Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #591612 > unrolled thread
| Started by | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-02 00:03 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-08-05 18:25 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 90 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 00:03 -0700
Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-02 12:40 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-02 12:58 +0200
Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-02 04:09 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-02 14:32 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-03 01:48 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 07:51 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-04 08:36 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 11:20 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-05 01:08 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 08:04 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-04 20:48 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 12:30 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 14:13 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-04 22:04 +0000
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 07:30 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 06:00 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 08:11 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 06:15 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 11:27 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 16:22 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:42 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 19:31 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 17:30 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-05 22:21 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 23:05 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 17:32 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:31 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-08 18:22 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 16:47 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-06 17:31 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-05 22:20 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-06 10:21 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-06 10:39 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 10:37 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 13:20 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 13:25 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 11:48 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-05 20:48 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 11:55 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:15 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:09 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 16:26 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:45 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:32 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:32 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:57 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 14:17 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-08 18:37 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-08 18:24 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-05 19:35 -0400
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-07 13:32 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-08-05 01:42 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 23:21 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 23:16 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 07:04 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-08-02 10:35 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-03 21:32 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 13:16 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 17:06 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO mapou001@gmail.com - 2016-08-03 15:39 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 21:25 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-03 21:29 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 07:58 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 06:07 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 08:20 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 06:48 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 07:16 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-04 14:51 +0000
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 09:08 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-08-04 16:39 +0000
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 07:20 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 23:28 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-05 05:26 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-04 11:14 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 23:23 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-08-05 20:49 +0200
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 07:02 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 05:12 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 12:50 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 15:28 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 19:35 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 20:55 -0700
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 10:45 -0500
Re: Misconceptions about LIGO LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-09 12:21 -0700
Re: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 11:10 -0700
Re: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-08-02 11:21 -0700
Re: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-04 23:12 -0700
Re: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 07:31 -0500
Re: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-08-05 18:25 -0700
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 15:15 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no2s49$1fbk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #591982 |
On 8/5/2016 1:55 PM, john wrote: > Point like particle said > "You are playing into the crackpots’ cards if you reduce science to a matter > of what can be believed. Science is decisively _not_ a system of belief. " > You have proof for: > DM? > BH caused by grav collapse? > Virtual particles? > Space time warp? > > No, but you "believe" in them. > Science does not produce proof. It provides evidence. There is mounting evidence for these, and oodles of evidence for warped spacetime. You choose to discount evidence, saying it's faked or misinterpreted and of no value whatsoever. So in your book, it's all about what you CHOOSE to believe, because you feel you can wash evidence away with the sweep of your hand. Unless someone can PROVE it to you (which science does not do). See? You just don't buy into science or how it works, John. In science, what scientists believe is driven by EVIDENCE. Not by animations. Not by whether it can be explained in two paragraphs in plain English. Not by whether it's consistent with everyday experience. Not by whether it is cool. Not by whether it's imaginative and new. Not by proof. Evidence. Just evidence. The stuff you don't care about. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 15:09 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no2rpt$1eoq$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #591979 |
On 8/5/2016 1:48 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 8/5/2016 12:37 PM, john wrote: >>> Oh, yeah, you believe LIGO >> >> Alright, let's just entertain that you don't believe LIGO. >> So let's roll back and see what evidence you DO believe? >> >> Yes or no answers, then reasons to these: >> 1. Do you believe in the existence of atoms? If so, what evidence proves >> that to you? >> […] > > You are playing into the crackpots’ cards if you reduce science to a matter > of what can be believed. Science is decisively _not_ a system of belief. > I agree with you. But clearly you can see why I'm asking this. If John feels he has the right to CHOOSE not to believe LIGO results and he CHOOSES to believe that the whole thing is faked, then I'm going to ask him about the other things in science and what he CHOOSES to believe and why. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 16:26 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <57a4f683$0$43809$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #591953 |
On 8/5/2016 8:30 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/4/2016 2:30 PM, LIGO Fraud Investigator wrote: >> On Thursday, August 4, 2016 at 11:48:39 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' >> Lahn wrote: >>> [crap] >>> >>> Bottom line: It *cannot* have been two independent seismic events. >> >> Of course not. Both detections were fraudulent fake injections. Only a >> clueless ass kisser like you can claim otherwise. > > So, just to confirm the level of insanity here. > > You are saying that the only honorable intellectual position someone can > take is to assume that everyone else is cheating. > > So to confirm your level of insanity, you are saying that the only honorable intellectual position is to blindly take everything Big Brother says as the absolute truth. Any questioning of authority is clearly "insane". Right? Demanding credible proof of statements is clearly something only kooks would do, right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 15:45 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no2tst$1i1m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592003 |
On 8/5/2016 3:26 PM, benj wrote: > On 8/5/2016 8:30 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 8/4/2016 2:30 PM, LIGO Fraud Investigator wrote: >>> On Thursday, August 4, 2016 at 11:48:39 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' >>> Lahn wrote: >>>> [crap] >>>> >>>> Bottom line: It *cannot* have been two independent seismic events. >>> >>> Of course not. Both detections were fraudulent fake injections. Only a >>> clueless ass kisser like you can claim otherwise. >> >> So, just to confirm the level of insanity here. >> >> You are saying that the only honorable intellectual position someone can >> take is to assume that everyone else is cheating. >> >> > So to confirm your level of insanity, you are saying that the only > honorable intellectual position is to blindly take everything Big > Brother says as the absolute truth. Nope. Because I don't believe the choice is black or white. I don't believe the choice is to believe everything or believe nothing. Do you think that's the choice? > Any questioning of authority is > clearly "insane". Right? If you do it as a pattern and for its own sake, yes. > Demanding credible proof of statements is > clearly something only kooks would do, right? In science it is. Science doesn't provide proof. It provides evidence in favor of, or in opposition to, statements. In no case is any statement proven. So demanding something of science that science doesn't provide is, yes, insane. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 15:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <0e43dab6-a231-4f46-83ef-8e2ced41fa5f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592010 |
Odd Show me where Bushman lied.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:32 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no7urb$1gm3$9@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592021 |
On 8/5/2016 5:32 PM, john wrote: > Odd > Show me where Bushman lied. > He said an alien handed him a photo of himself. That is a lie. It is a photo of a toy. No toy is going to hand a picture of itself to Bushman. Bushman said he could attest to the fact that this was a picture of an alien. He could not attest to that, and so his claim is a lie. Deal with it, John. You're trying to say that the utterances of fools and liars are to be believed, no matter whether the people speaking them are fools and liars. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <250bfa33-7364-4dbc-87e2-5c6f66cf92ea@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592230 |
Odd said "He said an alien handed him a photo of himself. " Not what I remember. Where? What time in the interview? I will check that, Tard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 14:17 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <5c72f74c-3beb-4c5b-b504-c9fb6df27283@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #592243 |
Odd you lying sack of PD: He says in the interview: "My people have been feeding me pictures for 13 years." Odd you lying sack of PD shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 18:37 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <57a909c0$0$31186$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #592249 |
On 8/7/2016 5:17 PM, john wrote: > Odd you lying sack of PD: > He says in the interview: > "My people have been feeding > me pictures for 13 years." > Odd you lying sack of PD shit. > John, too bad the government coverup has been going on for 70 years! Which does not change the truth that Odd really is a lying sack of shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-08 18:24 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <57a906b9$0$55990$c3e8da3$33881b6a@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #592230 |
On 8/7/2016 2:32 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/5/2016 5:32 PM, john wrote: >> Odd >> Show me where Bushman lied. >> > > He said an alien handed him a photo of himself. > That is a lie. It is a photo of a toy. No toy is going to hand a picture > of itself to Bushman. > Bushman said he could attest to the fact that this was a picture of an > alien. He could not attest to that, and so his claim is a lie. > > Deal with it, John. > > You're trying to say that the utterances of fools and liars are to be > believed, no matter whether the people speaking them are fools and liars. > Which is, of course, what you always say as well. That makes you both gullible fools.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 19:35 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <57a522b1$0$40882$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #592010 |
On 8/5/2016 4:45 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 8/5/2016 3:26 PM, benj wrote: >> On 8/5/2016 8:30 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> On 8/4/2016 2:30 PM, LIGO Fraud Investigator wrote: >>>> On Thursday, August 4, 2016 at 11:48:39 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' >>>> Lahn wrote: >>>>> [crap] >>>>> >>>>> Bottom line: It *cannot* have been two independent seismic events. >>>> >>>> Of course not. Both detections were fraudulent fake injections. Only a >>>> clueless ass kisser like you can claim otherwise. >>> >>> So, just to confirm the level of insanity here. >>> >>> You are saying that the only honorable intellectual position someone can >>> take is to assume that everyone else is cheating. >>> >>> >> So to confirm your level of insanity, you are saying that the only >> honorable intellectual position is to blindly take everything Big >> Brother says as the absolute truth. > > Nope. Because I don't believe the choice is black or white. I don't > believe the choice is to believe everything or believe nothing. Do you > think that's the choice? Are you saying you do not TRUST Big Brother? According to your conspiracy theory you just tried to use on me that means that you believe that EVERYTHING Big Brother says is a lie! That sure sounds black and white to me. I"m guessing here, but I think you are building up to an opinion like HVAC which is one should never believe anything that is said because only the things that you say are certain to be true! Right, right. >> Any questioning of authority is >> clearly "insane". Right? > > If you do it as a pattern and for its own sake, yes. > >> Demanding credible proof of statements is >> clearly something only kooks would do, right? > > In science it is. Science doesn't provide proof. It provides evidence in > favor of, or in opposition to, statements. In no case is any statement > proven. So demanding something of science that science doesn't provide > is, yes, insane. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-07 13:32 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no7uqq$1gm3$7@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #592029 |
On 8/5/2016 6:35 PM, benj wrote: > On 8/5/2016 4:45 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 8/5/2016 3:26 PM, benj wrote: >>> So to confirm your level of insanity, you are saying that the only >>> honorable intellectual position is to blindly take everything Big >>> Brother says as the absolute truth. >> >> Nope. Because I don't believe the choice is black or white. I don't >> believe the choice is to believe everything or believe nothing. Do you >> think that's the choice? > > Are you saying you do not TRUST Big Brother? According to your > conspiracy theory you just tried to use on me that means that you > believe that EVERYTHING Big Brother says is a lie! That sure sounds > black and white to me. Nope, I don't go by black or white, no matter how hard you try to pull the rope in one direction or the other. > > I"m guessing here, but I think you are building up to an opinion like > HVAC which is one should never believe anything that is said because > only the things that you say are certain to be true! Right, right. Bad guess. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 01:42 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <57a82781-db0b-4194-a6ed-a2b22ccae0ef@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591886 |
Thomas Lahn wrote.. > >> (There are billions detected in each detector). >No, there are not. As you can read e.g. in the GEO 600 scientist’s considerate response to Mrs. Lopez first request (which was rather reasonable compared to what followed from her), there is (in terms of sound, see below) continuous “noise” that is far from such a "chirp" (which is unsurprising given the literally astronomical circumstances required to create such a "chirp").…… I appreciate the time you put into your various points in addition to the above. But first of all.. there *ARE 100s of billions* of of candidate chirps detected in each detector over the run. I got that directly from LIGO. As I have pointed out in more detail to Odd, thats approximately 750,000,000 seperate 10 ms batches over 3 months. Each 10 ms having at least a hundred random chirps detected, by LIGO, in each detector. To be absolutely clear... each detector detects 100 candidate chirps each 10 ms. You can even see that in the blue/green coloured frequency to time graphs in the two published papers. That is trillions of potential coincidental chirps detected in both detectors... just from random events. Its not hard to surmise that once you only accept coincidences of very similar shaped chirps; you can whittle that down to 3. Just from random chance of random detections. Regarding what causes these chirps. Its true what you say about the setup carefully excluding seismic events. I take that point after looking at some of the faqs at LIGO. But note that they say only reduce, not exclude. And the facts are that something, be it seismic, local, air molecules trapped in detectors or otherwise, is creating billions of chirps in the detectors. Most of which have the neccesary profile to match the predicted template. It is only through template matching that the closest in shape are paired. Any theoretical conclusions from these pairing of random events is assumption only. And your point about speed of light for seismic waves. You miss the point. You dont need two simultaneous detections from the same seismic event to mimic the " gravitational wave". You can get two chirps from two *seperate seismic sources* in 10 ms. As long as they both have the same profile. And considering that LIGO is detecting at least 100 chirps in each detector each 10 ms over three months. ( thats trillions). Its not hard to only choose the three closest profiled random coincidences out of trillions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty350@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-04 23:21 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <362d51ef-ee43-4548-8f9e-ecd355a626b9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591747 |
בתאריך יום רביעי, 3 באוגוסט 2016 בשעה 15:51:14 UTC+3, מאת Odd Bodkin: > On 8/3/2016 3:48 AM, jay moseley wrote: > > If a chirp is recorded in one detector that matches a merger profile. > > (There are billions detected in each detector). What does the speed of light > > have to do with it? > > It doesn't. But it's a simple likelihood problem. > It's a calculable and MEASURABLE background. > > The issue is very simple: How likely is it that there are two completely > independent seismic events that > 1. have identical signal profiles (where "identical" is determined by > cuts), and > 2. occur within 10ms of each other. > > As mentioned previously, it is relatively straightforward to both > calculate and directly measure this background rate from > NONgravitational sources. It's once per several tens of thousands of > years, according to the authors and their published data and analysis. > > So if you see events that happen at a rate that is a lot larger than > that, you can be confident you are seeing signal, not background. This > is the straightforward experimental business of determining signal/noise > background, precisely so that you gain some certainty that what you are > seeing in an event is signal and not background. Every single discovery > experiment from the neutrino to the W to the top quark to the Higgs has > followed the same analysis. > > > You seem to not understand what is being detected at LIGO. > > They are detecting billions of chirps in each detector. None of those > > chirps has any information about how fast they arrived at the detector. > > Contrary to your delusion. > > It is only when the template software finds a match within a small timeframe > > of two similar chirps do the theorists then posit that possibly this coincidence > > could be from a BH merger. > > Assumption only. > > Do your homework. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables ================================ imbecile idiot hired gangster !! paid (again paid!! -- MEASURMENTS ARE MEASURMENTS ! AND INTEPRETATIONS OF MEASURMENTS ! ARE ANOTHER THING !! Y.Porat ==============================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | poraty350@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-04 23:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) |
| Message-ID | <98aa000a-1982-4d32-9cc0-4c54c4ad9244@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591621 |
בתאריך יום שלישי, 2 באוגוסט 2016 בשעה 14:09:22 UTC+3, מאת jay moseley: > Thomas Lahn wrote... > > It was not the "pressure" of a gravitational wave that "displaced mirrors", but a gravitational wave is a propagating *spacetime distortion* that *changes the length of objects when it passes through them*. As a result, the laser light travels a longer or shorter distance than if the gravitational wave would not pass through the experiment, … > > You are propagating a falsehood. > It is only an assumption that a gravitational wave was detected. > In fact the designers of the template matching software admit > that in each detector billions of potential candidates are recorded. > Not three. And these billions are essentially from any source, most > local to the detectors. That includes seismic events, and sources > such as construction noises etc. Furthermore these billions of chirps > all have the requisite profile of the theoretical profile predicted > for a merging black hole pair. > The only thing that makes each of these billions of chirps observed > in each detector a potential 'gravitational wave'...is if a similar shaped > profile in the same frequency range is seen in both detectors within > the theoretical time limit of milliseconds dictated by GR. > In other words there are many more, thousands even millions of > events detected in both detectors that match the profile of a theoretical > BH merger. But these occur outside the time limit and therefore cannot > be attributed to a merging event. > The conclusion can only be that the two events "detected" so far are > more likely to be coincidental local seismic events. After all if you are > looking at billions of similar shaped chirps caused by local seismic events > in each detector. The chances are that one or two in a few billion > will occur within milliseconds in both detectors. > It is a fantasy that these are caused by gravitational waves. ========================= shameless ** hired** Gangster !! you cant cheat every body forever ========== Y.Porat =========================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-05 07:04 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <no1vc2$1vaa$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #591621 |
On 8/2/2016 6:09 AM, jay moseley wrote: > Thomas Lahn wrote... >> It was not the "pressure" of a gravitational wave that "displaced mirrors", but a >> gravitational wave is a propagating *spacetime distortion* that *changes the length >> of objects when it passes through them*. As a result, the laser light travels a >> longer or shorter distance than if the gravitational wave would not pass through >> the experiment, … > > You are propagating a falsehood. > It is only an assumption that a gravitational wave was detected. > In fact the designers of the template matching software admit > that in each detector billions of potential candidates are recorded. > Not three. And these billions are essentially from any source, most > local to the detectors. That includes seismic events, and sources > such as construction noises etc. Furthermore these billions of chirps > all have the requisite profile of the theoretical profile predicted > for a merging black hole pair. > The only thing that makes each of these billions of chirps observed > in each detector a potential 'gravitational wave'...is if a similar shaped > profile in the same frequency range is seen in both detectors within > the theoretical time limit of milliseconds dictated by GR. > In other words there are many more, thousands even millions of > events detected in both detectors that match the profile of a theoretical > BH merger. But these occur outside the time limit and therefore cannot > be attributed to a merging event. > The conclusion can only be that the two events "detected" so far are > more likely to be coincidental local seismic events. After all if you are > looking at billions of similar shaped chirps caused by local seismic events > in each detector. The chances are that one or two in a few billion > will occur within milliseconds in both detectors. Actually, you are overestimating the likelihood that those signals are merely coincidental background signals. There is a well defined method to determine what the actual background rate is due to these coincidences, and I believe Steve Carlip both pointed to the paper where this is described and summarized the results. The result, to remind you, is that the likelihood that the "millions" of events would replicate the event initially reported is that this would be coincidental background once in over 40,000 years. Therefore, what you say is "more likely to be coincidental local seismic events" is in fact much much LESS likely to be coincidental local seismic events. > It is a fantasy that these are caused by gravitational waves. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mapou001@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-02 10:35 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO (was: Fight the LIGO fraud. Sign this Petition) |
| Message-ID | <3592e73f-65f4-498b-b4aa-6c6c346a3541@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591619 |
On Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 3:41:01 AM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > > > PETITION: Prof. Karsten Danzmann, please answer 3 questions on the > > measurement of gravitational waves in connection with the LIGO Experiment. > > > > https://www.change.org/p/prof-karsten-danzmann-beantworten-sie-bitte-3-fragen-über-das-ligo-experiment > > > > > > Don't let the lying and thieving assholes win. Fight them with all your > > strength. > > Let it be noted that the petitioner is > <http://www.crankwatch.com/wiki/index.php/Jocelyne_Lopez>, a Frenchwoman and > “physics layman” (Physiklaie) now “living in Germany”, who, according to > that reference, has been trolling “several German-speaking Web fora since > about 2003“, and whose “blog has been banned” repeatedly by service > providers due to “a lot of insults, denials, antisemitism, and severe > violations of personal rights in them”. See the reference for details. > (The Google Translate translation of that Web site from German into English > is, as usual, inadequate, but should be sufficient for the dedicated > English-speaking reader to tell where the motivation for that petition comes > from.) > > Some of her ridiculous "physical" statements include these on light > (translated by me, emphasis by me): > > “[…] Light does exist, but you could say that in only exists in very few > places in nature. Because *light is not created in the universe* [sic!], > light is only created in our eyes. Light does not exist outside > our eyes, or, IOW, light is invisible outside our eyes. > […] > This shows, paradoxically, that light is mostly invisible. The photons > or impulses that *are created* by the innumerable light sources *in the > universe* [sic!] do move […] but we do not see their motion; their motion > is not perceptible and not observable by us, we only see the few [sic!] > that accidentally hit our retina and only let light be created in our > eyes. Without the existence of the retina of observers, the universe is > completely dark, there is no light there.” > > As for the "petition" itself: > > “[…] There are, however, very great doubts in the international scientific > community as to whether the measurement accuracy required to register > gravitational waves can be achieved at all by current measurement > techniques and technology: […]” > > What does she dream of at night? Being a physics laywoman, how can she even > know about what the consensus in the “international scientific community” is > or what the “current measurement techniques and technology” are? There is > no evidence available (and she certainly does not provide any) that there > would be doubt among scientists that this precision can be achieved; > precisely *because* of the size of the detector that was *built* so that > this precision could be achieved, and the diligence involved in eliminating > other causes for the results. > > “On 14th Sept. 2015, during a period of approx. 0.2 seconds, the LIGO > detectors are supposed to have registered a displacement of the 40 kg > mirror of the interferometer by 10^(-18) m due to the pressure of a > gravitational wave stemming from the fusion of two black holes at a > distance of 1.3 billion light years.” > > From which we can clearly see that she has absolutely no clue what she is > talking about. > > First of all, it was not that "the mirrors were displaced", but the 4 km > long arms of the detectors were shortened and lengthened; there are full > mirrors at the end of each arm and semipermeable mirrors where the arms are > crossing, to deflect the *laser light* into the detector unit. > > It was not the "pressure" of a gravitational wave that "displaced mirrors", > but a gravitational wave is a propagating *spacetime distortion* that > *changes the length of objects when it passes through them*. As a result, > the laser light travels a longer or shorter distance than if the > gravitational wave would not pass through the experiment, and because light > is an *electromagnetic* *wave*, the pattern of interfering rays of laser > light changes. (And laser light created by commercially available lasers > can have wavelengths down to 157 nm = 1.57 × 10⁻⁷ m. Put simply, the > wavelength is the distance from one crest of a wave to the next one.) > > *That* is what was observed, and since all other known phenomena to cause > that change could be excluded, the cause had to be a gravitational wave. > Further analysis then showed where the wave must have come from. > > That LIGO consists of *two* detectors *several thousand kilometers apart* > (in Livingson, LA, and Hanford, CT) is an additional bonus, because that > allows one to see that the gravitational waves actually traveled (all at > the speed of light) from the source to one detector, through it, from it > to the other one, through that, and on in the universe. > > See also: <http://www.ligo.org/science/faq.php> > > -- > PointedEars > > Twitter: @PointedEars2 > Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail. Typical Einsteinian, ass-kisser response. First, attack the messenger and then argue that the machine behaved as was expected by theory. Of course it did. It would not be a fraud if it didn't. It's a fraud because the theory is a lie to begin with. The system was designed to generate results that perfectly agree with the theory. It's called fake injections. It's called fraud aka thievery. The truth is that gravitational waves do not exist simply because gravity is an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon, just as Newtonian physics assume. Therefore the whole LIGO thing was a fraud. Whatever waves were supposedly detected, were in fact fabricated. The system was designed in such a way as to make fake injections indistinguishable from what their crackpot model expected. Imagine that. They knew what the results would look like even before they detected them. They assumed that the theory (gravity travels at c) was correct before they tested it. How convenient. Worse, this was not a test to falsify GR, as required by proper science. It was an experiment designed to corroborate GR. Karl Popper is twisting in his grave. The UN should investigate this crap and arrest the fraudsters. It is not nice to lie to the whole world and get away with it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-03 21:32 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <1891850.irdbgypaU6@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #591656 |
mapou001@gmail.com wrote: > […] First, attack the messenger I do not have to “attack the messenger”. I only have to state the facts. Ms. Lopez *discredits herself* by posting statements of the form “not even wrong” to scientific fora *all day long*. This "petition" merely adds to her nonsense. > and then argue that the machine behaved as was expected by theory. The "machine" (I do not think that a laser, a collection of mirrors, and a detector can be called a “machine”, not even if you consider computers, , which are machines, evaluating the results; contrast that with the LHC which really *is* a huge machine with a lot of magnets to begin with) was designed to *test* the theory, not only to confirm it. Big difference. Contrary to crackpots, scientists to not assume that a theory is correct (which really means “makes predictions that fit observations well enough, until a theory comes along that makes predictions that fit observations even better”) *before* they have confirmed it by experiment. > The truth is that gravitational waves do not exist simply because gravity > is an instantaneous or nonlocal phenomenon, Evidentially and evidently, it is neither. One does not even have to investigate gravitational waves (which LSC was not the first to do, BTW) to know that. You cannot have the first clue of physics if you seriously claim that. > just as Newtonian physics assume. Newton’s law of universal gravitation (Newtonian gravity) has been *demonstrated* to be *wrong* whenever large mass or high speed are involved, starting with the precession of the perihelion of Mercury (there: large mass, namely that of Sol and its planets). Mercury in its orbit was _not_ and is _not_ where Newtonian gravity predicts it to be; it was and is very closely there where general relativity (GR) predicts it to be instead. So GR is *evidently* the *better* of these two theories of gravitation. Fortunately, as any good/better theory does, GR reduces to theories confirmed before: It reduces to Newtonian gravity for the case where masses are small; IOW, Newtonian gravity is a *special case* of general relativity, the same as Newton’s laws of motion are *special cases* of special relativity for slow speeds. ,---------------------------------------------------. : General relativity : : ,-----------------------------------------------. : : : Special relativity : : : : ,-------------------------------------------. : : : : : Newton’s laws of motion : : : : : : ,---------------------------------------. : : : : : : : Newton’s law of universal gravitation : : : : : : : `---------------------------------------' : : : : : `-------------------------------------------' : : : `-----------------------------------------------' : `---------------------------------------------------' And that is what you crackpots do not seem to get to store on your harddisks: Modern physics does _not_ deny that Newton’s laws are correct (in the sense described above) and applicable; but it has *showed* that Newton’s laws are not *universally* correct and applicable. To claim otherwise is equivalent to assuming something ridiculous such as that "followers of GR" and *all scientists preceding them* (which did not know about GR, but knew about Mercury’s precession from observation) have found a way to continuously *put* the *planet* of Mercury where it is supposed to be according to GR in such a way that *no* individual living on Terra and observing the night sky can tell that they did. That way lies madness, complete and utter insanity. > Therefore the whole LIGO thing was a fraud. Ex falso quodlibet. Or, IOW, *you* are the fraud as you pretend to know what you are talking about. It would therefore be acceptable if you finally got lost. F'up2 <news:sci.physics.relativity> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-03 13:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <152bb2b7-cdae-4abe-acb0-060373166fc1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #591757 |
On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 12:32:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >[crap] Fuck you, asshole. You, too, should go straight to jail when the shit hits the fan. And it will. Sackcloth and ashes for you, jackass. ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...AHAHAHAHA...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-03 17:06 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Misconceptions about LIGO |
| Message-ID | <nntpsb$188v$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #591761 |
On 8/3/2016 3:16 PM, LIGO Fraud Investigator wrote: > On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 12:32:11 PM UTC-7, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> [crap] > > Fuck you, asshole. You, too, should go straight to jail when the shit hits the fan. > And it will. Sackcloth and ashes for you, jackass. Do you want to make a small wager? You can put it in your will if you like, if you're willing to wait until the day you die to see if the shit hits the fan by then. > > ahahahaha...AHAHAHAHA...AHAHAHAHA... > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web