A Third LIGO Detection of a Black Hole Merger, 3 Billion ly Distant

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by danshawen, Jun 2, 2017.

  1. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,929
    How absurd. You really believe that it is more important for the scientists to hold on to a current theory than to advance knowledge? You are either trolling or just incredibly out of touch. By the way your prediction, holds about as much weight as a flea turd (don't feel bad, my prediction would be the same weight, we are not physicists - remember?).
     
    danshawen likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    But that's how it is. It makes sense to hold on to GR till it becomes absolutely absolutely untenable.

    Neither I am trolling nor I am incredibly out of touch. Wait and watch.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,533
    Huh??!! As already noted by The God, for many decades, probably not long after the inception of GR, there was a very good mathematical idea of what at least low amplitude GW's looked like. Check out any textbook on GR covering the subject e.g. MTW's Gravitation - written in the early 1970's.
    One day I must watch that fantasy sci-fi flick.
    Whose saying it is a fraud? Simulated detections - faux GW's owing to electronic injections into instruments and/or mirror mounts, would invalidate real detections how?
    PS: We still don't know for sure the detected GW's are those of GR. AS covered in previouis threads, experts affiliated with aLIGO, including Thorne, admit radically different G4v remains a viable contender.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    Me too, I suppose. I just watched that one scene, and that was enough fantasy science for me. Someone evidently thought GWs could be much stronger (larger amplitude) than the ones we have already detected. I don't see how.

    If the faux gravity waves are nothing more than mechanical coupling of noise to the mirrors, well that would be just sad. I still don't see how you can do that the first time without knowing what one should look like, or what sensitivity would be required. We really didn't. All we knew for certain was that previous sensitivity upgrades didn't work. There was really no reason to expect they would ever work, other than on paper.
     
  8. RADII Registered Member

    Messages:
    92
    The uncertainty is why they are also trying to validate using timings of pulsars:

    "While mergers of SMBHB's are expected to be common emitters of GW radiation, modulating pulsar timing observations have not yet detected any evidence for a GW signal (Arzoumanian et al. 2016). Pulsar timing observations, unlike LIGO, should be more sensitive to SMBHB mergers (Shannon et al. 2015).

    0402+379, with a separation of 7.3 pc between its core components, is one of the most important precursors of GW sources, and is important to understand the reason behind the low incidence of such systems. From the elliptical morphology of the 0402+379 host galaxy (Andrade-Santos et al. 2016), we believe this object to be the result of a major merger."

    [Constraining the Orbit of Supermassive Black Hole Binary 0402+379 K. Bansal1, G. B. Taylor1, A. B. Peck2, R. T. Zavala3, & R. W. Romani4]
     

Share This Page