Why Is There No New Data from LIGO/VIRGO?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jimgraber
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the lack of new data from the LIGO/Virgo collaboration, with participants expressing confusion and concern regarding the absence of recent findings since the start of the O3 observing run. The conversation touches on the publication timeline of scientific papers, the nature of data reporting, and the operational aspects of the collaboration.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express mystification and concern over the lack of new data from LIGO/Virgo, noting that no problems have been reported.
  • One participant points to a paper as evidence of new data, but others clarify that it is not new data from LIGO/Virgo, but rather tests of General Relativity using older data from a past event.
  • There is discussion about the lengthy publication time for scientific papers, with one participant humorously suggesting that the large number of authors could lead to delays due to extensive discussions.
  • Another participant notes a gap in events reported by LIGO, questioning the reasons behind it, such as operational issues or database problems.
  • Some participants reflect on the frustrations of waiting for data publication and the implications of this delay for public interest in the research.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the reasons for the lack of new data or the implications of publication delays. Multiple viewpoints are presented regarding the nature of the data and the publication process, indicating ongoing uncertainty and debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the timeline of data publication and the operational aspects of the collaboration, but these points remain unresolved and depend on various assumptions about the collaboration's processes.

jimgraber
Gold Member
Messages
247
Reaction score
18
TL;DR
O3 observing run started April 1. Much data until June 4 on GraceDB and GCN Circulars Archive. Since then, nothing. What's happening?
Why no new data? No news of any problems that I have heard. I'm both mystified and concerned.
Jim Graber
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zeke137
Astronomy news on Phys.org
There is new data from LIGO
The paper you link to can hardly be called new, since it was published in November 2018. Furthermore, the paper presents no new data from the LIGO/Virgo collaboration (LVC), but rather presents some new tests of GR, using data from the GW170817 binary neutron star coalescence event which occurred in August 2017.

As @jimgraber has noted, no new data are yet forthcoming from the newest observing run of the LVC. I hadn't known about the two sources of information he mentions in his post, so I'll be keeping an eye on them from time to time. Thanks jim.
 
Last edited:
Zeke137 said:
The paper you link to can hardly be called new, since it was published in November 2018. Furthermore, the paper presents no new data from the LIGO/Virgo collaboration (LVC), but rather presents some new tests of GR, using data from the GW170817 binary neutron star coalescence event which occurred in August 2017.

...
15 months from event to publication.

jimgraber said:
Summary: O3 observing run started April 1. Much data until June 4 ...
5 months since start of observation and data collection.

If they can cut the time to publish from 15 months to 7 months then they doubled the pace. So if something happened in May we should be happy if we get the results for Hanukkah.
 
15 months from event to publication
Your metadata has one data point, so hardly sufficient to spot trends.

But looking at the paper (it's available on arxiv), one notes that it has hundreds of authors - I didn't count how many (I estimate 1200), but the list of authors and their affiliations is enough to fill six whole pages! One could imagine them all squabbling amongst themselves for the full fifteen months about whether a colon or semicolon should be used in a particular sentence, or what shade of blue should be used in a graph. But I jest...

So, the paper is a report, not of new data, but of tests of General Relativity using older data, and one can easily imagine leisurely communications taking place between many of the authors, where they express an interest or idea on this or that constraint on GR, using various aspects of the data from the GW170817 event. Eventually, there would be enough momentum to propose a paper collecting these various threads of thoughts into a cogent whole, the end result being this paper. Fifteen months sounds about right for that, especially considering that many of the authors would probably have teaching duties and other research interests.

But do I detect a note of frustration in your post? Is it the case that having to wait so long between events and publication of papers on those events is causing you concern or anxiety? Do you feel, as a member of the public who has a particular interest in these topics, that you have some kind of special claim on their publishing as soon as is physically possible?

If so, then I would respectfully suggest that you, and others who may feel the same way, calmly consider the idea that publishing of scientific papers takes just as long as it takes, and we all just have to wait until the papers emerge into the light of day.
 
Last edited:
There was a gap in June, almost one month long, in the events shown at gracedb.ligo.org/latest. Wonder why.

...
S190630ag 1.435e-13 2019-06-30 18:52:28 UTC
S190602aq 1.901e-09 2019-06-02 17:59:51 UTC
...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Zeke137
Zeke137 said:
But looking at the paper (it's available on arxiv), one notes that it has hundreds of authors - I didn't count how many (I estimate 1200), but the list of authors and their affiliations is enough to fill six whole pages! One could imagine them all squabbling amongst themselves for the full fifteen months about whether a colon or semicolon should be used in a particular sentence, or what shade of blue should be used in a graph. But I jest...
That happens. Can't speak for LIGO/VIRGO but big particle physics collaborations do have these discussions. You make a draft with X, then you get a comment that it should be changed to Y, you change it, then in a later review round you get a comment that you should change it to X...
That is ultimately a small part of the work (it doesn't influence publication time notably) but it is a very annoying part.

I was surprised by the gap in events as well and asked around but didn't find a plausible explanation. Operational issues? Issues with the database?
 
This also sounds very bad
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy
What and why?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad New LIGO/Virgo event (08-Apr-19)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad LIGO+Virgo saw something unknown
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
High School AI Enhanced image of M87 black hole
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
High School Analogue Black Holes: Disposal?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School Observational bias? Lack of massive black hole observations....
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Graduate Rumors of 3rd LIGO Event: New Scientific Article Sheds Light
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School LIGO detects second gravity waves
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Where Can I Find Accurate Planetary Event Data for an Astronomy Course?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School LIGO Back Online: Upgraded Detector to Spot Fainter Gravitational Waves
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School Strange spiral structure in Oort Cloud, outer Solar System
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K