ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th February 2016, 01:49 PM   #41
fishbob
Seasonally Disaffected
 
fishbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chilly Undieville
Posts: 6,986
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
We will be able to weaponise it and create a gravity gun.
Simple: All you need is 78 gazilldillion tons of rapidly spinning mass and a way to keep it from sucking in the entire solar system.
__________________
"When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder.
"It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels
I hate bigots.
fishbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 02:16 PM   #42
ben m
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,387
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
If nothing impedes the progress, how is it detected? How does it affect mass? Are they detecting the ether moving?

I'm trying to imagine something that affects mass but is not affected by mass.
Gravitational waves affect mass; they apply little accelerations that make things fall in different directions. LIGO had some big, massive mirrors that were hanging vertically, but the gravity wave made them "fall" horizontally (back and forth a few times) by a few attometers each way; I guess they must have gotten up to speeds of femtometers per second.

Yes, those mirror motions did affect the gravitational waves a little bit---it's not quite right to say "nothing" impedes the progress of a gravity wave. But gravity waves are, by some absurd number of orders of magnitude, better at passing through matter than anything else in the Universe. Better than photons, better than neutrinos, probably better than dark matter.
ben m is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 02:17 PM   #43
p0lka
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,057
this gives us another way to detect the universe then yeah?
We use the electromagnetic spectrum atm, but this makes us like an insect on the surface of water that now has the ability to detect the water vibration itself, rather than waiting for the light to get to us?

Last edited by p0lka; 11th February 2016 at 02:20 PM.
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 02:55 PM   #44
Mikemcc
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,748
So we can now detect extreme events, determine where it happened (and hence when) , and also the scale of it. Hopefully the pending improvements will allow more (and smaller) events to be detected. But will this allow us to eventually map the local universe in the way that we can with radio waves? The detectors involved are huge and expensive.

Where do those brighter than me see this technology going?
Mikemcc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 03:26 PM   #45
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,120
Is this the first thing that has been detected that has the same speed as light yet is not part of the electromagnetic spectrum? I know certain particles travel at ALMOST the speed of light. But these do not count.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 03:29 PM   #46
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,950
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Are there any potential, practical benefits from this?
Proving the incompetents who think they have theories better than Einstein when they have no functional physics or math background to justify their "theories" and nutcake mutterings wrong again is definitely one!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 03:31 PM   #47
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,950
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
Well, I'm glad to see that on this island Earth, an advanced scientist finally constructed a working Interocitor Interferometer.
I see what you did there(TIE)
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:04 PM   #48
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 37,535
This is damn cool.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:19 PM   #49
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by The Garduan
The particular ripple moved the LIGO detectors by about one thousandth the width of a proton (the tiny particle found at the heart of a hydrogen atom).
That's all? Just that? That's enough 'signal' to interprete this as 'huge evidence' and 'a ripple in spacetime'?
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously in past, present and future.(Einstein) Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of the unfolding of these events, moment by moment.

Last edited by Maartenn100; 11th February 2016 at 05:23 PM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:27 PM   #50
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,444
Originally Posted by ben m View Post
Yes, those mirror motions did affect the gravitational waves a little bit---it's not quite right to say "nothing" impedes the progress of a gravity wave. But gravity waves are, by some absurd number of orders of magnitude, better at passing through matter than anything else in the Universe. Better than photons, better than neutrinos, probably better than dark matter.
Which is why they are also so much harder to detect.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:34 PM   #51
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,444
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's all? Just that? That's enough 'signal' to interprete this as 'huge evidence' and 'a ripple in spacetime'?
A girl sends a letter to her lover: "I don't love you anymore, I've found someone else.", and on reading it he is heartbroken.

A different girl sends a letter to her lover, but this time she has it printed on microfilm. At first he sees only a few spots on the film, and feels nothing, but as he later magnifies the image, it reads, "I don't love you anymore, I've found someone else."

Is this lover any less heartbroken?
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:47 PM   #52
ben m
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,387
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's all? Just that? That's enough 'signal' to interprete this as 'huge evidence' and 'a ripple in spacetime'?
Yes, because this particular type of tiny motion could only have been caused by a ripple in spacetime.
ben m is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:48 PM   #53
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 59,402
http://imgur.com/gallery/EXlzn

Explanation in comic form.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:49 PM   #54
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's all? Just that? That's enough 'signal' to interprete this as 'huge evidence' and 'a ripple in spacetime'?

Yep.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:49 PM   #55
ben m
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,387
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
Is this the first thing that has been detected that has the same speed as light yet is not part of the electromagnetic spectrum? I know certain particles travel at ALMOST the speed of light. But these do not count.
Technically we are not *sure* whether all of the are massive. (We know at least two of the three neutrino masses are nonzero, but the third could be zero. It'd be weird.)

Otherwise, yes, only photons and gravitons travel at c.
ben m is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 05:58 PM   #56
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
http://imgur.com/gallery/EXlzn

Explanation in comic form.

Source (which is linked in that Imgur album, but also includes a video): http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1853
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 06:16 PM   #57
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by ben m View Post
Yes, because this particular type of tiny motion could only have been caused by a ripple in spacetime.
How do you know that for sure? Maybe there are other, unexplained phenomena outhere wich are no gravitational waves. How do you know for sure that it is not something else yet unknown? It is just an interpretation (confirmation bias) to interprete this 'signal' as evidence for your theory, because you are so focused on it, to find it. Maybe it is something we don't know yet. Why jumping to conclusions that 'it can only be a gravitational wave'.
The claim of the existence of gravitational waves is an extra-ordinary claim. You need exta-ordinary evidence.
You need a lot more then one 'move' of one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the public.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously in past, present and future.(Einstein) Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of the unfolding of these events, moment by moment.

Last edited by Maartenn100; 11th February 2016 at 06:29 PM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 06:30 PM   #58
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
How do you know that for sure? Maybe there are other, unexplained phenomena outhere wich are no gravitational waves.

Perhaps. But this observation matches predictions of gravitational waves so well that there's currently no reason to suspect "something else".

Quote:
Maybe it was dark matter?

Dark matter doesn't work like that.

Quote:
Maybe it was a neutrino?

Neutrinos don't work like that. A single neutrino isn't going to separately alter the lengths of two 4km-long tunnels. Also, the waves were detected at both LIGO observatories, which are, I think, roughly 2,000 miles apart.

If you're interested, why not try reading up on the topic?

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 11th February 2016 at 06:45 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 06:32 PM   #59
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,721
IMO, this discovery must come close to turning the "Theory of Relativity" into the "Fact of Relativity"... it is that important!

It also means that the people designing the detectors must now know they are on the right track... refinements in the future will likely lead to the discovery of gravitational waves from less massive gravitational events.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 06:32 PM   #60
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
How do you know that for sure?
He doesn't. Neither does anyone else.

That's science.

How do you know for sure that there's a massive ball of plasma, ~150 million km from us, radiating light, IR, ...? You - Maartenn100 - don't. Not for sure.

Quote:
Maybe there are other, unexplained phenomena outhere wich are no gravitational waves. Maybe it was dark matter? Maybe it was a neutrino? How do you know for sure that it is not something else? It just some interpretation (confirmation bias) to interprete every little signal as evidence for their theory, because you are so focused on it, to find it. Maybe it is something we don't know yet.
Yep.

Could be invisible pink fairies too. Cavorting with invisible blue unicorns.

Maartenn100, do you *do* science?
Quote:
Why jumping to conclusions that 'it must be a gravitational wave'.
Consistent. With a well-established, well-studied theory. Quantitatively. Objectively.

It's called science.
Quote:
The claim of the existence of gravitational waves is an extra-ordinary claim.
You need more then one 'move' one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the tax money payers.
Huh?

The (US, Italian, German, Australian, ...) taxpayers are already convinced.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 07:49 PM   #61
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,082
Ask yourself this question: would James Randi accept a 'move' of my spoon of less then 1/1000th of the size of a proton to accept the existence of telekinesis? I don't think so. Where is James Randi when we need him?
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously in past, present and future.(Einstein) Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of the unfolding of these events, moment by moment.

Last edited by Maartenn100; 11th February 2016 at 07:56 PM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 07:56 PM   #62
jonesdave116
Master Poster
 
jonesdave116's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 2,622
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ask yourself this question: would James Randi accept a 'move' of less then 1/1000th of the size of a proton to accept the existence of telekinesis? I don't think so. Where is James Randi when we need him?
I assume you've read the paper; yes?
__________________
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 07:57 PM   #63
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ask yourself this question: would James Randi accept a 'move' of less then 1/1000th of the size of a proton to accept the existence of telekinesis?
Dunno. But I don't think so.
Quote:
I don't think so.
Good. We agree then.
Quote:
Where is James Randi when we need him?
Why do you want JR?

And why is your question relevant?

I mean, is there a well-established, well-tested model of telekinesis? One that's comparable to GR, as a model of gravity (and more)?

Doesn't exist, right?

So your comparison is between invisible pink fairies and apples.

Maartenn100, do you *do* science? Do you even know what science is?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 08:05 PM   #64
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by jonesdave116 View Post
I assume you've read the paper; yes?
Why would anyone, taxpayer or not, want to read the paper?!?

Or any paper?

That'll only lead you to consider data (of the quantitative kind), analyses (of the quantitative kind), comparisons with GR-based models (of the quantitative kind), ...

How could such things possibly be relevant to invisible pink fairies, telekinesis, and how mainstream scientists are conspiring to rip taxpayers off with expensive experiments which only "prove" what they want?

Sheesh.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 08:13 PM   #65
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,950
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
How do you know that for sure? Maybe there are other, unexplained phenomena outhere wich are no gravitational waves. How do you know for sure that it is not something else yet unknown? It is just an interpretation (confirmation bias) to interprete this 'signal' as evidence for your theory, because you are so focused on it, to find it. Maybe it is something we don't know yet. Why jumping to conclusions that 'it can only be a gravitational wave'.
The claim of the existence of gravitational waves is an extra-ordinary claim. You need exta-ordinary evidence.
You need a lot more then one 'move' of one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the public.
How do you know,other forces/phenomena/whatever the hell there is. It doesn't matter because you are not going to find them because you do not want to learn how and practice doing it. Real scientists do not just sit around saying ( or writing pointlessly on the internet) crap, thinking crap and not bothering to learn the math (or even vaguely understand it). Your (way) betters have done it again. You haven't and never will.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 08:29 PM   #66
macdoc
Philosopher
 
macdoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Planet earth on slow boil
Posts: 7,927
Maarteen
Quote:
How do you know that for sure? Maybe there are other, unexplained phenomena outhere wich are no gravitational waves. How do you know for sure that it is not something else yet unknown? It is just an interpretation (confirmation bias) to interprete this 'signal' as evidence for your theory, because you are so focused on it, to find it. Maybe it is something we don't know yet. Why jumping to conclusions that 'it can only be a gravitational wave'.
The claim of the existence of gravitational waves is an extra-ordinary claim. You need exta-ordinary evidence.
You need a lot more then one 'move' of one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the public.
Because millions of dollars and 4 decades have been spent eliminating other forces and the fundamental way we understand the forces in the universe has been confirmed AGAIN.
EVERY result and theory is open to new evidence...if you have some, present it ...if you have none except meaningless blather then STFU

You are a waste of electrons.

The very fact you ask the question "how do you know for sure " means you do not understand science at all.
You invoke Randi...you are not a skeptic ...you are merely ignorant of your universe and the body of human knowledge that underpins this breakthrough.

You wouldn't understand evidence if it bit you because you are ignorant of the field and as for joe public ....they get on aeroplanes blithely despite the reality that aerodynamic theory is a work in progress.

The computer you post your nonsense on depends on unimaginably small aspects of reality.....you really realy don't get it do you..

This is not some random thing being looked for ...it is an outcome of Einstein's theory...a predicted outcome....that's WHY it was looked for.

Last edited by macdoc; 11th February 2016 at 08:34 PM.
macdoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 08:37 PM   #67
surreptitious57
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 403
If gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light does it mean that they are massless and can not experience time
like a photon? Does it also mean it is no longer true that nothing can travel as fast as light in vacuum? Are binary black
holes caused by binary stars dying at the same time? If binary solar systems are so common why has it taken this long
to discover gravitational waves? How important is the discovery with regard to formulating a theory of quantum gravity
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 08:55 PM   #68
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by surreptitious57 View Post
If gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light does it mean that they are massless and can not experience time
like a photon?
A bit of oranges and apples (GW are like classical waves; photons are quantum beasts), but yes.
Quote:
Does it also mean it is no longer true that nothing can travel as fast as light in vacuum?
Yes ... except that GW were expected to travel at c, from circa 1916 ... the only thing that's changed is that GW has now been directly detected.
Quote:
Are binary black holes caused by binary stars dying at the same time?
This is an active area of research, and (IIRC) there are two pathways to the formation of BBHs (of the stellar mass kind) that are considered most promising. Sorry, but I don't have the papers to hand, and don't want to rely upon memory, but in neither do the two stars in a binary 'die at the same time'.
Quote:
If binary solar systems are so common why has it taken this long
to discover gravitational waves?
Binaries (ordinary star-ordinary star) are very common; BBHs are likely very rare.

The GW from a BBH inspiral is weak, and the rate at which such events happen not yet well constrained (or even understood); it seems that had GW150914 happened while the original LIGO was 'up', it may have been detected (GW detectors are 'live' much less than 24x365).
Quote:
How important is the discovery with regard to formulating a theory of quantum gravity
Not at all, at the moment ... except that the detection constrains the mass of any graviton to be incredibly small.

With a few hundred BBHs inspirals observed, plus comparable numbers of BNS (binary neutron star) and BH-NS inspirals, plus detection of such events in the electromagnetic spectrum, it may be possible to put some weak constraints on some QG theories.

Better constraints will come from LISA, or relict GW from inflation (i.e. CMB observations), but I think it's far too soon to do anything more than speculate.

This arXiv preprint may contain a lot that will address at least some of your questions: Astrophysical Implications of the Binary Black-Hole Merger GW15091
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 09:23 PM   #69
surreptitious57
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 403
Why do stars in a binary system not die at the same time? Does one have larger mass than the other or is one older than
the other? Are binary black holes rare because the stars have insufficient mass to become black holes? Or is that one dies
first and becomes a black hole and sucks the other one in when it becomes a black hole that then leaves only just the one
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 09:24 PM   #70
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,120
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
IMO, this discovery must come close to turning the "Theory of Relativity" into the "Fact of Relativity"... it is that important!

It also means that the people designing the detectors must now know they are on the right track... refinements in the future will likely lead to the discovery of gravitational waves from less massive gravitational events.
Actually no. No matter how much evidence there is, it would always be called a theory. A theory is an explanation of what we observe.

To complete the picture we need several more gravitational waves detected.

I wonder what the wavelength of the waves are?
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 09:29 PM   #71
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 59,402
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
You need a lot more then one 'move' of one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the public.
No you don't. All you need is a flashy press conference and a lot of pundits talking about it on television.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 09:30 PM   #72
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,082
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
Actually no. No matter how much evidence there is, it would always be called a theory. A theory is an explanation of what we observe.

To complete the picture we need several more gravitational waves detected.

I wonder what the wavelength of the waves are?
I totally agree.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously in past, present and future.(Einstein) Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of the unfolding of these events, moment by moment.

Last edited by Maartenn100; 11th February 2016 at 09:39 PM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 10:43 PM   #73
surreptitious57
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 403
In science theory is the highest classification possible incorporating a body of knowledge which is as close to being
objectively true as it can be. For something to be a theory it to has be subject to the most rigorous and consistent
testing of all. Evolution is a theory. Gravity is a theory. Special Relativity is a theory. General Relativity is a theory
Electromagnetism is a theory. So does not mean just an idea or hypothesis which is what the lay definition means
__________________
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 11:04 PM   #74
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ask yourself this question: would James Randi accept a 'move' of my spoon of less then 1/1000th of the size of a proton to accept the existence of telekinesis?

But if it were predicted that a spoon could only be moved at most, say, 2/1000th of the size of a proton, then an observed move of 1/1000th the size of a proton would certainly be rather significant.


Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
To complete the picture we need several more gravitational waves detected.

There are rumors (posted earlier in this thread) that LIGO has detected two more gravitational waves in December. But those obviously haven't been confirmed yet. The one announced on Thursday was detected in September (the very first month it was back online after a 5-year upgrade).
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 11:05 PM   #75
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,648
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ask yourself this question: would James Randi accept a 'move' of my spoon of less then 1/1000th of the size of a proton to accept the existence of telekinesis? I don't think so.
If you could do it from 1.3 billion light years away and JR had access to LIGO equipment I think he would - except telekinesis doesn't exist, whereas, it would appear, gravity waves do.
Quote:
Where is James Randi when we need him?
JR does not test science, he challenges pseudoscience.

Gravity waves have no attraction for him, in that regard.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th February 2016, 11:15 PM   #76
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,775
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
I wonder what the wavelength of the waves are?

It increased as the black holes drew closer (and orbited faster), but... 2000 km at it's peak, according to this factsheet, if I'm reading that correctly.

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 11th February 2016 at 11:28 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2016, 12:20 AM   #77
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,376
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
........
The claim of the existence of gravitational waves is an extra-ordinary claim. You need exta-ordinary evidence.
You need a lot more then one 'move' of one thousandth the width of a proton to convince the public.
Jesus H...

They already got more than one movement. They got two........identical traces at identical facilities thousands of kilometres apart, and at exactly the right distance in time apart to confirm that they were measuring the same thing. They then spent nearly 5 months checking and testing and calculating to be absolutely certain that there was no other possible explanation, so that idiots on the internet wouldn't immediately jump to the conclusion that they'd made something up to spoil their own silly little theories.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2016, 01:11 AM   #78
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,721
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
It increased as the black holes drew closer (and orbited faster), but... 2000 km at it's peak, according to this factsheet, if I'm reading that correctly.
That's 150hz!! (assuming the gravity waves travel at c)

That is a lot lower than I would have expected.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2016, 01:14 AM   #79
smartcooky
Philosopher
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 9,721
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Jesus H...

They already got more than one movement. They got two........identical traces at identical facilities thousands of kilometres apart, and at exactly the right distance in time apart to confirm that they were measuring the same thing. They then spent nearly 5 months checking and testing and calculating to be absolutely certain that there was no other possible explanation, so that idiots on the internet wouldn't immediately jump to the conclusion that they'd made something up to spoil their own silly little theories.

And I imagine a fair bit of that would be brainstorming to dream up, and then systematically eliminate anything that could have caused the effect at both locations.
__________________
As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
- Henry Louis Mencken - Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
smartcooky is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th February 2016, 01:24 AM   #80
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 24,120
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
It increased as the black holes drew closer (and orbited faster), but... 2000 km at it's peak, according to this factsheet, if I'm reading that correctly.
We need detectors that are 1000km long. That way the detector would be a lot more sensitive. This distance is half a wavelength. Could they be built? Do we have tunnels that long? Remember we need two of them at right angles.

Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
That's 150hz!! (assuming the gravity waves travel at c)

That is a lot lower than I would have expected.
150hz is what the link says. So you are correct.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:22 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.