Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Figure 1: The gravitational-wave event GW150914 observed by the LIGO Hanford (H1, left column panels) and Livingston (L1, right column panels) detectors. Times are shown relative to September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC. For visualization, all time series are filtered with a 35–350 Hz bandpass filter to suppress large fluctuations outside the detectors’ most sensitive frequency band, and band-reject filters to remove the strong instrumental spectral lines. Top row, left: H1 strain. Top row, right: L1 strain. GW150914 arrived first at L1 and 6.9 ms later at H1; for a visual comparison, the H1 data are also shown, shifted in time by this amount and inverted (to account for the detectors’ relative orientations). Second row: Gravitational-wave strain projected onto each detector in the 35–350 Hz band. Solid lines show a numerical relativity waveform for a system with parameters consistent with those recovered from GW150914 confirmed to 99.9% by an independent calculation (details in original). Shaded areas show 90% credible regions for two independent waveform reconstructions. One (dark gray) models the signal using binary black hole template waveforms. The other (light gray) does not use an astrophysical model, but instead calculates the strain signal as a linear combination of sine-Gaussian wavelets. These reconstructions have a 94% overlap. Third row: Residuals after subtracting the filtered numerical relativity waveform from the filtered detector time series. Bottom row: A time-frequency representation of the strain data, showing the signal frequency increasing over time. (Caption edited from the original, Ref. 6)

THis is the digested caption from the CMI article.

1 posted on 02/17/2016 8:11:19 AM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: fishtank

“... It is still unreasonable....”

Really?

You folks are making me a bit ashamed of my Christianity.

Please leave physics to those who actually understand math.

Please.


2 posted on 02/17/2016 8:22:24 AM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Can anyone give a practical explanation of this article?


3 posted on 02/17/2016 8:29:48 AM PST by bramps (It's the Islam, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

None since God created gravity.


7 posted on 02/17/2016 8:47:13 AM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank
mad scientists photo:  053_zpsb1850b7f.jpg
8 posted on 02/17/2016 8:47:40 AM PST by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all sarmed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

And what are these solutions? Please do not cite the thoroughly-discredited Russell Humphreys. His book single-handedly set Christian apologetics back decades.


10 posted on 02/17/2016 8:51:23 AM PST by backwoods-engineer (AMERICA IS DONE! When can we start over?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

The latest report on LIGO’s ‘discovery’ of Einstein gravitational waves is no more connected to reality than the fictitious black hole:

Crothers, S.J., The Painlevé-Gullstrand ‘Extension’ - A Black Hole Fallacy, American Journal of Modern Physics, 5, Issue 1-1 , February 2016, Pages:33-39,
http://vixra.org/pdf/1512.0089v1.pdf

no more real than the fictitious Cosmic Microwave Background:

Robitaille P.-M., WMAP: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.1, pp.3-18, (2007), http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2007/PP-08-01.PDF

Robitaille P.-M., COBE: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.17-42, (2009), http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2009/PP-19-03.PDF

no more real than the fictitious gaseous Sun:

Robitaille P.-M., Forty Lines of Evidence for Condensed Matter — The Sun on Trial: Liquid Metallic Hydrogen as a Solar Building Block, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp.90-142, 2013, http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2013/PP-35-16.PDF

and no more real than the fictitious Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission:

Robitaille, P.-M., Crothers, S. J., “The Theory of Heat Radiation” Revisited: A Commentary on the Validity of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission and Max Planck’s Claim of Universality, Progress in Physics, v. 11, p.120-132, (2015),
http://vixra.org/pdf/1502.0007v1.pdf

Those who believe in ghosts and goblins see them lurking in the shadows and assign their action to what they don’t understand. Cosmologists likewise see their beliefs lurking in their shadows and assign the action of their beliefs to what they don’t understand.

Mass-media induced mass-hysteria over ghosts and goblins, holes and bangs, Einstein gravitational waves, Higgs bosons and higgsinos, CMB, etc. does not constitute science. The BICEP2 report was also surrounded with similar hysterical scientists and mass-media induced mass-hysteria. That science is now done but mass media hysteria is a symptom of its decay, not a sign of achievement. Rational thought no longer prevails.

We now await Hawking et al to announce their contact with the aliens:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/scientist-warns-world-to-think-twice-before-replying-to-alien-signals-from-outer-space-10408201.html

They must be out there too; after all, the scientists have a journal for them: The International Journal of Astrobiology, published by Cambridge University, Mr. Hawking’s learned school.

Stephen J. Crothers


14 posted on 02/17/2016 9:01:11 AM PST by Yollopoliuhqui
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Maybe God made Einstein his go-to guy for explaining to the human race what He is and how He works.


16 posted on 02/17/2016 9:08:18 AM PST by equaviator (There's nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

The book of General Relativity will need an update.


17 posted on 02/17/2016 9:11:03 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

Scientists have FOR DECADES tried very hard to disprove God and prove speculations like the Big Bang and evolution. But science ALWAYS leads us back to Genesis. Scientists are constantly frustrated by that. They sit in their labs and wring their hands over their inability to disprove God.


21 posted on 02/17/2016 9:29:10 AM PST by GodAndCountryFirst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: fishtank

No impact. God made it so. End of discussion.


22 posted on 02/17/2016 9:38:36 AM PST by JimRed (Is it 1776 yet? TERM LIMITS, now and forever! Build the Wall, NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


27 posted on 02/17/2016 11:17:18 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Facing Trump nomination inevitability, folks are now openly trying to help Hillary destroy him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl; betty boop
Here we go again!

Self-imposed medieval ignorance on blatant display...:-(

28 posted on 02/17/2016 11:23:09 AM PST by TXnMA ("Allah: Satan's current alias. "Obama": Allah's current ally...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson