Why Invest Billions in LIGO if We're Certain About Gravity Waves?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter muccasen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ligo
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the rationale behind the significant investment in the LIGO project, particularly in light of the ongoing search for gravitational waves. Participants explore the implications of LIGO's detection capabilities, the relationship between gravitational waves and astronomical events, and the potential for future discoveries or failures in detection.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about LIGO's effectiveness, comparing it to a Hi Fi enthusiast without results.
  • Others note that LIGO has not yet reached full sensitivity, with one participant mentioning a 10% chance of detection.
  • Some participants argue that LIGO has better odds of detecting gravitational waves in the next decade compared to SETI.
  • A participant highlights a recent Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) that LIGO did not detect gravitational waves from, questioning the implications of this absence of detection.
  • Concerns are raised about the possibility that gravitational waves do not exist, contradicting general relativity, especially if future upgrades to LIGO still yield no detections.
  • Some participants suggest that a lack of detection from events expected to produce gravitational waves could indicate flaws in the detection method or in the understanding of general relativity.
  • Others counter that there is already indirect evidence supporting the existence of gravitational waves, questioning the need for further investment in LIGO if certainty exists.
  • A comparison is made to the construction of telescopes despite existing knowledge of light waves, raising questions about the motivations behind funding LIGO.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some skeptical about LIGO's potential and others defending its importance. There is no consensus on the effectiveness of LIGO or the implications of its current lack of detection.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific astronomical events and detection probabilities, but the discussion remains open-ended regarding the implications of LIGO's findings or lack thereof. The relationship between gravitational waves and observed cosmic events is also under scrutiny.

muccasen
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
ok guys maybe I missed something but this project looks more and more like a Hi Fi enthusiast tuning his kit with excited enthusiasm. But no music is heard.

:devil: Ok so a few years or so I said this would fail through an error of priciple. LOL I no nothing compared to these guys... so why no results after all these years?
 
Space news on Phys.org
They have yet to get to full sesitivity.

Edit

I think the last time i looked they gave a 10% chance of detection.
 
Last edited:
I give LIGO much better odds of detection in the next decade than SETI.
 
Vast said:
I give LIGO much better odds of detection in the next decade than SETI.

LOL.
 
On a serious note, the next generation (10 fold better) LIGO should answer many questions.
 
wolram said:
On a serious note, the next generation (10 fold better) LIGO should answer many questions.

Recently a Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) was detected coming from the direction of the Andromeda galaxy. This is just the sort of event LIGO has been waiting 2 years for. The idea was that a collision of two massive bodies (possibly black holes) would be marked by a GRB and a gravity wave. LIGO did not detect a gravity wave and so they concluded that either the collision occurred much further away than the Andromeda galaxy or that the GRB was originated by something other than a massive collision. It never crossed their minds for a nanosecond that the reason they did not detect any gravity waves during the GRB event (or the during the previous two years that LIGO has been operation), is that possibly gravity waves do not exist, in contradiction with theory of general relativity. I wonder if after another two years of no detection with ten fold sensitivity, will they start to question the existence of gravity waves? Probably not.
 
kev said:
Recently a Gamma Ray Burst (GRB) was detected coming from the direction of the Andromeda galaxy. This is just the sort of event LIGO has been waiting 2 years for. The idea was that a collision of two massive bodies (possibly black holes) would be marked by a GRB and a gravity wave. LIGO did not detect a gravity wave and so they concluded that either the collision occurred much further away than the Andromeda galaxy or that the GRB was originated by something other than a massive collision. It never crossed their minds for a nanosecond that the reason they did not detect any gravity waves during the GRB event (or the during the previous two years that LIGO has been operation), is that possibly gravity waves do not exist, in contradiction with theory of general relativity. I wonder if after another two years of no detection with ten fold sensitivity, will they start to question the existence of gravity waves? Probably not.

When new LIGO is up and running there will be very little room for error, non detection would be a hard knock to take.
 
kev said:
It never crossed their minds for a nanosecond that the reason they did not detect any gravity waves during the GRB event (or the during the previous two years that LIGO has been operation), is that possibly gravity waves do not exist, in contradiction with theory of general relativity.

It would be very exiting if one can have an observed event, proven to be inside the range of LIGO, that should produce detectable gravitational waves and LIGO 'sees' nothing! This could mean that the detection method is wrong, or that Einstein's GR is wrong, or some modeling of GR has been done wrongly. IMO, any of these would trigger big advances in the understanding of gravitation.
 
kev said:
It never crossed their minds for a nanosecond that the reason they did not detect any gravity waves during the GRB event (or the during the previous two years that LIGO has been operation), is that possibly gravity waves do not exist

And why should they? There is already indirect evidence that gravity waves do exist.
 
  • #10
Vast said:
And why should they? There is already indirect evidence that gravity waves do exist.

Science should answer direct questions, one can prophesis all one wants that an apple is an onion.
 
  • #11
wolram said:
Science should answer direct questions, one can prophesis all one wants that an apple is an onion.

Yes, I agree. I was merely suggesting that we appear to be on the right track.
 
  • #13
Vast said:
And why should they? There is already indirect evidence that gravity waves do exist.


Why did they spend billions of dollars building LIGO and plan to spend more millions of dollars upgrading it, if they are already so certain gravity waves exist?
 
Last edited:
  • #14
kev said:
Why did they spend billions of dollars building LIGO and plan to spend more millions of dollars upgrading it, if they are already so certain gravity waves exist?

Why do we build telescopes when we're already so certain light waves exist?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Launch Loop to Space: Questions & Answers
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
News Why Does Senator Coburn Want to Cut NSF Funding?
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
8K
Automotive Concerned about hiring after graduation. (Engine guy)
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Schools First Year Math graduate school - Full of possibility
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Dreaming to become a scientist (physicist), can I?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
What if Gravity could be controlled?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
A Tale of Perseverance: Overcoming Challenges in Graduate School
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
16K
Three new books to read about expertise vs. democracy
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Appl. Phys: I love everything about her.... but her Math(s)
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Engineering Switching from Electrical Engineering to Computer Science
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
13K