Discussion:
Gravitational Waves: Einsteinians Brainwash the Gullible World Again
Add Reply
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-15 19:48:14 UTC
Réponse
Permalink
Raw Message
Detection of neutron star gravitational waves is far more likely than detection of black hole gravitational waves and yet LIGO conspirators haven't reported even weak and inconclusive signals (which could be compared with Integral's data and become valid evidence in the end). The reason is that faking black hole waves is safe and profitable while faking neutron star waves is dangerous - mergers of neutron stars emit light which means that Integral may expose the fraud. So Einsteiniana's brainwashers don't mention neutron stars anymore and advance a red herring - the gullible world will have to wait for 15 years to know whether black hole mergers emit light or not:

Ethan Siegel: "In the aftermath of the first LIGO detection, the Fermi Gamma-ray Burst Monitor made headlines as they claimed to detect a high energy burst of radiation coincident within a second of the gravitational wave signal. Unfortunately, ESA's Integral satellite not only failed to confirm Fermi's results, but scientists working there uncovered a flaw in Fermi's analysis of their data, completely discrediting their results. [...] Also, everything we see is perfectly consistent — and arguably, more consistent — with the notion that merging black holes don't have any electromagnetic counterparts at all. But the truth about it all is that we don't have sufficient data to decide just yet. With more gravitational wave detectors, more black hole mergers of high masses, better pinpointing of the location, and better all-sky coverage of transient events, we just might find out the answer to this. If the missions and observatories proposed to collect this data are successfully built, operated, and (where necessary) launched, then 15 years from now, we can expect to actually know the scientific answer for certain." https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/08/newest-ligo-signal-raises-a-huge-question-do-merging-black-holes-emit-light/

Ethan Siegel:

Loading Image...

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-16 07:47:15 UTC
Réponse
Permalink
Raw Message
Detecting neutron star mergers is much more likely than detecting black hole mergers because even weak and inconclusive signals could be compared with Integral's data and become valid evidence in the end. The fact that only black hole mergers have been announced unequivocally proves that gravitational waves don't exist (LIGO's discovery is a fake):

"What surprised the LIGO collaboration instead was the nature of what they'd detected. Of the various gravitational-wave-producers that LIGO might observe - the kind that disturb space-time to such an extent that LIGO could register the aftershock - the collision of binary black holes was perhaps the least likely. Supernovae, neutron stars, colliding neutron stars: These were what the LIGO collaboration foresaw as far more common candidates. And now LIGO has detected a second pair of colliding black holes." http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2016/06/16/getting-from-wow-to-yawn/

"Before the Sept. 14 detection, LIGO scientists had focused their calculations on the mergers of neutron stars, not black holes. That's because neutron stars - the dense remnants of collapsed stars - had been observed already through other means, like electromagnetic radiation, and were, thus, more predictable, said Joseph Giaime, head of the LIGO Livingston Observatory and a professor of physics and astronomy at LSU." http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/communities/article_1c4abc2e-33f6-5f38-8174-c33b95e97f09.html

"Advanced LIGO is likely to observe mergers of double neutron star (NS/NS) binaries at a rate of a few to a few hundred per year; and black-hole/neutron-star (BH/NS) binaries perhaps in a comparable range of rates." Benjamin J. Owen Pennsylvania State University, Endorsed by: David H. Reitze (University of Florida), Stanley E. Whitcomb (LIGO-Caltech) http://www8.nationalacademies.org/ssbsurvey/DetailFileDisplay.aspx?id=146

"Just over a year ago, LIGO detected its first gravitational-wave signal: GW150914, produced when two black holes merged. While we didn't expect to see any sort of light-based signal from this merger, we could expect to see transient electromagnetic signatures in the case of a neutron star-black hole merger or a neutron star-neutron star merger - in the form of a kilonova or a short gamma-ray burst. While we haven't yet detected any mergers involving neutron stars, LIGO has the sensitivity to make these detections..." http://aasnova.org/2016/10/26/narrowing-the-search-after-gravitational-wave-detections/

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-17 06:58:32 UTC
Réponse
Permalink
Raw Message
LIGO conspirators in trouble (the world is gullible but not infinitely gullible):

Sabine Hossenfelder: "Was It All Just Noise? Independent Analysis Casts Doubt On LIGO's Detections. A team of five researchers - James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, and Pavel Naselsky - from the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, presented their own analysis of the openly available LIGO data. And, unlike the LIGO collaboration itself, they come to a disturbing conclusion: that these gravitational waves might not be signals at all, but rather patterns in the noise that have hoodwinked even the best scientists working on this puzzle. [...] A few weeks ago, Andrew Jackson presented his results in Munich. A member of the local physics faculty (who'd rather not be named) finds the results "quite disturbing" and hopes that the collaboration will take the criticism of the Danes to heart. "Until LIGO will provide clear scientific(!) explanation why these findings are wrong, I would say the result of the paper to some extent invalidates the reliability of the LIGO discovery." https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/06/16/was-it-all-just-noise-independent-analysis-casts-doubt-on-ligos-detections/

It wasn't "just noise". It was a FAKE:

"On September 16, 2010, a false signal - a so-called "blind injection" - was fed into both the Ligo and Virgo systems as part of an exercise to "test ... detection capabilities". [...] But take a look at the visualisation of the faked signal, says Dr Kiriushcheva, and compare it to the image apparently showing the collision of the twin black holes, seen on the second page of the recently-published discovery paper. "They look very, very similar," she says. "It means that they knew exactly what they wanted to get and this is suspicious for us: when you know what you want to get from science, usually you can get it." The apparent similarity is more curious because the faked event purported to show not a collision between two black holes, but the gravitational waves created by a neutron star spiralling into a black hole. The signals appear so similar, in fact, that Dr Kiriushcheva questions whether the "true" signal might actually have been an echo of the fake, "stored in the computer system from when they turned off the equipment five years before"."
http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life/the-review/why-albert-einstein-continues-to-make-waves-as-black-holes-collide#full

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-17 08:02:37 UTC
Réponse
Permalink
Raw Message
Sinisa Lazarek: "One thing that struck me as very odd ( don't wanna use a harsher word) is this part:

"A major shortcoming of the Danish group's analysis that they [LIGO] pointed out to me is that the Danes use methods based on tutorials from the LIGO Website, but these methods do not reach the quality standard of the - more intricate - data analysis that was used to obtain the published results."

what the hell... ?! You gather the data... you make that data available to the rest of the world... you give the instructions on how to analyse that data, and now you say that the methods you gave are not the methods you yourself used?! This alone should be a huge red flag. Regardless of weather the detection was real, regardless if Danes did or did not make a mistake... what kind of b.s. is this?" http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2017/06/16/was-it-all-just-noise-independent-analysis-casts-doubt-on-ligos-detections-synopsis/

Pentcho Valev

Loading...