Posted by cool_ambo on February 11th, 2016 | Comments Off on Einstein’s Gravitational Wave Theory Proven?
The LIGO under the funding of NSF has claimed
that they have proof of this theory
and have published a paper on it!
Now wait a minute!
Wait a effing minute!
The explanation was not convincing
and the experiment as described have all the signs of being faulty.
Give me a couple, or three hours,
to post my views on this….
Don’t get me wrong, though.
Einstein had an uncanny way of being on the right track.
And even if It were not proven, I would believe that he was right.
What I am at odds against is the lackluster way of
explaining how the scientists got the proof.
The device that was used for this experiment is called an interferometer.
This is not a collider, rather it splits a laser beam into two,
sends one beam towards a mirror and the other to a separate mirror.
Both are bounced back and rejoined at one spot
where their travel time is measured.
Now it so happened that the time travel is different.
So they conclude that a factor shortens the time traveled from one way
and lengthens it the other way.
In other words, they say that there is a shrinkage in one way
and there is a lenghtening on another way.
This is produced by waves of gravity resulting
from the merging of two black holes into one.
This is true. No doubt about it.
But the LIGO people’s explanation has not been very convincing.
In tne first place, the laser beam that was split must each be proven to be
identical at the point of splitting
A lot of properties have to be considered in verifying this.
Also, how can they be sure earth’s gravity,
or even the rotation of the earth,
or tidal waves, or the moon’s gravity has no effect on the experiment.
In the second place,
the graphics have been presented in 2-dimensional pictures.
The heavens are three-dimensional.
The representation might just as well be
an avocado cut in half with the seed still on its seat.
If the scientists can explain their experiment in simple words,
then no doubt, they are believable.
As Einstein said, “The theory is so simple
that even a child can understand it”
As for me, I would have reran the beam that was rejoined
through another separate splitter and re-collected the beam
twice, or many more times, for accuracy.
Recycling the experiment on the same beam would have a cumulative result
and the final difference in time would have been greater
but more conclusive.
That is, if the interferometer setup is correct.