with atoms. I am so depressed.
http://russia-insider.com/en/science-tech/toxic-south-ukraine-n-power-station-shut-down/ri13579

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380158

Bojana Kudryavtseva wrote:

>> One can but wonder what kind of mental disturbance make a person
>> constantly change his name and write nonsense only. plonk
> 
> You are doing this senseless obvious insanity to so many people, and it
> is me the mental?
> 
> This is what happens when the poorest country in Europe is allowed to
> play with atoms. I am so depressed.
> http://russia-insider.com/en/science-tech/toxic-south-ukraine-n-power-
station-shut-down/ri13579

Hey Gary, what are the scriptures saying about the next one hundred years 
in Europe, will it stay inhabitable? I have a bad feeling about this 
mission. We all need to emigrate. Very funny and strange indeed, the irony 
gets quite ironical this days.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380166

Bojana Kudryavtseva wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Obnoxious liar.

> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> On 25.03.2016 12:11, Bojana Kudryavtseva wrote:
>>  > []
>> 
>> It doesn't help to change your name,
>> the trolling idiot is recognized anyway.
>> One can but wonder what kind of mental disturbance make a person
>> constantly change his name and write nonsense only. plonk
> 
> You are doing this senseless obvious insanity to so many people,

There is only one person to whom this is done, who switches their
pseudonym every time their nonsense is exposed for what it is.

> and it is me the mental?

Yes, obviously.  *PLONK*


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the nuclear physicist order for lunch?  
A: Fission chips.

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380122

Pentcho Valev wrote:

>  But he also claims that a binary black hole merger is much more likely
>  than someone with that level of computer hacking power who is
>  interested in hacking LIGO."

You are wrong. Those must be gravitational waves, because Reativity
predicts them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380587

An interesting discussion that Einsteinians are going to delete (so I will save the two most endangered answers):

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/246607/why-didnt-ligo-wait-for-a-second-observation-of-a-gravitational-wave-are-not-r 
 "Why didn't LIGO wait for a second observation of a gravitational wave?"

"The LIGO hype is not just unprecedented, it is scandalous. LIGO is not about science but politics and money. The truth is that GR suffers from a fatal disease: Spacetime is a block universe in which nothing happens. Surprise!

Several thinkers, including Sir Karl Popper (see Conjectures and Refutations) have pointed this out to the relativists over the years, to no avail. They ignore it because it's a highly inconvenient truth that destroys the Einsteinian fairy tale. Popper even compared Einstein to Parmenides of Elea, the ancient Greek philosopher (Zeno was his student) who maintained that there was no such thing as change.

So, if nothing can move in GR's spacetime, how did gravitational waves get a free pass, pray tell? Answer: they didn't. LIGO is crackpottery at best and a gigantic fraud at worst.

PS. No gamma rays were detected at the time of the supposed G-wave detection, as should be expected from such a powerful event as black holes colliding. But why am I not surprised?"
answered 1 hour ago Rebel Science

"Wow, just Wow! It is amazing how many folks here oppose the scientific method!

Well, luckily I found the answer to my question online, as to why LIGO didn't/couldn't wait for a second signal, and why they had to forgo the scientific method and reproducibility:

https://ligoskeptic.wordpress.com/2016/02/14/ligo-hail-mary-press-conference-where-are-all-the-expected-orbiting-black-hole-merger-ligo-events-why-all-the-ligo-hype-after-only-just-one-supposed-black-mole-merger-event/

Where are all the expected "orbiting black hole merger" LIGO Events? Why all the LIGO hype after only just one supposed black-hole-merger event?

This paper states that LIGO should be expecting 40 events/year now:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1003.2480v2.pdf

That means that LIGO should have seen at least 15 more events since September 15th.

Where are they? Just one more event LIGO! Why not wait for just one more tiny little single event? Especially when you're expecting over three events every month!

The LIGO team was obviously asking the same question. And since they hadn't seen any more events as month after month dragged on, they naturally concluded that more events probably wouldn't be seen over the next few months nor years either.

And so they panicked as their billion-dollar pseudoscience hype window was closing fast, and they pulled the trigger and held a press massive conference centered about the one and only signal they would likely ever receive.

In football this is called a Hail-Mary!"
answered 3 hours ago Physics Ph.D.

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380603

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-5, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> An interesting discussion that Einsteinians are going to delete (so I will save the two most endangered answers):
> 
> http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/246607/why-didnt-ligo-wait-for-a-second-observation-of-a-gravitational-wave-are-not-r 
>  "Why didn't LIGO wait for a second observation of a gravitational wave?"

They made "several" other probable detections of gravitational waves during its 
first observing run (termed "O1") which ended January 12, 2016 at 8:00 a.m. PST. 
None of these other probable detections were as spectacular as the Sept 14, 2015 
discovery, which was clearly visible above the background noise without the aid 
of complicated analysis. 

O2 will begin later this year after some engineering upgrades have been made to
increase sensitivity. These tweaks and re-tunings of the instrument are being
based, in large part, on analysis of the data collected in O1.

At least one paper is in preparation that will summarize these secondary 
detections. No single one of these secondary detections stands out above the
noise by more than a couple of standard deviations or so, and so none of these
individual detections merit any sort of press release. The LIGO scientists are
exercising due diligence in analyzing the data as best they can before
publishing. 

The O1 observing run lasted for four months. O2, when it begins, is expected to
run for six months at a moderately heightened sensitivity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#380619

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/04/black-hole-blues-gives-a-ringside-seat-to-discovery-of-gravitational-waves/ 
 "You know, there's a small group of LIGO "truthers" out there, convinced it's all just one big conspiracy by fame-hungry scientists to hoodwink the public.

Janna Levin: No! Really? That's hysterical. This detection was much louder than anyone expected. LIGO heard it clear as day. If anything it's too clear.

So clear that the LIGO collaboration seriously considered the possibility that it was a malicious hack -- a fake injected signal.

Levin: Yes. Rai said, "Look, we went through every possible scenario for how you would inject a false signal, and tried to do it ourselves." There were only a few people in the entire collaboration with sufficient access and knowledge to do something like that, and they interrogated them all. And you have to physically attach stuff, you can't just do this telepathically, so they looked for little black boxes and things like that. It was like a C.S.I. experiment. So there's no physical evidence. It would be very hard to fake a signal without being caught. And I don't think anyone in the collaboration has that sophisticated a criminal mind. In fact, when they did a [deliberate] blind injection during the test run [of the earlier version of LIGO], they screwed it up a little. They got the orientation wrong."

So in 2010 LIGO conspirators did not still have "that sophisticated a criminal mind" and "screwed it up a little" but then they improved and in 2015 everything was just fine:

http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life/the-review/why-albert-einstein-continues-to-make-waves-as-black-holes-collide#full 
 "Einstein believed in neither gravitational waves nor black holes. (...) Dr Natalia Kiriushcheva, a theoretical and computational physicist at the University of Western Ontario (UWO), Canada, says that while it was Einstein who initiated the gravitational waves theory in a paper in June 1916, it was an addendum to his theory of general relativity and by 1936, he had concluded that such things did not exist. Furthermore - as a paper published by Einstein in the Annals of Mathematics in October, 1939 made clear, he also rejected the possibility of black holes. (...) On September 16, 2010, a false signal - a so-called "blind injection" - was fed into both the Ligo and Virgo systems as part of an exercise to "test ... detection capabilities". At the time, the vast majority of the hundreds of scientists working on the equipment had no idea that they were being fed a dummy signal. The truth was not revealed until March the following year, by which time several papers about the supposed sensational discovery of gravitational waves were poised for publication. "While the scientists were disappointed that the discovery was not real, the success of the analysis was a compelling demonstration of the collaboration's readiness to detect gravitational waves," Ligo reported at the time. But take a look at the visualisation (www.ligo.org/news/blind-injection.php) of the faked signal, says Dr Kiriushcheva, and compare it to the image apparently showing the collision of the twin black holes, seen on the second page of the recently-published discovery paper (tinyurl.com/h3wkvmo). "They look very, very similar," she says. "It means that they knew exactly what they wanted to get and this is suspicious for us: when you know what you want to get from science, usually you can get it." The apparent similarity is more curious because the faked event purported to show not a collision between two black holes, but the gravitational waves created by a neutron star spiralling into a black hole. The signals appear so similar, in fact, that Dr Kiriushcheva questions whether the "true" signal might actually have been an echo of the fake, "stored in the computer system from when they turned off the equipment five years before"." 

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web