"Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"

An ambitious experiment to detect gravitational waves from
distant astronomical sources is currently in preparation (Laser
Interferometric
Gravitational Observatory - LIGO). A typical source for such waves would be
two
stars circling each other in close proximity. It is proposed to detect these
waves by means of a two axis laser array to measure the relativistic effects
of
the waves as they pass by. It is postulated that these waves will cause the
distance between the ends of the array, as sensed by Laser inteferometry, to
be
moved by the "distortion of space" as they pass the Earth. It is expected
that
this movement will be detectible by an interference pattern observable in
Laser
signals sent between the ends of the arrays. Calculations have shown that
the
gravitational wave produced by a massive star in close orbit about another
should contain enough energy to be readily detectible by this method. What
does
not seem to be mentioned is the fact that LIGO is only capable of detecting
longitudinal waves. In addition in none of these reports does mention seem
to
have been made of the fact that such waves must always be generated as
multiple
waves which cancel completely for longitudinal waves and cancel in the far
field
for transverse waves. Considering the distances involved and the size of the
LIGO array, all such observations will be made as distant far field
observations.

The generation of multiple waves (e.g.- two for a binary
system) results from the fact that, as is the case with a single
gravitational
object, the center of gravity of a gravitationally coupled multiple object
must
remain stationary as its component parts move with respect to each other. As
a
result, the gravitational wave (as seen at an "infinite distance") from one
of
the objects in a binary system will be equal in amplitude and opposite in
phase
to the gravitational wave from the other. The net gravitational radiation
from
the pair will consist of both longitudinal and transverse waves which are
equal
in amplitude. The longitudinal waves will be opposite in phase and shoud
therefore cancel completely. The transverse waves will have a very small
phase
angle between them equal to the radius of the orbit(so) involved divided by
the
distance to the source.

The transverse waves are only observable if the two objects
can be resolved as separate objects (near field radiation). If they cannot
be so
resolved (far field radiation) by the gravitational wave detector, they will
be
impossible to detect because the detector will experience only the static
field
from their common center of gravity. The cyclical field which for which
detection was hoped for will cancel. A further complication in the detection
of
the transverse wave is the fact that they will not produce a 'stretching" of
the
local horizontal, they will produce a "tilting" of the local vertical. The
LIGO
array should not capable of detecting the effect even if it has sufficinet
amplitude.

The longitudinal waves emanating from the center of gravity of
the emitting system always produce far field radiation which cancels
completely.
An additional complication results from the fact that any residual component
of
the gravitational radiation is attenuated not only by the expected inverse
square law, it suffers an additional attenuation in proportion to the cube
of
distance rather than the square of distance do the transverse waves. It
would
seem reasonable to assert that there are no longitudinal waves for LIGO to
detect.

Gravitational waves certainly do exist, we live on a world
with an enormous gravity wave detector, the oceans. The tides in the ocean
are
produced by the Moon's gravitational field. The time of high tide advances
about
an hour a day. This advancement can be considered to be the output of a
gravity
wave detector, but, that gravity wave would be undetectable at
interplanetary
distances because the gravitational waves from the Earth and the Moon would
cancel each other virtually completely! The writer has received arguments
that
the fact that binary stellar systems are observed to lose energy over time
due
to radiation of gravitational energy to the Universe shows that the
limitation
described does not occur and that gravitational waves will therefore be
detectible. Such an argument is faulty. The radiating objects are embedded
in
the Universe and, as a result, all of the radiated gravitational energy is
absorbed as "near field" radiation. It is only the shrimpy detectors that
man is
capable of building which will have difficulty in detecting transverse
gravitational waves. (In addition to the expected attenuation in wave
strength
imposed by the inverse square law, the energy received by the far field
detector
represented by the LIGO array will be reduced in proportional to the square
of
the ratio of the orbital radius of the sources divided by the distance to
the
sourced. Rotsa Ruck Fellows!

The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
http://einsteinhoax/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
http://einsteinhoax/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity" {1997}).
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE
WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND
IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm .

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not
monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the
same
courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of
our
parts, please do not raise objections that are not related to material that
you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:-

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for
over 5 years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF
THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals
who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it.
If
anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered,
the
material at the Website will be withdrawn. Challenges to date have revealed
only
the responder's inadequacy with one exception for which a correction was
provided.

Esu wrote:
"Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"




Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax" at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einst...Awww.crank.net

"Esu" wrote in message
...
| "Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"

No.


| An ambitious experiment to detect gravitational waves from
| distant astronomical sources is currently in preparation (Laser
| Interferometric
| Gravitational Observatory - LIGO).

Let's be even more ambitious.
Totally annihilate a nearby star in one huge supernova, all mass
removed and converted to light. Proxima Centauri will do nicely.
This will produce negative-going pulse as its gravity vanishes,
the biggest gravity wave imaginable.
So measure the effect of gravity by Proxima Centauri as it is now and
then calculate how much Earth's orbit will be perturbed when it is
removed.
Androcles.



A typical source for such waves would be
| two
| stars circling each other in close proximity. It is proposed to detect
these
| waves by means of a two axis laser array to measure the relativistic
effects
| of
| the waves as they pass by. It is postulated that these waves will
cause the
| distance between the ends of the array, as sensed by Laser
inteferometry, to
| be
| moved by the "distortion of space" as they pass the Earth. It is
expected
| that
| this movement will be detectible by an interference pattern observable
in
| Laser
| signals sent between the ends of the arrays. Calculations have shown
that
| the
| gravitational wave produced by a massive star in close orbit about
another
| should contain enough energy to be readily detectible by this method.
What
| does
| not seem to be mentioned is the fact that LIGO is only capable of
detecting
| longitudinal waves. In addition in none of these reports does mention
seem
| to
| have been made of the fact that such waves must always be generated as
| multiple
| waves which cancel completely for longitudinal waves and cancel in the
far
| field
| for transverse waves. Considering the distances involved and the size
of the
| LIGO array, all such observations will be made as distant far field
| observations.
|
| The generation of multiple waves (e.g.- two for a binary
| system) results from the fact that, as is the case with a single
| gravitational
| object, the center of gravity of a gravitationally coupled multiple
object
| must
| remain stationary as its component parts move with respect to each
other. As
| a
| result, the gravitational wave (as seen at an "infinite distance")
from one
| of
| the objects in a binary system will be equal in amplitude and opposite
in
| phase
| to the gravitational wave from the other. The net gravitational
radiation
| from
| the pair will consist of both longitudinal and transverse waves which
are
| equal
| in amplitude. The longitudinal waves will be opposite in phase and
shoud
| therefore cancel completely. The transverse waves will have a very
small
| phase
| angle between them equal to the radius of the orbit(so) involved
divided by
| the
| distance to the source.
|
| The transverse waves are only observable if the two objects
| can be resolved as separate objects (near field radiation). If they
cannot
| be so
| resolved (far field radiation) by the gravitational wave detector,
they will
| be
| impossible to detect because the detector will experience only the
static
| field
| from their common center of gravity. The cyclical field which for
which
| detection was hoped for will cancel. A further complication in the
detection
| of
| the transverse wave is the fact that they will not produce a
'stretching" of
| the
| local horizontal, they will produce a "tilting" of the local vertical.
The
| LIGO
| array should not capable of detecting the effect even if it has
sufficinet
| amplitude.
|
| The longitudinal waves emanating from the center of gravity of
| the emitting system always produce far field radiation which cancels
| completely.
| An additional complication results from the fact that any residual
component
| of
| the gravitational radiation is attenuated not only by the expected
inverse
| square law, it suffers an additional attenuation in proportion to the
cube
| of
| distance rather than the square of distance do the transverse waves.
It
| would
| seem reasonable to assert that there are no longitudinal waves for
LIGO to
| detect.
|
| Gravitational waves certainly do exist, we live on a world
| with an enormous gravity wave detector, the oceans. The tides in the
ocean
| are
| produced by the Moon's gravitational field. The time of high tide
advances
| about
| an hour a day. This advancement can be considered to be the output of
a
| gravity
| wave detector, but, that gravity wave would be undetectable at
| interplanetary
| distances because the gravitational waves from the Earth and the Moon
would
| cancel each other virtually completely! The writer has received
arguments
| that
| the fact that binary stellar systems are observed to lose energy over
time
| due
| to radiation of gravitational energy to the Universe shows that the
| limitation
| described does not occur and that gravitational waves will therefore
be
| detectible. Such an argument is faulty. The radiating objects are
embedded
| in
| the Universe and, as a result, all of the radiated gravitational
energy is
| absorbed as "near field" radiation. It is only the shrimpy detectors
that
| man is
| capable of building which will have difficulty in detecting transverse
| gravitational waves. (In addition to the expected attenuation in wave
| strength
| imposed by the inverse square law, the energy received by the far
field
| detector
| represented by the LIGO array will be reduced in proportional to the
square
| of
| the ratio of the orbital radius of the sources divided by the distance
to
| the
| sourced. Rotsa Ruck Fellows!
|
| The source material for this posting may be found in
| http://einsteinhoax/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
| http://einsteinhoax/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
| http://einsteinhoax/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity"
{1997}).
| EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING
ELSE
| WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS,
AND
| IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET
THIS
| REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP
FROM
| THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
|
| All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
| http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm .
|
| Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not
| monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with
the
| same
| courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both
of
| our
| parts, please do not raise objections that are not related to material
that
| you
| have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
|
| E-mail:-
|
| The material at the Website has been posted continuously for
| over 5 years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF
ANY OF
| THE
| MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
| individuals
| who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning
it.
| If
| anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively
answered,
| the
| material at the Website will be withdrawn. Challenges to date have
revealed
| only
| the responder's inadequacy with one exception for which a correction
was
| provided.
|
|

Esu wrote:

"Will the LIGO Experiment Work?"
[snip ignorant crap]

http://www.freefarts.com/farts.html
Move cursor over blinkers to hear Retic's lecture.

Psychotic ineducable boring spammer retic (Ernest Wittke),

You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png

http://www.edu-observatory.org/cranks.html
http://www.pagetutor.com/idiot/idiot.html

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf
http://www.****inggoogleit.com/
http://www.meninhats.com/d/20040430.html
http://www.you-moron.com/
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=gr...uthor%3Awittke

http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
http://www.firehead.org/~jessh/film/kubrick/Kubrick-Psycho.html
http://www.naturalchild.com/elliott_barker/prisons.html

The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999)
[snip]

Hey, stooopid spammer Ernest Wittke - Do you want EVIDENCE? Each of
the 24 GPS satellites carries either four cesium atomic clocks or
three rubidum atomic clocks in orbit, with full relativistic
corrections being applied. NAVSTAR Block II GPS satellites (currently
being launched as replacements) have two rubidium and two cesium
atomic clocks.

Internal inconsistencies in SR (meaning inconsistencies of a purely
mathematical logical nature) automatically lead to contradictions in
number theory, itself, and arithmetic, since the mathematics of
Minkowski geometry is equiconsistent with the theory of real numbers
and with arithmetic.

http://optoelectronics.perkinelmer.com/content/Datasheets/rfs2f.pdf

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html
Mathematics of gravitation
http://wugrav.wustl.edu/people/CMW/update98.pdf
http://www.astro.northwestern.edu/AspenW04/Papers/lorimer1.pdf
http://www.vallis.org/publications/tesidott.pdf
Equivalence Principle testing
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0111236
Geometric structure of reality
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0103044
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140
GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/index.html
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Experimental constraints on General Relativity
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf
Nature 425 374 (2003)
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/index.html
Relativity in the GPS system
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014
Amer. J. Phys. 71 770 (2003)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 121101 (2004)
falling light
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf
http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012
Hafele-Keating Experiment
http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html
http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html
Twin Paradox
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html
http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1473_1.asp
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405160
Black hole evaporation
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
No aether
http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/mans/clane/
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7
No Lorentz violation
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0409089
Spin-2 gravitons have problems
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics.strings/msg/ba31a00f5f26277a
(so does the proposal)
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411113
http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 261101 (2004)
Nordtvedt Effect
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403292
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310723
WMAP + Sloane Digital Sky Survey
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175
Dark matter candidates
http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll/frames.html
Carroll on what it all means.

Special Relativity is physics on a topologically trivial Lorentzian
manifold with a metric whose curvature tensor is zero. This is a
perfectly diffeomorphism-invariant condition and does not require
any particular coordinate choice. It is invariant under
the full group of diffeomorphisms. The Poincare group is
the group of *isometries* of the metric in special relativity.

The Special Relativity metric is *non-dynamical* (unlike GR). It
defines the coupling *constants* of your theory. If you change the
metric in any nontrivial way you are changing your theory. An
operation can only be called a "symmetry" of a special-relativistic
(non-gravitational) theory if it preserves the metric, and therefore
the symmetry of special-relativistic theories is the Poincare group
only. General Relativity (gravitation) has a dynamic metric.

NIM A 355 537 (1995)
Physics Letters B 328 103 (1994)
Physical Review Letters 64 1697 (1990)
Physical Review Letters 39 1051 (1977)
Physical Review 135 B1071 (1964)
Physics Letters 12 260 (1964)
Europhysics Letters 56(2) 170-174 (2001)
General Relativity and Gravitation 34(9) 1371 (2002)

http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/ae_1905_error.htm
http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/finkelstein/relativity.pdf
Longitudinal and transverse mass
Physics Today 58(3) 34 (2005)
Time passage, equator vs. poles

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.

Right, like your head has ever been withdrawn from your ass - even
when you ****.



--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf