‘No evidence for or against gravitational waves’: Big Bang 'ripples' too weak to be significant.

NATURE ^ | 06/02/2014 | RON COWEN

[DannyTN]

“All we are is dust in the wind”

[SeekAndFind]

[UCANSEE2]

All we are is dust in the wind.

[dfwgator]

[SeekAndFind]

Seriously though, The main reason for postulating gravitational waves is that Einstein was staunchly against the idea of nonlocal interactions, i.e., “spooky actions at a distance” as he called them. He insisted that nothing can move faster than the speed of light, including gravity and EM waves.

But now we realize that Einstein was wrong about the spookiness of quantum physics.

[freedumb2003]

The Scientific Method once again proves itself.

There is no other area of knowledge that polices itself as rigorously as Science.

This is a null value determination. But a really good catch.

[ruesrose]

Ahhh yes. The Big bang. When there was nothing and then it blew up.

[DannyTN]

LOL, that’s great. I haven’t seen that one.

[House Atreides]

And I thought that this was settled science and that the evidence of primordial gravitational waves was incontrovertible and accepted by 97% of physicists.

[HandyDandy]

Nothing comes from nothing.

[ConservingFreedom]

Not that I'd heard. Maybe you're thinking of the microwave background radiation?

[DannyTN]

Science polices itself, but it does suffer from too much group think and not enough scientific testing which results in slowing down scientific progress and the embrace of invalid hypotheses. Too often new scientific ideas have to wait an entire generation before they will be adequately investigated and adopted.

We've seen with global warming the political influence on science. And the willingness of too many scientists to get on board and promote global warming without criticallly examining the data.

RIDICULED DISCOVERERS,VINDICATED MAVERICKS"

Genius Hall of Vindication

[Cboldt]

And God said, "let there be light," and there was light.

At least one scientist proposes a modification to Einstein's theory of gravity, whereby the beginning was more of a big "push" than explosion. And he's not the only scientist who supposes the sum total energy (including the energy represented by matter) is exactly zero.

No matter how you decide to look at it, the universe is a vast and intriguing place.

[Lazamataz]

Nothing comes from nothing.

Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.

[onyx]

Time to Put This Baby To Bed!!

Less Than $900. To Go Green!!
Please Help End This Quarter's FReepathon

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

Time to Put This Baby To Bed!!

Less Than $900. To Go Green!!
Please Help End This Quarter's FReepathon

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

Time to Put This Baby To Bed!!

Less Than $900. To Go Green!!
Please Help End This Quarter's FReepathon

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[Moonman62]

According to the article, within six months there will be much better data for dust and CMB light that could settle the issue. It’s been over 13 billion years. A few more months won’t hurt.

[Moonman62]

The Big bang. When there was nothing and then it blew up.

My understanding, which could be wrong, is that a vacuum would have to exist. I don't know about the vacuum back then, but the vacuum we have today is much more than nothing.

[onedoug]

Drat.

[mlo]

Something comes from nothing.