It is currently Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:17 pm


Why L.I.G.O. is Blind to Gravity Waves

Forum for suggesting experimental confirmation of the theory.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Why L.I.G.O. is Blind to Gravity Waves

PostThu Feb 19, 2015 3:43 pm

When I first read about the proposed gravity wave experiment named LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory) I never thought it could work, and now after it has been in operation for years, it seems I have no reason to change my mind.

Although I am 100% certain that we are surrounded by gravity waves, I remain sceptical about Kip Thorne et al. method of using interferometry to measure length contraction.

Physical dimensions are coupled to time, and time is a function of ground potential, so to believe it is somehow possible to measure length contraction/expansion is (forgive my bluntness) nonsense.

As a gravity wave travels through the LIGO laboratory, groundpotential will rise and fall, this will have the effect of lengthening and shortening both the x leg and the y leg of the LIGO interferometer by the exactly the same amount and will therfore always result in a null change. The gravity wave travelling through the x and y targets or any other part of the laboratory, simply has no measurable effect, because ∆v is a direct function of ∆ø and obviously since a gravity wave can not change the mass of fermions there can be no relative movement.

So does this mean gravity waves can not be detected?

Fortunately not, in fact the apparatus to measure gravity waves can be made much, much smaller and a heck of a lot cheaper. It will most likely fit on a bench top, and maybe some time in the future it will fit in your iPhone.

According to GP theory, a rise or fall in ground potential changes the electron to proton mass ratio, by the formula;

\[ \phi_e = \frac{\Phi_p - \phi_{gnd}}{2} \sqrt{1-\frac{\phi_{gnd}^2}{\Phi_p^2}}\]

Where the constant \(\Phi\) is the proton potential and \(\phi_e \: and \: \phi_{gnd} \) are the electron potential and ground potential respectively.

So all that is needed to measure gravity waves is an apparatus to measure a variance in the electron to proton mass ratio, this ought to be possible with some kind of cyclotron, which no doubt already exists.

In the mean time scientists at LIGO are granted more funding to build "advanced LIGO" see http://www.ligo.caltech.edu

Of course no one is going to admit that all the money was spent on flawed science, so no doubt the results will be published in some very large publications, showing that gravity waves are very weak and barely detectable, and that any time soon the results will be rolling in.

I think gravity waves in terms of groundpotential rise and fall might be quite large, making them rather easy to detect, providing we use the right kind of equipment.

Love to hear more thoughts on this, so if you are involved in LIGO or related sciences, maybe you would care to post a reply.

Steven


PS: I say this with confidence, as if I am wrong, no one will remember ;)
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...
Offline

FourLeaves

  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2014 7:00 pm

Re: Why L.I.G.O. is Blind to Gravity Waves

PostSat Feb 21, 2015 5:46 am

To propose an interesting experiment that I do not believe had been carried out before.
First I will make a few assumptions:
Gravity waves exist and can be measured.
Gravity waves travel at the speed of light. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity)
The force of gravity varies with distance from the center of Earth, such that the attractive force is weaker the farther away from Earth. (See Newton's Law of Gravitation)

For terminology, a line tangent to the surface of Earth will be referred to as horizontal and a line perpendicular to a horizontal line will be referred to as vertical. Skyscrapers have vertical displacement, LIGO's arms have horizontal displacement. https://ssl.panoramio.com/photo_explorer#view=photo&position=5&with_photo_id=10232107&order=date_desc&user=1211517 - LIGO's arms.


Expanding on the notion that the force of gravity weakens as the distance from the source increases, I propose a question to be tested. Can the varying force of gravity along vertical lines be used to identify gravitational waves when compared to the non-variance of gravitational force along horizontal lines? Essentially/experimentally, if one of LIGO's arms is displaced vertically and the other arm displaced horizontally (as opposed to the current setup of two horizontal arms) will the detection of gravity waves be possible?
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Re: Why L.I.G.O. is Blind to Gravity Waves

PostSat Feb 21, 2015 9:54 am

Fourleaves,

I understand your proposal, but if GP theory is correct, and I for one have to believe it is, then it makes no difference which direction you rotate the LIGO arms.

Let me try and prove why this is the case.

All solid objects around us including the arms of LIGO are essentially made of protons, as we have seen from GP theory, the proton potential is a constant, i.e. it is completely invariable and sits steady at 938 MV.

The only variable in GP theory is ground potential, and the only thing that changes velocity (∆v) is (∆ø) which is defined as (proton potential - observers ground potential).

At the end of LIGO's long arm is a suspended chunk of steel it has a fixed potential being it's mass energy in eV divided by the number of nucleons is invarant (930 MV), a gravity wave travelling through that block of steel can not in any way change its mass or it's energy content relative to the observer.

So the relative velocity with respect to the observer is \(\Delta v = c(\frac {\Delta \phi}{\Phi})= 0\)

In this case the block of steel was at rest before the gravity wave passed through and since it's potential did not change as a result of the passing wave \(\Delta v\) and therefore \(\Delta x\) obviously has to be zero.

Now when the gravity wave reaches the observer, causing a temporary fall followed by a rise in ground potential, it certainly does affect \(\Delta \phi\), because now there is a temporary difference between the invariant potential in the block of steel and the observers ground potential so \(\Delta \phi\) goes negative and positive and so does \(\Delta v\) and \(\Delta x\).

So when the gravity wave passes through he observer, space stretches and shrinks in all directions, which is why LIGO will never measure gravity waves.

I guess it is pretty fortunate that we don't observe the world wobble every time a large wave passes through, and let's face the fact that human history has no account of such wobbles ever having been observed.

This is one of the simplest equations ever to describe the physical world.

\[\Delta v = c(\frac {\Delta \phi}{\Phi})\]

Its derivation is simple and even a child can follow how it tells us that a difference in velocity is a difference in potential, it's that simple.

On the blackboard below I show how a gravity wave propagates through matter, it is a ripple in space-time which travels through matter, without affecting the potential of the matter itself, it only affects the local ground potential.

gravitywave.jpg
Gravity Wave
gravitywave.jpg (30.71 KiB) Viewed 2804 times


In the image below we can see how a gravity wave travelling through third party matter, does not in any way affect the difference between the observers potential and the potential of third part matter (as in the arms of LIGO),

nowave.jpg
Wave travelling through third party matter
nowave.jpg (32.83 KiB) Viewed 2804 times


In the image below we see the gravity wave travelling through the observer, causing a rise and fall in ground potential, which does affect \(\Delta v / \Delta x \) but sadly for LIGO, it is omnidirectional, so it will not manifest itself as a difference between one arm and the other placed at 90˚.

wave.jpg
Wave travelling through observer
wave.jpg (32.5 KiB) Viewed 2804 times


I trust GP theory 100%, and I have just made a $1 bet with another scientist on Twitter that LIGO will never detect gravity waves, and he assures me that LIGO will announce a discovery in less than 4 years.

Malcolm Fairbairn.png
Malcolm Fairbairn
Malcolm Fairbairn.png (36.45 KiB) Viewed 2804 times


I doubt it will take 4 years to win my bet, but I am looking forward to receiving the polished and framed 1 pound coin from Malcolm :)

I am not suggesting that LIGO is/was a waste of money, if that was the case we could say the same about the Cavendish experiment which set out to measure the ether, and we all know how it's complete failure led to the Lorenz equation and later to Special and general relativity.

The spectacular failure of LIGO to measure gravity waves will no doubt do the same for Groundpotential.

Steven
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...
Offline
User avatar

Steven Sesselmann

Site Admin

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2014 9:41 pm
  • Location: Sydney - Australia

Re: Why L.I.G.O. is Blind to Gravity Waves

PostSun Feb 14, 2016 3:40 pm

So, it is official, the LIGO team announced the detection of one 10 ms gravity wave and in the usual spectacular way held a press conference and said "We did it!"

Technically I have lost my one dollar bet with Malcom Fairbairn, and will pay him the dollar, but I reserve my judgement about the gravity wave detection for now. As noted above, this is not a bet against Einstein, it's a bet against the LIGO apparatus.

If LIGO detected a gravity wave then something is seriously wrong, it just shouldn't happen, it's just another Michelson-Morley experiment and just as the M & M experiment failed to detect an ether, so too LIGO should fail to detect gravity waves.

GW150914 must be a mistake or a hoax.

Steven
Steven Sesselmann
Only a person mad enough to think he can change the world, can actually do it...

Return to Experimental confirmation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron