Have scientists detected gravitational waves?

[UM-Bot]

Recent rumors suggest that gravitational waves may have been directly detected for the first time.

Gravitational waves - ripples in the fabric of space-time that carry energy across the universe - were first proposed by Albert Einstein as a consequence of his General Theory of Relativity back in 1916.

Read More: http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/290411/have-scientists-detected-gravitational-waves

[Duke Wellington]

Recent rumors suggest that gravitational waves may have been directly detected for the first time.

Read More: http://www.unexplain...itational-waves

If confirmed it will get rid of any notion of dark matter.

I remember scientists sending up a satellite to detect freak waves in the ocean and discovering they occur more frequency than what the existing models predicted. They had to apply quantum mechanics to under how those waves randomly combined to produce so many 30m high monsters. The same lesson will come about with gravity if it does indeed come in waves. It will be far stronger than what relativity predicts in places where waves combine in certain ways.

[_Only]

Sounds like mp3-2016.

[pallidin]

I guess I don't fully understand the implications should this become verified, but hey, they're the scientists, so, ok.

[Aftermath]

I guess I don't fully understand the implications should this become verified, but hey, they're the scientists, so, ok.

From the article: "If gravitational waves have been discovered, astronomers could use them to observe the cosmos in a way that has been impossible to date. “We would have a new window on the universe,” Krauss said."

Meaning: "Gravitational waves should penetrate regions of space that electromagnetic waves cannot. It is hypothesized that they will be able to provide observers on Earth with information about black holes and other exotic objects in the distant Universe. Such systems cannot be observed with more traditional means such as optical telescopes or radio telescopes, and so gravitational-wave astronomy gives new insights into the working of the Universe. In particular, gravitational waves could be of interest to cosmologists as they offer a possible way of observing the very early Universe." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave)

[Dark_Grey]

If confirmed it will get rid of any notion of dark matter.

Will it? I thought 80+% of the makeup of the Universe is an unknown, which they call "dark matter". Whereas gravitational waves are just...gravitational waves. Very important discovery, but not the same as discovering actual dark matter. Unless my understanding is way off, which is entirely possible.

[pallidin]

@Aftermath

Is it analytically ideal to have such a detection device on earth itself?

Seems like a whole lot could potentially be in interference (tectonic movement, ocean movement, etc...)

[Calibeliever]

@Aftermath

Is it analytically ideal to have such a detection device on earth itself?

Seems like a whole lot could potentially be in interference (tectonic movement, ocean movement, etc...)

I thought I heard about a plan to put a detector in space years ago. Somewhere at a distant Lagrange point to minimize those effects. I haven't heard anything in a long time though.

[Duke Wellington]

Will it? I thought 80+% of the makeup of the Universe is an unknown, which they call "dark matter". Whereas gravitational waves are just...gravitational waves. Very important discovery, but not the same as discovering actual dark matter. Unless my understanding is way off, which is entirely possible.

Waves are often mistaken as being linear (traveling in a straight line from one point to another). They are actually non-linear (spread out in all directions from A) meaning gravity waves often end up overlapping with other gravity waves (assuming they exist) merging together to produce an area of strong gravity or cancelling each other out altogether.

Too much credit is given to Einstein because Special Relativity does not deal with gravity being a wave (unlike what the poorly written article tries to suggest). A new theory of gravity will be needed. There would be areas in space where enough gravity waves overlap to surpass the strength of even a black-hole. It also means ideas about black-holes need revising because if they're emitting gravity waves then that is something escaping from them besides the theorised Hawking Radiation.

Areas of super strength gravity may also experience time flow in reverse, and if we could manufacture one make new types of propulsion possible.

Edited January 12, 2016 by RabidMongoose

[Dark_Grey]

Waves are often mistaken as being linear (traveling in a straight line from one point to another). They are actually non-linear (spread out in all directions from A) meaning gravity waves often end up overlapping with other gravity waves (assuming they exist) merging together to produce an area of strong gravity or cancelling each other out altogether.

Too much credit is given to Einstein because Special Relativity does not deal with gravity being a wave (unlike what the poorly written article tries to suggest). A new theory of gravity will be needed. There would be areas in space where enough gravity waves overlap to surpass the strength of even a black-hole. It also means ideas about black-holes need revising because if they're emitting gravity waves then that is something escaping from them besides the theorised Hawking Radiation.

Areas of super strength gravity may also experience time flow in reverse, and if we could manufacture one make new types of propulsion possible.

So gravitational waves, pulsing outward in all directions from it's center, sometimes overlap and create areas of strong gravity that could be a filler for dark matter? I understand your explanation (which was well done,) but knowing how gravitational waves work, how does that relate to dark matter?

[Why not]

I read an article within the last few months saying that they had just finished an 11 year study with sensitive satellites that many scientist thought for sure could find gravity waves. And " absolutely nothing was found" is what I remember the article saying.

Very interesting to learn more about this.

[Duke Wellington]

So gravitational waves, pulsing outward in all directions from it's center, sometimes overlap and create areas of strong gravity that could be a filler for dark matter? I understand your explanation (which was well done,) but knowing how gravitational waves work, how does that relate to dark matter?

Special Relativity treats gravity as a linear force in that while it considers how two bodies attract each other it ignores the gravity radiating off in every other direction too. That 'other gravity' would be quite powerful inside a galaxy with all those waves overlapping each other. That stronger than predicted gravity might mean we dont need dark matter to account for observations regarding the spin of galaxies. Its a simple case of us understating how much gravity is emitted by bodies inside a galaxy because we're ignoring its non-linear component.

What happens if you have several black holes near each other? There would be a location between them all where there is super strength gravity under the right setup.

[Aftermath]

@Aftermath

Is it analytically ideal to have such a detection device on earth itself?

Seems like a whole lot could potentially be in interference (tectonic movement, ocean movement, etc...)

It's not ideal to have detection devices here on earth (LIGO). Not only is background noise a problem but we are talking about very, very tiny waves and due to spacial limitations the "net" to capture these waves is small. The best way to detect gravitational waves would be in space, like the LISA Pathfinder (in orbit at the L1 Lagrange point). Not only is background noise (i.e., solar wind and cosmic radiation) mitigated with shielding, the distance between instruments could be hundreds of thousands of miles apart making the "net" much, much bigger and more likely to capture gravitational waves. At this time, the technology isn't there yet, but that is the path forward.

[pallidin]

It's not ideal to have detection devices here on earth (LIGO). Not only is background noise a problem but we are talking about very, very tiny waves and due to spacial limitations the "net" to capture these waves is small. The best way to detect gravitational waves would be in space, like the LISA Pathfinder (in orbit at the L1 Lagrange point). Not only is background noise (i.e., solar wind and cosmic radiation) mitigated with shielding, the distance between instruments could be hundreds of thousands of miles apart making the "net" much, much bigger and more likely to capture gravitational waves. At this time, the technology isn't there yet, but that is the path forward.

Could we place one-half of the detector on our own moon?

Or is that too problematic and/or scientifically non-substantial?

[Dark_Grey]

Special Relativity treats gravity as a linear force in that while it considers how two bodies attract each other it ignores the gravity radiating off in every other direction too. That 'other gravity' would be quite powerful inside a galaxy with all those waves overlapping each other. That stronger than predicted gravity might mean we dont need dark matter to account for observations regarding the spin of galaxies. Its a simple case of us understating how much gravity is emitted by bodies inside a galaxy because we're ignoring its non-linear component.

What happens if you have several black holes near each other? There would be a location between them all where there is super strength gravity under the right setup.

Fascinating...thanks for that. Last question: what do you do for a living?

[Aftermath]

Special Relativity treats gravity as a linear force in that while it considers how two bodies attract each other it ignores the gravity radiating off in every other direction too. That 'other gravity' would be quite powerful inside a galaxy with all those waves overlapping each other. That stronger than predicted gravity might mean we dont need dark matter to account for observations regarding the spin of galaxies. Its a simple case of us understating how much gravity is emitted by bodies inside a galaxy because we're ignoring its non-linear component.

What happens if you have several black holes near each other? There would be a location between them all where there is super strength gravity under the right setup.

I thought Special relativity "treats" gravity as nonexistent; while General relativity predicts gravitational waves.

It is interesting to imagine the spinning of galaxies as the result of the interaction of "super-massive" gravitational waves, I wouldn't put the kibosh on dark matter just yet.

[Aftermath]

Could we place one-half of the detector on our own moon?

Or is that too problematic and/or scientifically non-substantial?

I think it merely comes down to: what is most feasible?. At this time, it's more feasible to place equipment here on earth... we are getting to the place where a Lagrange orbit (like LISA Pathfinder) is feasible... but would it ever be feasible to place equipment on the moon? In my opinion, the only problem would be getting the equipment to the moon safely.

[Calibeliever]

Special Relativity treats gravity as a linear force in that while it considers how two bodies attract each other it ignores the gravity radiating off in every other direction too. That 'other gravity' would be quite powerful inside a galaxy with all those waves overlapping each other. That stronger than predicted gravity might mean we dont need dark matter to account for observations regarding the spin of galaxies. Its a simple case of us understating how much gravity is emitted by bodies inside a galaxy because we're ignoring its non-linear component.

What happens if you have several black holes near each other? There would be a location between them all where there is super strength gravity under the right setup.

Interesting idea. I only have a layman's knowledge of physics but this is pretty thought provoking.

[ShadowSot]

Could we place one-half of the detector on our own moon?

Or is that too problematic and/or scientifically non-substantial?

I think that would still create problems with background interference.

[Waspie_Dwarf]

If confirmed it will get rid of any notion of dark matter.

When you first posted this I was interested to see what your thinking was, as this statement flies in the face of conventional wisdom.

Waves are often mistaken as being linear (traveling in a straight line from one point to another). They are actually non-linear (spread out in all directions from A) meaning gravity waves often end up overlapping with other gravity waves (assuming they exist) merging together to produce an area of strong gravity or cancelling each other out altogether.

This showed me how ((I think) you had come to your conclusion. It should also have given you a big clue as to why your conclusion is wrong.

Firstly let's assume your "super gravity" idea is right (it isn't but I'll come back to that in a moment).

Currently dark matter is needed because observations of the behaviour of objects such as galaxies require there to be more mass (and therefore gravity) than can be observed by conventional means.

You seem to be proposing your areas of "super gravity" as the source of this extra gravity. However your opening sentences destroy this argument:

Waves are often mistaken as being linear (traveling in a straight line from one point to another). They are actually non-linear (spread out in all directions from A) meaning gravity waves often end up overlapping with other gravity waves (assuming they exist) merging together to produce an area of strong gravity or cancelling each other out altogether.

(my emphasis).

For every area of your "super gravity" there is an area of cancelled out gravity. You can not count on one whilst ignoring the other, on average the gravity will be the same. This can not account for the behaviour of galaxies and so the need for dark matter remains.

But there is a more fundamental problem with your idea. The interference patterns you observe with light, radio or sound may make detection easier or harder depending on whether you are experiencing constructive or destructive interference but it in no way affects the power of the original signal, When you see light and dark areas in the double slit experiment the original light source is just the same. What you are proposing would cause "light" and "dark" spots in the detection of gravity waves but would not cause a change in the actual amount of gravity. Since we are not measuring gravity directly by gravity waves but by the observed effect it has on galaxies these interference patterns are irrelevant.

In short, the detection of gravity waves will not change the notion of dark matter one iota.

[sepulchrave]

Yeah, Waspie, I was wondering about RabidMongoose's posts too.

Technically gravitational waves are non-linear, at least waves with relatively large amplitudes and/or waves relatively near a massive source (in comparison to the wavelength of the wave), but RabidMongoose's description of what ``linear'' and ``non-linear'' mean in reference to waves is completely incorrect.

[pallidin]

Indeed. The suggestive aspect that gravitational waves necessarily "stretch and compress space-time" infers a nonlinearity.

Or maybe I have that wrong. Either way, it's curious to be sure, even though I don't know squat.

[pallidin]

Say, I have a question...

Is "gravity" the only currently known force that can actually alter space-time?

[Aftermath]

Re: gravitational waves...

"a slight distortion in one region of space distorts nearby regions, and in the end, there is a moving distortion which speeds along at the highest possible speed (the speed of light). Such travelling distortions of space geometry are called gravitational waves."

"...that all distortion takes place in a plane perpendicular to the direction in which the wave travels."

(http://www.einstein-online.info/elementary/gravWav)

[barbco196]

Gravity doesn't exist though. If you can't SEE it, touch it. It must not be real, right?