Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #590353 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-22 13:09 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-07-26 09:11 -0700 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 59 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 13:09 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 16:56 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 14:15 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 16:39 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-22 15:43 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 10:50 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 11:36 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 23:04 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 20:59 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 16:18 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 20:49 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-23 01:29 +0000
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 16:59 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-23 21:12 +0000
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 19:58 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-07-24 05:36 +0000
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 10:52 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-23 17:06 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 15:10 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 20:03 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-24 20:19 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 08:10 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 09:51 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 11:55 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 12:03 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 12:25 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 15:52 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 14:16 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 16:29 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 15:08 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 17:20 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 15:34 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 07:18 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 09:32 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 13:04 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 11:21 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 15:35 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-25 18:51 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:10 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-25 18:50 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 12:25 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 15:53 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-25 08:01 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 15:56 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-07-22 17:16 -0400
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-07-22 23:13 -0700
More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-07-23 09:46 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-23 12:23 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-23 11:08 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-24 15:06 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Steven Carlip <carlip@physics.ucdavis.edu> - 2016-07-25 18:50 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-25 20:06 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 17:10 -0500
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-26 09:00 +0200
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 00:05 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-26 09:13 +0200
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 01:10 -0700
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-07-26 10:48 +0200
Re: More of the taxpayer's money going to LIGO thieves mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-07-26 09:11 -0700
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 12:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <07bca223-f809-4add-b063-e127b3cc4854@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590673 |
On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 6:10:55 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/24/2016 10:19 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 8:03:31 PM UTC-7, john wrote: > >> Odd spluttered > >> "It's not fraudulent until proven fraudulent. Due process, innocent until > >> proven guilty and all. So where is due process here? " > >> > >> Haha. > >> Extraordinary claims. > >> When Odd's bunch makes > >> them, they hardly need ANY proof. > >> 'tard > > > > Especially since it is easy to prove that LIGO is a fraud. > > > > How? It is because there are no gravitational waves. > > Prove that. > > > > > Why? Because gravity is an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon. > > Prove that. > > > > > Why? Because, if gravity had a propagation speed, the gravitational > > field would not obey a strict inverse square law. > > And what evidence do you have that measurements show an EXACT inverse > square law? In other words, what SIZE deviations from inverse square > behavior would you expect from a source moving at, say, 0.01c? And what > measurements can you quote with precision greater than that deviation > that shows this prediction doesn't match experimental observation? > > If you don't have this -- and I can't emphasize this enough -- you have > nothing. > > > > > Why? Because an inverse square law assumes a purely spherical field > > around the gravitational source regardless of the motion of the source. > > This is what is observed. > > This is your unsubstantiated claim: that this is what is observed. Prove > that, you presumptive ass. > > > If the gravitational field was propagated at c and the source of the > > field was moving, it would break the spherical symmetry of the field. > > By HOW MUCH? > > > This is not observed because Newtonian gravity would be completely out > > of whack if the field was not strictly symmetrical around the source. > > Completely out of whack, or just an itty bitty bit out of whack? What's > your calculation, you slimy imposter? > > > > > Conclusion: The LIGO team is perpetrating a fraud/scam against the public > > to the tune of billions of dollars. Some people need to go to jail. Heck, > > this fraud has been going on for close to a century. A lot of people in the > > physics community deserve to go to jail. It's not nice to fool the entire > > world and preach a bunch of worthless lies and make them pay for the lies. > > > > > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Fuck you, asshole. ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 15:53 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn5u90$1rkg$7@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590721 |
On 7/25/2016 2:25 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 6:10:55 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/24/2016 10:19 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Sunday, July 24, 2016 at 8:03:31 PM UTC-7, john wrote: >>>> Odd spluttered >>>> "It's not fraudulent until proven fraudulent. Due process, innocent until >>>> proven guilty and all. So where is due process here? " >>>> >>>> Haha. >>>> Extraordinary claims. >>>> When Odd's bunch makes >>>> them, they hardly need ANY proof. >>>> 'tard >>> >>> Especially since it is easy to prove that LIGO is a fraud. >>> >>> How? It is because there are no gravitational waves. >> >> Prove that. >> >>> >>> Why? Because gravity is an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon. >> >> Prove that. >> >>> >>> Why? Because, if gravity had a propagation speed, the gravitational >>> field would not obey a strict inverse square law. >> >> And what evidence do you have that measurements show an EXACT inverse >> square law? In other words, what SIZE deviations from inverse square >> behavior would you expect from a source moving at, say, 0.01c? And what >> measurements can you quote with precision greater than that deviation >> that shows this prediction doesn't match experimental observation? >> >> If you don't have this -- and I can't emphasize this enough -- you have >> nothing. >> >>> >>> Why? Because an inverse square law assumes a purely spherical field >>> around the gravitational source regardless of the motion of the source. >>> This is what is observed. >> >> This is your unsubstantiated claim: that this is what is observed. Prove >> that, you presumptive ass. >> >>> If the gravitational field was propagated at c and the source of the >>> field was moving, it would break the spherical symmetry of the field. >> >> By HOW MUCH? >> >>> This is not observed because Newtonian gravity would be completely out >>> of whack if the field was not strictly symmetrical around the source. >> >> Completely out of whack, or just an itty bitty bit out of whack? What's >> your calculation, you slimy imposter? >> >>> >>> Conclusion: The LIGO team is perpetrating a fraud/scam against the public >>> to the tune of billions of dollars. Some people need to go to jail. Heck, >>> this fraud has been going on for close to a century. A lot of people in the >>> physics community deserve to go to jail. It's not nice to fool the entire >>> world and preach a bunch of worthless lies and make them pay for the lies. >>> >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Fuck you, asshole. See? You have nothing. Just empty assertions, claims without backup. No numbers, no data, no calculations. Just "would be completely out of whack". And you expect people to buy that???? > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 08:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn52jl$e6o$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590645 |
On 7/24/2016 10:03 PM, john wrote: > Odd spluttered > "It's not fraudulent until proven fraudulent. Due process, innocent until > proven guilty and all. So where is due process here? " > > Haha. > Extraordinary claims. > When Odd's bunch makes > them, they hardly need ANY proof. > 'tard > John, being unconvincing to you and being fraudulent are two completely different complaints. If you take any claim that you just don't believe is true, and therefore conclude that the claimant is a fraud, then you are making a rather large leap. You for example. I believe you are wrong about benzene and how it is built. However, I don't think you are a fraud. I just think you're a bit stupid and uninformed. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-22 15:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nmu1ao$1d7f$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590353 |
On 7/22/2016 3:09 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ > > This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken coop. Because real physics should be left to those who glean their understanding of nature from a mixture of soundbites and common sense. > Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or later and it won't be pretty. > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-22 17:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <57928d48$0$1579$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #590367 |
On 7/22/2016 4:56 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/22/2016 3:09 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: >> http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ >> >> >> This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken coop. > > Because real physics should be left to those who glean their > understanding of nature from a mixture of soundbites and common sense. > >> Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or later and it >> won't be pretty. >> >> ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... Well, soundbites from PBS and common sense are good, but the best science as you know comes from those plus a few textbook quotes and a few posts and blogs from the likes of Professor Wormely.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-22 23:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <faefb5a0-5c2f-41ee-ba9a-251d5fdb2043@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590367 |
On Friday, July 22, 2016 at 11:57:01 PM UTC+3, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 7/22/2016 3:09 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ > > > > This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken coop. > > Because real physics should be left to those who glean their > understanding of nature from a mixture of soundbites and common sense. ====================== and Mr crook who on earth nominated you parrot to be '''from a mixture of soundbites and common sense. ???!! =============== > > > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables ================= just go on making toys ============================= Y.Porat ==================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-23 09:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0cf96d6b-dce2-43d7-92b3-0e0f6ff42ca8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590353 |
mapo...@gmail.com wrote.. http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ >This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken coop. Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or later and it won't be pretty. It will probably hit the fan when there are three detectors. Then theyll find that two will get the gravitational wave chirp signal, but one wont. Relegating the previous 2 so far as spurious. What they do at LIGO is detect billions of candidate chirps in each detector. And then look for any that similar enough in both detectors and close enough together in time to call, erroneously,...a 'gravitational wave' What they dont admit is that the billions of chirps in each could just as easily be from local sources near to the detectors as from merging black holes. So for instance, one could record billions of chirps in each detector from known local sources only. Then match up any signals from both that look the same and process them with template matching software. They would look exactly like two merging black holes as far as LIGO could tell. Even though the matching chirps were actually seismic events sourced from our own planet. In other words the LIGO gravitational wave detections were more likely two toilet doors being shut, one each near to each detector.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-23 12:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn096h$b96$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590462 |
On 7/23/2016 11:46 AM, jay moseley wrote: > It will probably hit the fan when there are three detectors. Then theyll find that two will get > the gravitational wave chirp signal, but one wont. And what will you do or say when this turns out not to be the case? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-23 11:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b2789fc1-c904-413b-b970-960059f6a069@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590462 |
On Saturday, July 23, 2016 at 9:46:55 AM UTC-7, jay moseley wrote: > mapo...@gmail.com wrote.. > > http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ > > >This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken coop. Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or later and it won't be pretty. > > It will probably hit the fan when there are three detectors. Then theyll find that two will get > the gravitational wave chirp signal, but one wont. Relegating the previous 2 so far as spurious. > What they do at LIGO is detect billions of candidate chirps in each detector. And then > look for any that similar enough in both detectors and close enough together in time > to call, erroneously,...a 'gravitational wave' > What they dont admit is that the billions of chirps in each could just as easily be > from local sources near to the detectors as from merging black holes. > So for instance, one could record billions of chirps in each detector from > known local sources only. Then match up any signals from both that look the > same and process them with template matching software. They would look > exactly like two merging black holes as far as LIGO could tell. Even though > the matching chirps were actually seismic events sourced from our own planet. > In other words the LIGO gravitational wave detections were more likely two > toilet doors being shut, one each near to each detector. It's possible but I doubt it. They faked it all. It's easy to inject fake signals into the system. They designed it that way. Gravitational waves do not exist at all. It's all bullshit fabrication by liars and fraudsters. The LIGO team is a physics mafia taking advantage of the Big Brother Einstein religion. The whole thing will blow up in their faces.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-24 15:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn373j$rv$7@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590467 |
On 7/23/2016 1:08 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > It's possible but I doubt it. They faked it all. It's easy to inject fake > signals into the system. They designed it that way. > > Gravitational waves do not exist at all. It's all bullshit fabrication by > liars and fraudsters. The LIGO team is a physics mafia taking advantage of > the Big Brother Einstein religion. The whole thing will blow up in their faces. And how soon do you think this will happen? It's been 110 years. In your lifetime? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven Carlip <carlip@physics.ucdavis.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 18:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <nn6fkr$g6i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #590462 |
On 7/23/16 9:46 AM, jay moseley wrote: > mapo...@gmail.com wrote.. > > http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ > >> This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken >> coop. Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or >> later and it won't be pretty. > > It will probably hit the fan when there are three detectors. Then > theyll find that two will get the gravitational wave chirp signal, > but one wont. Relegating the previous 2 so far as spurious. What they > do at LIGO is detect billions of candidate chirps in each detector. > And then look for any that similar enough in both detectors and close > enough together in time to call, erroneously,...a 'gravitational > wave' What they dont admit is that the billions of chirps in each > could just as easily be from local sources near to the detectors as > from merging black holes. So for instance, one could record billions > of chirps in each detector from known local sources only. Then match > up any signals from both that look the same and process them with > template matching software. They would look exactly like two merging > black holes as far as LIGO could tell. It is, of course, pointless to argue with a conspiracy theorist, since any evidence I present is obviously just part of the conspiracy. But in case anyone else is reading this, let me explain one of the ways LIGO tests for this kind of accidental coincidence. The two LIGO detectors are about 10 milliseconds light travel time apart. Coincidences within 10 ms of each other are gravitational wave candidates. Coincidences much more than 10 ms apart, on the other hand, must necessarily be the kind of accidents Jay Moseley is worried about. So what LIGO does is to take the signal from one detector and compare it to the signal of the second detector shifted in time, so that any coincidences would be accidents. For the first gravitational wave observation, they did the comparison with 16 days of data, looking at a total of 10^7 different time shifts. This gave them a "false alarm rate," a *measurement* of how often an accidental coincidence would be as strong as the observed signal. For the September 14 observation,the false alarm rate was less than once every 200,000 years. The December 26 observation was a little less certain -- the false alarm rate was once every 44,000 years. Steve Carlip
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-25 20:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5cf3a487-7934-4641-ab18-4ca09946f58e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590765 |
On Monday, July 25, 2016 at 7:33:13 PM UTC-7, Steven Carlip wrote: > On 7/23/16 9:46 AM, jay moseley wrote: > > mapo...@gmail.com wrote.. > > > > http://news.syr.edu/physicist-awarded-grant-to-assess-authenticity-of-gravitational-wave-signals-51076/ > > > >> This is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the chicken > >> coop. Fraud can only go so far. The shit hits the fan sooner or > >> later and it won't be pretty. > > > > It will probably hit the fan when there are three detectors. Then > > theyll find that two will get the gravitational wave chirp signal, > > but one wont. Relegating the previous 2 so far as spurious. What they > > do at LIGO is detect billions of candidate chirps in each detector. > > And then look for any that similar enough in both detectors and close > > enough together in time to call, erroneously,...a 'gravitational > > wave' What they dont admit is that the billions of chirps in each > > could just as easily be from local sources near to the detectors as > > from merging black holes. So for instance, one could record billions > > of chirps in each detector from known local sources only. Then match > > up any signals from both that look the same and process them with > > template matching software. They would look exactly like two merging > > black holes as far as LIGO could tell. > > It is, of course, pointless to argue with a conspiracy > theorist, since any evidence I present is obviously > just part of the conspiracy. But in case anyone else > is reading this, let me explain one of the ways LIGO > tests for this kind of accidental coincidence. > [crap deleted] > > Steve Carlip Re: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/grav_speed.html Carlip, you are either a crackpot or a fraud or both. You claim (see link above) that a moving body, by some unknown and unfalsifiable magic, broadcasts information about its position and velocity out into space. This information travels at c. Somehow, by some other unfalsifiable, pseudoscientific magic, a receiving body can calculate the actual position of the source regardless of how far apart the two are. This way, relativity can agree with the Newtonian result even though Newton assumed instantaneous gravity. This is one of the stinkiest pile of crap I have ever seen from Big Brother physics. No moving body can know its velocity or position relative to anything else so as to broadcast that information at the speed of light. This alone falsifies your crap. You, Carlip, are not a physicist. You are a pseudoscientist, a mental midget, a jackass, a crackpot and a gutless criminal. You should be in jail. Fuck you. LOL You assholes in the physics community who are preaching these lies ought to be ashamed of yourselves. You are a bunch of con artists and you should be in jail. It's not nice to fool the whole world to the tune of billions of dollars. It is not nice to use Big Brother government to force the world to pay you in order to preach your lies. Fuck all of you, and the mules you sleep with. Your time is coming sooner than you think. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 17:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nn8n45$1skf$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #590775 |
On 7/25/2016 10:06 PM, mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > You claim (see link above) that a moving body, by some unknown and unfalsifiable magic, > broadcasts information about its position and velocity out into space. This information > travels at c. Somehow, by some other unfalsifiable, pseudoscientific magic, a receiving > body can calculate the actual position of the source regardless of how far apart the two are. I don't know where you got either of these ideas from what is written anyplace. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 09:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1661445.taCxCBeP46@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #590765 |
Steven Carlip wrote: > The two LIGO detectors are about 10 milliseconds light > travel time apart. Coincidences within 10 ms of each > other are gravitational wave candidates. Coincidences > much more than 10 ms apart, on the other hand, must > necessarily be the kind of accidents Jay Moseley is > worried about. > > So what LIGO does is to take the signal from one detector > and compare it to the signal of the second detector shifted > in time, so that any coincidences would be accidents. For > the first gravitational wave observation, they did the > comparison with 16 days of data, looking at a total of 10^7 > different time shifts. This gave them a "false alarm rate," > a *measurement* of how often an accidental coincidence > would be as strong as the observed signal. > > For the September 14 observation,the false alarm rate > was less than once every 200,000 years. The December 26 > observation was a little less certain -- the false alarm > rate was once every 44,000 years. Thank you very much for that explanation. I understand even better now why it took so long until LSC could announce with confidence the detection of gravitational waves. Since you are chiming in here, would you be so kind as to comment on what was posted in another thread in <news:fa41b4c7-c11b-4cc7-bb66-9b48e39de034@googlegroups.com>¹ (*except the conspiracy theory*)? Is that a correct interpretation of your article there? I presume it is not, but I would rather be certain (and whom better to ask than the original author), and learn the reason(s) why (not). Looking forward to your comment there. _________ ¹ In case you do not know, this is a Message-ID URI. In Thunderbird, you can install the Message-ID Finder extension and find the article by clicking or context-clicking the URI. If that is not an option for you, I can post other information that would help you to find the Usenet article citing/quoting your article. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 00:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8b0b819f-0a8f-4c6b-86c6-46df5d8a9c3e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590792 |
On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:00:47 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Steven Carlip wrote: > > > The two LIGO detectors are about 10 milliseconds light > > travel time apart. Coincidences within 10 ms of each > > other are gravitational wave candidates. Coincidences > > much more than 10 ms apart, on the other hand, must > > necessarily be the kind of accidents Jay Moseley is > > worried about. > > > > So what LIGO does is to take the signal from one detector > > and compare it to the signal of the second detector shifted > > in time, so that any coincidences would be accidents. For > > the first gravitational wave observation, they did the > > comparison with 16 days of data, looking at a total of 10^7 > > different time shifts. This gave them a "false alarm rate," > > a *measurement* of how often an accidental coincidence > > would be as strong as the observed signal. > > > > For the September 14 observation,the false alarm rate > > was less than once every 200,000 years. The December 26 > > observation was a little less certain -- the false alarm > > rate was once every 44,000 years. > > Thank you very much for that explanation. I understand even better now why > it took so long until LSC could announce with confidence the detection of > gravitational waves. > > Since you are chiming in here, would you be so kind as to comment on what > was posted in another thread in > <news:fa41b4c7-c11b-4cc7-bb66-9b48e39de034@googlegroups.com>¹ (*except the > conspiracy theory*)? > > Is that a correct interpretation of your article there? I presume it is > not, but I would rather be certain (and whom better to ask than the original > author), and learn the reason(s) why (not). > > Looking forward to your comment there. > > _________ > ¹ In case you do not know, this is a Message-ID URI. In Thunderbird, > you can install the Message-ID Finder extension and find the article > by clicking or context-clicking the URI. If that is not an option > for you, I can post other information that would help you to find > the Usenet article citing/quoting your article. > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. Ass kisser. We all know there are plenty of those in the physics community. ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 09:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1598834.atdPhlSkOF@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #590793 |
mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > Ass kisser. Because, in contrast to you, I want to learn? > We all know there are plenty of those in the physics > community. > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... I am surprised that you do not understand the concept of “retarded potential”; apparently you are it personified. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 01:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f6ed0b8f-2981-4598-9579-63162a49db8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590795 |
On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:13:26 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > > Ass kisser. > > Because, in contrast to you, I want to learn? > > > We all know there are plenty of those in the physics > > community. > > > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > > I am surprised that you do not understand the concept of > “retarded potential”; apparently you are it personified. > > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. Fuck you, ass kisser. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 10:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <39725279.fMDQidcC6G@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #590798 |
mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > Fuck you, ass kisser. > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... Well, it’s been fun, but you know, all good things must come to an end. May you die in ignorance. *PLONK* & reported for abuse; F'up2 poster. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-26 09:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8523514a-9e9d-480a-bf65-b9c4ed09138b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #590799 |
On Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 1:48:32 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > > Fuck you, ass kisser. > > > > ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha... > > Well, it’s been fun, but you know, all good things must come to an end. > > May you die in ignorance. > > *PLONK* & reported for abuse; F'up2 poster. > > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. I got your plonk hanging, right here. ahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...ahahahaha...
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web