Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Gravitational radiation

  1. Oct 20, 2003 #1

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    the search for "gravity waves", is ongoing, i cannot comprehend
    all the consequences if they are not found, but i understand
    they wont be minor.
    anyone have thoughts on this?
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 20, 2003 #2

    mathman

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    (Written by a non-expert.) General relativity predicts their existence. If they can be proven not to exist (not just hard to find), this will indicate a serious flaw in the theory.
     
  4. Oct 20, 2003 #3
    I think they do exist, but am quite sure that they don't exist in the form that they're looking for them. Of course I have no evidence yet .
     
  5. Oct 21, 2003 #4

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    They have been looked for for 50 years and not found yet. The failure to find them is blamed on the insensitivity of the detectors, not on GR. You can see the scientists trying to lower the bar on LIGO and prepare the public for a null result. Tis will again be blamed (crrectly) on LIGO, not GR.


    Gravity waves are indeed the weakest, faintest large scale phenomena we have ever tried to detect.
     
  6. Oct 22, 2003 #5

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    http://physicsweb.org/article/world/12/5/4/1

    The work is a significant step towards achieving the nearly incredible measurement sensitivity aimed for in gravity-wave research - equivalent to detecting a change less than the radius of an atom in a distance as large as that from the Earth to the Sun.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    there is little more on this web site, i picked this quote
    to emphasise the accuracy needed to find these waves.
     
  7. Oct 23, 2003 #6
    We've used stereophotogrammetry to measure pressure waves on mars. Would'nt this help in finding gravity waves? You need a matrix of some sort to see the waves with stereophotogrammetry.
     
  8. Oct 23, 2003 #7

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    We've used stereophotogrammetry to measure pressure waves on mars. Would'nt this help in finding gravity waves? You need a matrix of some sort to see the waves with stereophotogrammetry.

    pardon my ignorance but i do not understand "stereophotogrammetry"
    can you expand on this?
     
  9. Oct 23, 2003 #8

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think they do exist, but am quite sure that they don't exist in the form that they're looking for them. Of course I have no evidence yet

    JONATHAN are you waiting for a negative result before you print
    your theory, or are you willing to spill the beans now?
    "he who dares":smile:
     
  10. Oct 24, 2003 #9
    Have a look a this for now, http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2002/pdf/1229.pdf

    Stereophotogrammetry might not be what we need to detect radiation, if gravity is a form of radiation. Pressure is not a form of radiation but does come in the form of radiating waves.
     
  11. Oct 24, 2003 #10

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    sorry i have no idea what this is about
     
  12. Oct 24, 2003 #11
    I can't say I know what its about either.

    Here's another place where stereophotogrammetry was used, note the use of the term "gravity waves" in this passage


    Effects of ocean waves on remote imaging sensors (stereophotogrammetry), pp.84-93
    Author(s): John W. McLean, Kaman Aerospace Corp., Tucson, AZ,
    USA;
    Aly Graham, Kaman Aerospace Corp., Tucson, AZ, USA.

    Abstract: A simulation model is described which generates
    simulated images of underwater objects as viewed
    through a wind-roughened ocean surface. The physical
    model includes representations for the two-dimensional
    wavy surface (gravity waves), beam spread at the
    surface due to small scale roughness (capillary waves),
    and beam spread and attenuation due to multiple
    scattering and absorption in the water. The sensor is
    modeled as a monostatic imaging system of arbitrary
    incidence angle, with emphasis on LIDAR systems.
    Results of the simulations are presented, illustrating
    the distortion of images in active seas, and the loss
    of resolution due to surface and volumetric scattering.
     
  13. Oct 25, 2003 #12

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    from what i can understand this is a remote mapping system
    incorperating stereo photography to define the topography
    of a surface.
    it seems this system has many uses but finding grvity waves
    is not one of them:smile:
     
  14. Oct 25, 2003 #13
    This is probably a terminological confusion. Geophysicists and oceanographers have a term, "gravity wave", which refers to a kind of water wave. It has nothing to do with gravitational radiation, or the propagation speed of gravity. To avoid confusion, the preferred term for wave solutions of gravitational radiation is "gravitational wave", not "gravity wave", although you will sometimes see the latter (particularly among popularized treatments).

    So anyway, no, stereophotogrammetry is not useful to detect gravitational waves.
     
  15. Oct 25, 2003 #14
    I guess we can leave that instrument to the geophysicists.

    What is used in the detection of gravitational waves is the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory.

    http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/docs/G/G030024-00.pdf

    This document is an evaluation of its good and bad points. You need Acrobat to read this.
     
  16. Oct 27, 2003 #15

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    To (hopefully) clarify another possible confusion in terminology:
    - "gravitation radiation" (the subject of this thread) has been "observed" in at least one binary pulsar (a pair of closely orbiting neutron stars), in the sense that the orbits appear to be changing in a way which implies a loss of energy in the system. The energy loss is hypothesised to be gravitational radiation, and the observed and predicted changes in the pulsar's orbit are consistent with GR.
    - "gravitational waves" have not yet been detected, though LIGO (now up and running) and LISA (set to be launched in 2011) are expected to make positive detections.

    The gravitational radiation from binary pulsars - at least, those we've found to date - is too weak to be detected by LIGO. However, if a neutron star binary (or a black hole-neutron star one) were to coalesce, the death spiral would generate strong enough gravitational radiation for LIGO to detect. If a suitably distant* NS-NS coalescence were observed in EM (especially in gamma!), and the expected gravitational radiation were not detected, GR would be likely be in trouble.

    By the time LISA goes live, son-of-LIGO should have detected at least one death spiral (and several other violent events besides).

    *we don't want it to be close - the gravitational radiation would certainly be detected, but no humans would be left alive to record it!
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?