Is there a simple way to detect gravitational waves?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by jcc, Jun 10, 2015.

  1. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    let's see, photon has no mass no charge, yet it carries em fields and energy?

    electrons can relax? can emit photons? red and blue photons? is red photon vibrating 4 x 10^14 times per second? or is red photon passing a point 4 x 10^14 times per second?

    exited atoms do vibrate and produce gravitation waves, it is fact. is gravitation radiation propagating at c speed? is it has frequency? is its energy inversely proportional to r^2?

    your call, open your mind.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    jcc, this is crank bullshit.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Tiassa, you might consider treating this thread the same way. Locked and in the cesspool.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,108
    Mod Hat ― Closure and Redirect

    I'm getting sick of this.
     
  8. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    can't handle the truth?

    i don't blame you.
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    33,766
    jcc:

    We can't detect the gravitational waves from the sun. Not yet, anyway.

    Most of the energy in the hot gases in the sun goes nowhere. It stays right there in the sun. Some energy escapes from the surface of the sun as light, which carries some energy away. We detect it as light and other forms of electromagnetic radiation on Earth. The Sun also emits lots of charged particles.

    That's part of it. A lot of the sun is a plasma, though.

    There's constant absorption and emission happening in the sun, so you end up with radiation in thermal equilibrium with the matter. This leads to a blackbody spectrum.

    I'm not sure what "mechanism" you want.

    Electrons change orbital when they gain or lose energy. The electromagnetic interaction creates or destroys photons in the process.

    A red and a blue photon have different frequencies.

    Mass and charge are not required for something to carry energy.

    Photons have momentum \(p=E/c\), where \(E\) is the photon's energy.

    It's a discrete value that the energy of a particle or other object can have.
     
  10. river

    Messages:
    13,078
    If gravity has a physical wave to it , then objects should simply ride the wave .

    Hence :

    Strong attraction and weak attraction at equal intervals
     
    danshawen likes this.
  11. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,950
    One way to produce gravity waves is by large masses orbiting other large masses (typically very slowly). These are waves of time dilation, which is one reason you are not likely to detect them using either an interferometer or with multi-ton Weber bars and attached piezoelectric sensors. The first method is nothing more than an updated Michaelson-Morely experiment, which will always have a null result for gravitational waves. The second idea operates on the same principle as the Earth-moon tides, but since the dimensions of bars are not referenced to anything that measures time not also under the influence of the same gravity waves, it will never detect anything. The Earth-moon tides work as a gravity wave detector as a sort of water clock. Water closer to the moon side of the Earth undergoes a different time dilation /acceleration than the water on the far side.

    What is needed to detect gravitational waves like the ones due to planets orbiting the Sun in our solar system, is to measure time dilation effects in as many different directions as possible using a clock that is based on quantum entanglement and their rates referenced to another such entanglement clock located at a great distance from the gravitational influences you are trying to measure.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2015
  12. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Why the hell y'all feed this troll instead of using the ban hammer, I just don't get.

    He has been banned from here more than once, yet you succumb to his anti-education fucking bullshit for page after page of hand-holding, as if you can't really believe someone could be so abysmally stupid and still goad further responses from (Your name here)?

    What motivation could there be to allow this dumbass hatful of hammers to keep shitting on this forum?

    Fucking ban me.
     
  13. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,950
    It is true that his previous posts were lackluster, Dr Toad, but since this particular subject is one in which a lot of mainstream physics money was and is being spent, so far with nothing but null results, I, for one would be willing to give jcc the benefit of the doubt. Better and more productive to allow discussion that might bring in some better ideas than to hone dozens more LIFO mirrors and beam splitters to finer than 1 atom planar tolerances, and all of the wasted expense that process will entail.

    I don't know or care whom LIFO employed for their design, but even Joe Weber, a naval engineer turned physicist, was not as wrong. Dr Weber was no crackpot. Not particularly original in his designs, but he did the best he could. When I attended U of M in the '70s, he had a pretty good cult going, and more than one big project there failed. The electron ring accelerator failed because it ran out of money to redesign its focusing magnets. Some of that team went on to much greater success in physics. Failure sometimes just means you dreamt big, and ran out of money.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2015
  14. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,486
    Which theory of gravity are you referring to? It's not GR, for which the only allowed GW's have purely spatial component distortions. Time only enters as propagation parameter e.g. cos(ωt - kx).
    Maybe - but not because they won't detect g_tt time distortions.
    Same comments as per above.
    You are confusing near-field tidal variations with vastly weaker hoped-for GW's. Chalk and cheese.
    See above comments.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  15. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,950
    Oh, yeah. Another case of the Minkowski version of Euclidean/Pythagorean/ hyperbolic rotation / time tacked on as an extra physical dimension / afterthought kind of relativistic reasoning that makes GR only an approximation (although in cases like bulk celestial mechanics with only a few bodies in motion, and a dominant mass, it's the best we've got). Well, that just explains a lot. You win honors and accolades for being forthright enough to provide any detail on this flawed idea.

    The underlying principle of operation was evidently treated as something of a closely guarded classified U.S. Navy top secret or something in the 1970s. An easy expedient for hiding bad engineering, don't you think? Like Teller's flawed H-bomb design that would never have worked.

    LIFO no doubt plays a similar game with what should be classified as basic science research.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2015
  16. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,486
    Umm....I think that last bit was not a back-handed compliment. Anyway, if it helps, I actually have some sympathy for the idea that any possible GW should involve temporal distortion. Here's cut & paste from another site where GW detection came up:
     
    danshawen likes this.
  17. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,806
    I agree about jcc and have reported him, hoping he will eventually get banned. I expect he is accumulating the points necessary for that to happen. Meanwhile I avoid his obvious wind-ups.
     
  18. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    you exclude scale of an entity, without realizing it.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  19. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    are you sure? science has to be sure.

    if heat and light from the sun are gravitation waves produces by hot gasses, aren't we feel/see it all the time? why you say gravitation waves is not detectable?
     
  20. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    can we detect that heat and light from the sun?

    heat and light as you said, as i suggested, are produced by exited/vibrating hot gasses/atoms on the sun?
     
  21. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,009
    Yes we are sure.
    They aren't so we don't.
    They may be detectable but we have not detected them yet.
     
  22. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,009
    I certainly can.
    Actually the heat and light is from nuclear fusion and by the time the emitted gamma rays reach the surface their energy has been lowered to mostly UV, IR and the visible spectrum.
     
  23. jcc Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    412
    are the atoms of the hot gasses on the sun vibrating?

    are they produce gravitation waves?

    is the energy of the gravitation wave proportional to its frequency?

    where that energy goes/becomes?
     

Share This Page