Hints of gravitational waves in the stars?

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Finding hints of gravitational waves in the stars

Scientists have shown how gravitational waves—invisible ripples in the fabric of space and time that propagate through the universe—might be "seen" by looking at the stars. The new model proposes that a star that oscillates at the same frequency as a gravitational wave will absorb energy from that wave and brighten, an overlooked prediction of Einstein’s 1916 theory of general relativity. The study, which was published today in the journal Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, contradicts previous assumptions about the behaviour of gravitational waves.

"It’s pretty cool that a hundred years after Einstein proposed this theory, we’re still finding hidden gems," said Barry McKernan, a research associate in the American Museum of Natural History’s Department of Astrophysics, who is also a professor at CUNY’s Borough of Manhattan Community College; a faculty member at CUNY’s Graduate Center; and a Kavli Scholar at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics.

Read more...

[taniwha]

The effect might be due to a heat mirage could it not, but time will tell.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

The effect might be due to a heat mirage could it not, but time will tell.

No it couldn't.

[keithisco]

What a poor bit of theoretical "research". So much of it is based on unproven assumptions and extrapolations. No mention is made of Phase variance (which would throw one of their assumptions out of the window) let alone the fact that Gravitational Waves are as yet, still a purely theoretical concept

[sepulchrave]

It sounds like a sensible model, but I'd be surprised if it actually worked.

I doubt most gravitational waves have enough energy to noticeably enhance the brightness of a star (above the regular chaotic oscillations that naturally occur) to be detectible.

[toast]

.... let alone the fact that Gravitational Waves are as yet, still a purely theoretical concept

Wrong.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

Wrong.

Loathe as I am to agree with someone whose objections are frequently based on his personal hatred of conventional science rather than any actual evidence, in this case keithisco is correct.

The only claimed detection of gravitational waves made so far is from the BICEP2 experiment and the researchers that made the claim have lowered their own confidence in the results (see HERE, HERE and HERE).

As these claims are unconfirmed and heavily disputed gravitational waves remain a purely theoretical concept.

However since the entire point of this new search is to attempt to find such gravitational waves it does rather make keithisco's argument that they are only theoretical illogical. That is rather the point, to look for them, to confirm their existence, so that they cease to be just theoretical.

[keithisco]

Loathe as I am to agree with someone whose objections are frequently based on his personal hatred of conventional science rather than any actual evidence, in this case keithisco is correct.

The only claimed detection of gravitational waves made so far is from the BICEP2 experiment and the researchers that made the claim have lowered their own confidence in the results (see HERE, HERE and HERE).

As these claims are unconfirmed and heavily disputed gravitational waves remain a purely theoretical concept.

However since the entire point of this new search is to attempt to find such gravitational waves it does rather make keithisco's argument that they are only theoretical illogical. That is rather the point, to look for them, to confirm their existence, so that they cease to be just theoretical.

Play nicely Waspie... and stop telling folk what I personally believe. I was brought up in Conventional Science with Higher Degrees in Aerospace engineering. The one thing that was always impressed on me was to challenge the Status Quo. Newton and Euclid have worked very nicely when determining orbital injection (Einstein not required), and planning trajectories etc.

As to your other statement ("However since the entire point of this new search is to attempt to find such gravitational waves it does rather make keithisco's argument that they are only theoretical illogical") - how can a "fact" become "Illogical" in your perception when describing 2 very different concepts?

One particular misconception, that many young'uns have been taught (myself included) is that a gravity well is formed because the Earth 's mass makes a "dent" in spacetime (usually described as like a rubber mat (spacetime) being compressed by the weight of the Earth on top of it... does anybody else see the glaring contradiction here (maybe they don't teach that anymore, I hope not anyway)?

Another small point to consider... the mass of an object below where you are standing on the surface of the earth, must necessarily decrease the further you move towards the centre of said mass, because at some point, there is greater mass above than below... ergo sum, standing dead centre in a perfectly spherical mass you will weigh nothing (still retaining inertia of course). This leads me to believe that a "Gravity Well" is purely a "Surface Effect"

Just a couple of rough ideas - not worked through...