This lecture was recorded after TH's appearance on JRE, and before NDT's peer review. And to everyone else, crackpots have been attending public lectures for as long as they have existed.
Great talk, but why the quality of the video even though at 1080 DPI is still so pixelated? What is so high-tech at Caltech to make it look so amateurish? I don't understand.
at 24:06 / Gravitational Memory (h+ geometry) inverse Pythagorean Theory = 2 to the ten exponentially or 1023 x PI or 360 degrees = 368,640 ways to perceive gravitational memory; each way unique. Each way more than '0' and less than '1' like the color of our universe.
What I never got is how we could seemingly draw conclusions about the nature of reality based on the fact of how well (or not well) we could communicate with one another. Maybe that's not what's being asserted, but just listening to the words, that's what it sounds like.
Just wanted to say wow! What a great presentation, very clear even to a layman like me and of the least gobbledegooky and at the same time positive messages I've heard about the work going on to try and crack quantum gravity. Great stuff!
It’s weird how a video like this attracts random guys throwing their brain farts, taking a tiny grain of a fact they know and then follow with claims completely disconnected from reality.
Are you talking about the people who write essays in the comments that usually include assertions to the effect that “everybody is brainwashed”, “they refuse to see the truth”, etc?
@@AdrianBoyko From this video: "speed of light is an assumption", "gravity is just time", "moon's gravitational distortions which should be millions of times more powerful" - and it goes on and on...
can someone tell me at 10:22 the massive pieces leave behind the old one, what it is (spiral). Doesn't even the sun leave behind a pod like that when it moves?
There is a brilliance at work here, no question. I grasp how he goes step by step. I think the pitfall, if there is one, is that the shortcuts (algorithms) may not accurately illuminate correctly one or more of the steps. The concept of permanent change due to the gravity waves is fascinating. It seems to me that everything, then, generates gravity waves, even bouncing a ball on the ground should generate gravity waves. If there was equipment sensitive enough to register even the smallest gravity waves, would these gravity waves cancel out other gravity waves, even down to the quantum level? That means that there would be memories leftover. It seems to me that this will greatly complicate the search for a way to describe Quantum Gravity, should it even exist.
Hey, Caltech has rediscovered a great sonic breakthrough unknown for at least a week: if you point a microphone at a hard wall you can get awesome echoes!
That's a good summary. I've found a lot of discrepancies in GR over the years, but I'm not sure what would be a better solution as the very language we talk about this stuff is built upon GR.. Like a lot of the hokus pokus is staged around an assumption of relativistic mass, which acceleration doesn't cause an objects mass to increase. Although, I would wager that there aren't any infinite waves. Even waves should curve space at some point as it's positive energy density in space. That should give the universe a slight curve, like a sphere, although mathematically a smidge below infinity.
Space/Time is all about geometry and dimensions. It makes energy follow that geometry. The reason why gravity is so weak is because it is a side effect of geometry. There are no gravitons.
@@Just.A.T-Rex no one has observed a graviton, it is postulated. They have been trying to fit space/time in and it won’t go. Energy and space/time are separate.
I guess it probably would be harder to differentiate the distortion from gravitational waves from the self-noise if the light was of even shorter wavelength (the way i understand it, what they use for the detection is the differences in phase, so the changes in the overlap of the light waves caused by the gravitational waves passing, at shorter light wavelengths it probably is harder to detect the changes in the phase because the frequency waves of light are much closer together Also, blue and UV lasers are way harder to produce than infrared and red ones (uv lasers for example are used in semiconductor production, and they cost millions of dollars and consume thousands of watts just to produce a couple tens of watts in the UV range, they're also nearly the size of a whole room)
@@KibitoAkuya it's probably something like that, the quality (beam quality, frequency etc) of the light they need might be such that it can only be done with red light. Yes, it's the difference in brightness they measure, after interference with its own light. From what I remember, the interference is caused by an insanely small fraction of a single wavelength and that was part of the difficulty of measuring the wave. You saw the noise in their chart. So yeah, of course they considered other light colors but I don't remember the choice of red being explained.
If it travels as waves, then it follows an inverse square law, meaning planets or stars that are together like this binary system would be creating waves that exhibit strong effects on each-other, much greater than effects perceived at a distance. Doesn't seem that's the case though? Something seems to be missing.
I'm not sure he explained the source of the DC shift. Obviously, after the merger of the two black holes, the distribution of that mass in space is going to be different but I don't know if that is what is supposed to be detectable. Great talk btw.
Hi Jatigre. Mondo question… I imagine Kip & company contemplated such a thing. I suppose it would involve lowering extremely sensitive apparatus down into a 1 km bore hole produced by, say, oil well drilling equipment. I presume this would have made the whole project at least an order of magnitude more expensive. But I love the idea. In fact, I would suggest a ‘star pattern’ of many arms of the detector, perhaps in space. Now that the giant team of people have shown that gravity wave detection is possible, the scientific doors may swing open. Maybe someday some enterprising optics PhD will invent a silicon wafer mini gravity detector ‘array’, allowing imaging… a gravity telescope. Cheers.
@@SystemsMedicine As the immortal Norm Macdonald once said: "no offense but it sounds like some commie gobbledygook". ua-cam.com/video/7T0d7o8X2-E/v-deo.html
@@SystemsMedicineProbably not, since gravity waves are huge. So huge that we’ll need much LARGER detectors to make the observations we’re interested in. We’re currently hampered by the small size of systems like LIGO.
@@AdrianBoyko Hi Adrian. I generally agree with you, with some caveats. [My knowledge here is highly suspect, so I am unreliable about this stuff.] I think the highest gravitational wave frequency detectable by Ligo is about 20kHz. This would imply a wavelength of about 15 km. Ligo, being about 4 km long, is already a ‘quarter wavelength antenna’ for these gravitational waves. But Ligo is said to detect waves as long as 5Hz (this seems extraordinary, but then the whole project does). From elementary antenna theory, there would be nothing actually preventing a ‘sixteenth wavelength antenna’, except additional losses in antenna sensitivity. However, at this point, it is a practical impossibility to operate a Ligo style apparatus in a ~1km or deeper bore hole. In any case, the Japanese version of Ligo adds a synthetic aperture ‘perpendicular long arm’ to the existing detectors. Other detectors will almost certainly be added around the globe. In principle, the future of this technology holds tremendous potential. [Space based systems might be many orders of magnitude longer and more sensitive.]
NASA is actually collaborating with ESA to build a project called Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (or LISA for short), which, as the name implies, is exactly what you described
I think that there should be a simpler way to test for gravitational memory. Bouncing a photon up and down on earth’s surface causes redshift on the way up and blueshift on the way down. If one repeats the experiment long enough, given gravitational memory, one should see that the photon changes its wavelength overtime.
@@nathanhill2044 Turn on your radio and tune into your favorite radio station. How does that energy, wave? You interact with it the moment you hear it. Yet the wave that carries it to you is still there. Miles away, someone else can tune into the same energy wave. Stand naked in the sun and get burned from invisible Ultraviolet radiation. How does that seemingly invisible but obviously there energy get here? Physical properties are assigned to matter and matter is made up of trillions of discrete tiny wave elements we call particles. Matter is mixed energy waves, tied up in particle density. It's not basic science. It's a tad deeper into physics. Solid matter is actually not solid. It has more empty space between the particles that the particles themselves. That's because particles are small wave packets and are vibrating.
What is forgotten is you have gravity inside matter and outside . Gravity from the space of the universe and gravity from space within matter that holds matter together.
They have published all the details of how it was constructed. They have published All the details of how it has behaved since construction was completed. They have published their analysis of how this all relates to the theory of general relativity. You can read all of this for yourself and decide if you believe that it’s probably true or probably false.
I believe that Einstein was right, the problem lies in the definition. The understanding of Entropy for example, let's be honest, there can only be peace and order, if everyone is in their place. We humans are just bad in accepting a higher order, if it doesn't benefit us. He is talking about a right choice of coordinates, in a so called 3+1 spacetime, but that is not how it works. Remember, in Spacetime you can't move in one direction, without effecting at least a second one. That is what causes length contraction and time dilation after all. And there is no velocity, everything there is in time is interacting at the same time. If the universe is a room, there is no outside, because anything can move in space without changing time. There is no emptyness in our universe of light. The universe is a light switch and god is a kid with the abilities to switch it faster than the speed of light. Is it on, off or 50/50? I believe, if you want to show the different structure through a binary system, you shouldn't do it with only one representation of the binary system. There is a reason we have 2 brain hemispheres, one uses symbolic reasoning and the other subsymbolic reasoning. The keyword here is cumulative binary weighting. Otherwise there is no way of showing the complexitiy of spacetime's structure. I know it might seem like I disaprove this video, but I am greatful for it. Thank you for the love you put into your work.
Fields of color. Remember..magnetism is caused by length contraction Radiation is the result of c being a limit This is interesting stuff. Granted, not everything is number.
Seems kind of snotty saying Einstein numbers are wrong and quantum numbers are correct. It is just as possible that both sets of numbers are incorrect.
..the WORD Universe is a slang for 2 Words: Uni & Verse..Uni is Union & Verse is Version.....Universe is a Union of 3 Infinites..1. Infinite Space ABOVE, 2. Infinite Lands BELOW & 3. Infinie Waters in the MIDDLE..Only 1 VERSION OF Universe...Infinite Space is not a Fabric or Cloth..Space is made of Nothing...Fabric or Cloth are Matter that can only occupy Space..Earth is not a Matter that can occupy Space & Float Indefinitely...Only Matter with solar Masses or Photonic Masses can Float or stay Indefinitely in Space..
GR is a complex mathematical language to describe the path that an object takes through Space but it does not explain Gravity and it does not push out Newton. The "Gravitational Radiation" that is being measured is not the Gravitational Force Field (GFF) itself. The GFF is not limited by the speed of light. Another wrong path steep in speculation down a never ending complex mathematical rabbit hole.
Gravity is limited by the speed of light because its information is ruled over by causality, as all things appear to be. We have proven this logically and empirically.
@@null2470 FYI, the late Tom Van Flandern, PhD, Yale graduate, specializing in celestial mechanics, said it was impossible to determine correctly the location when calculation planetary solar objects if done assuming gravity moved at light speed. “The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous." "As astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here. It seemed incongruous to allow for the finite speed of light from the body to the Earth, but to take the effect of Earth’s gravity on that same body as propagating from here to there instantaneously. Yet that was the required procedure to get the correct answers.” Physics continues to ignore obvious facts that disagree with the dogmatic held position because they cannot see how to deal with facing this error.
@@null2470 FYI, the late Tom Van Flandern, PhD, Yale graduate, specializing in celestial mechanics, said it was impossible to determine correctly the location when calculation planetary solar objects if done assuming gravity moved at light speed. “The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous." "As astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here." Physics continues to ignore obvious facts that disagree with the dogmatic held position because they cannot see how to deal with facing this error.
The event horizon of black hole is the place where all our souls located and our body is inside the black hole our physical reality here is a projection or the shadow of whats going on on the boundry of the univese and all our behavior as souls are memorized so its all about memory ans information its a virtual reality and the player is the soul
Gravity is time / possibility of one black hole star being older the memory effects are going to be different looking back looking forward maybe the same.
If a far distant black hole collision can cause LIGO to "wobble" with gravitational wave distortions, why not detect the moon's gravitational distortions which should be millions of times more powerful?
it does not detect the gravity. it detects the gravity distortions. And gravity can be distorted with high frequency movements of high mass objects. Moon neither moves in high frequency, nor a high mass object. So, it can not distort the gravity enough to ligo to detect. I hope my language is understood.
That’s a good question. We orbit the sun because it has the biggest gravity monopole moment. The moon dominants the tide (induced quadrapule moment) because it has the biggest gravity gradient. Gravitational waves require a high rate of change of mass quadrapule, which looks like a spinning dum bell. Moon is a tiny mass spinning monthly. Ligo saw 60 solar masses spinning 10 to 100 times per second.
@@emrahyalcin It is said that it is detecting space-time curvature ripples, which the moon should also create on a much more massive yet much slower scale.
@@merlepatterson maybe. What matters is the difference in the moon gravity at each end, and the lever arm is only 4 km. But the problem is the frequency response, which he does show at some point….LIGO just doesn’t see waves at one micro Hz (one over two weeks). Also, as with electromagnetism, there are near field effects that are not radiative (c.f. The credit card chip), so it may not even count as gravitational radiation. But I don’t know enough about it. If you find an equation, the terms that fall off faster than 1/r…those are non radiative, and tidal effects fall off as 1/r cubed. Wikipedia has nice expansion for EM dipole radiation where you can see it action.
Every time someone relies on an assumption, I get stuck and cannot listen anymore. You have already assumed without question that light speed is constant. It's the only thing taught, so what else are you going to think. Constant-light-per-observer is not an observation, it is a declaration that you support by "transforming" your numbers AFTER the fact ON PAPER! There is a Doppler shift in the light BEFORE you transform your numbers (big contradiction). After you assume, you are explaining what's left by assuming gravity waves are changing the dimensions, but there could be a change in the production of light or a change in the speed of light. Dimensions are how all of this got started in the first place. Dimensions don't exist outside of math. They are also in your head. Prove me wrong. Analogously correct math answers don't have to be real for people to worship them. You are CREATING your favorite theory by changing the board you play on by changing the dimensions. You believe it, and it is a belief system that you all share which makes me a quack. Relativity says that if you change YOUR speed, then the ENTIRE Universe INSTANTLY changes shape along that axis JUST FOR YOU! This is just goofy.
One of the key take always from relativity is that the way you see the universe depends entirely on your coordinates, and the other take away is that the universe doesn’t care about your coordinates. Which is what your last sentence says.
@@DrDeuteron No, the key is that you believe it and will not question it. Math allows rote memory thinkers to thrive in physics, so when math lies to you, you will never see it. You don't arrive at Relativity from any logic. It starts with a postulate, which is a declaration, not an observation. You create the postulate with transform equations, which means that there is a NON-transformed reality left behind. Each "velocity" has INFINITE definitions, so I don't think nature even knows what a velocity is. A massless medium would have no points to be relative to. It is the accelerations at each end of it where physics BEGINS, and ALL observers agree. This is 100 years of wasted physics based in shadows, because they are easier to see.
@@jnhrtmn actually, when I split atoms I need relativity to tell me where the two halves go, and when I do com with deep space spacecraft, I need relativity to get the frequency and pointing right. I’ve also shined lasers on antimatter positron beams, and it bounces back as a gamma ray….relativity required. Now one thing you got right is that a lone photon in space doesn’t have a wavelength ….that depends on who looks at it. And ofc the very existence of antimatter is only explained by special relativity
@@DrDeuteron It's the only thing you've ever known, and like I said, you use it, and you believe it, but you changed your data in order to believe it. It's not like Relativity is fixing something broken in the NON-transformed world. It seems to work just fine without your belief system. You have experience with something that works, and I never challenged that it works for you, but you don't dare question it, and that I challenge. You think angular momentum causes the gyroscopic effect (after a right-hand rule), and this is BASIC mechanics, not subatomic or far away. It's in your face, and you didn't see it. Math got this wrong too, which is saying that math can predict by analogy AND lie to you. Look at my Proof video about the real cause. Modern science doesn't even know what cause is anymore. They get it from math.
God, Everyone dies. Can't we send information back in time to prevent a tragic death? Or can't we send a message to the future and ask them to tell you how to do it? / Please, Can anyone make it possible to sending messages to past? My father Kim Kyu Dong died SNU hospital at 2024.04.15. I must prevent that death. / Both light and electromagnetic waves are called waves. Is the wave going out from point A to point B? Or is it already at points A and B like the sea, but only the waves are transmitted? In modern science, it seems to be seen as the former... / What about time and space? In modern science, time and space are the latter, don't you think? / In other words, space-time comes first, and light, photons and protons go along that path... / So the Einsteinian school's absolute speed of light is strange? At the absolute speed of light, is not the speed determined by light, but by the time and space that already exists? Isn't speed the time to move from point A to point B? If time and space are not absolutely fixed, why does the speed of light have absolute speed? / Therefore, the absolute speed of light can also be wrong. Isn't the absolute speed of light a space-time dimensional barrier? If it exceeds the absolute speed, will it jump to another dimension? / Einstein's theory is based on the dimension only now, so if you go beyond this dimension, is not it beyond the constraints of Einstein? / The question is whether you can find an object faster than light or accelerate light. Or is space-time and massive mass spread out in front of us, and can not we cross the space-time dimension using space-time and massive mass? / In this sense, I think we should study whether there is a way to send signals to the past. We don't have to worry about who in the past will get this signal, do you? We're already receiving a 24-hour signal from radio telescopes and various receivers. / If we think deeper... Light has a slower speed as it passes through the medium. / It is not that we can not accelerate light, but is not the absolute speed of light the highest speed of light observed in our dimension? / Is not it observable only at a constant speed in the dimension we are in? / If we accelerated the light at all, for example, if we shot light on a spacecraft, or if the light of the sun already moving at a high speed exceeded the observable absolute speed, would not it have passed to another dimension? / Whether there are eleven dimensions, or even larger dimensions, is not there necessarily a overlap with our dimension in the end? / Would not light or radio waves that went to another dimension come back to our dimension as slow as passing through the medium? / Can't we do an experiment like this? / Why don't we measure the amount of electromagnetic energy by accelerating it with magnetic force? Or how about measuring the amount of light coming out of the sun to accelerate to the mass of Mercury or Venus?
If we haven't detected it,it isn't a phenomenon, its a hypothesis. So he is banging the money drum to get funding for "research" to find the mythical memory theory.... Cmon man,get serious.
Hi George. Testing hypotheses comprises a great deal of leading edge physics. An example would be the discovery of (predicted) Higgs bosons. [This is somewhat different than what scientists often do in industry.] Of course there is also sheer ‘data collection’. An example would be the huge amount of data collected by all the Mars landers and rovers. But these data can be a source for hypothesis testing as well. An example would be that Thomas predicted ‘dust devils’ on Mars, and then confirmed their existence via photos previous taken via satellites orbing Mars. [All these projects were speculative and expensive.]
Wouldn’t putting a massive mass at the end of the laser vacuum increase the distortion to the spacetime when the gravity waves were closer to the mass 😂
Someone PLEASE show me 1 dimension outside of math -something real. Math needs them to grip what you see, and theories that make them adjustable are completely insane when they are not real. This includes time. Send a pendulum into space and tell me about relative time. I'm not saying that space is not flexible, but it's not according to modern science. Math is a procedural path that allows rote memory dependent people to thrive in physics. This is their belief system. There is NO causality in modern science, and without math, they are lost. They just need it to work on their paper -reality forgone. Maxwell's equations use a cross product, and this turns number perpendicular FOR NO REASON! Describing what you see it do is not an understanding. I want to know "why" they are perpendicular. EVERYTHING is like this.
As if the universe was came to be excatly by the math that we use, and it not just a way through we can better understand it...comon...let me guess you are a militant atheist too
@@gyorgytolvaj67 You are not "better understanding it" if you are replacing reality with analogies. Look at my gyroscopic effect explanation ("Proof..."). Formally trained people CANNOT see the cause, because they were taught angular momentum describes it perfectly, and they will even tell you that angular momentum is a pseudo vector, and STILL they ignore my causal explanation that says spin velocity only sets a rate for perpendicular tilt velocity changes to happen. It is based in accelerations. Understanding cause is an understanding. Describing what you see it do is NOT an understanding. A perfect analogy will fool you forever. Everyone is spending all of their time trying to master the paradigm, so they don't have time to question it. If you do, it falls apart, and most just don't want it to fall apart. If you would rather just boil it down to believers and nonbelievers, that just makes it sadder -like the ability to believe is somehow greater than being gullible?
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't believe somebody asked this guy about Terrence Howard's theory.
Oh, brother! How did that person get anywhere near Caltech?
@@madmaxfzz Exactly
@@madmaxfzz he clearly snuck in the back door when no one was looking. Those dirty commoners!! You need LOCKS caltech!!!
This lecture was recorded after TH's appearance on JRE, and before NDT's peer review. And to everyone else, crackpots have been attending public lectures for as long as they have existed.
@@madmaxfzzfareals
cmon caltech, get an HD camera that's not grainy af
A 720p camera perhaps?
Wtf are you talking about 😂 this shit is in 1080p
Get off that McD's wifi bro! 😂
Low light
It’s dark
this entire presentation brought to you by a single word; namely...
Great talk, but why the quality of the video even though at 1080 DPI is still so pixelated? What is so high-tech at Caltech to make it look so amateurish? I don't understand.
It looks exactly the same at 480
Excellent presentation!
at 24:06 / Gravitational Memory (h+ geometry) inverse Pythagorean Theory = 2 to the ten exponentially or 1023 x PI or 360 degrees = 368,640 ways to perceive gravitational memory; each way unique. Each way more than '0' and less than '1' like the color of our universe.
Great presentation, thank you.
What I never got is how we could seemingly draw conclusions about the nature of reality based on the fact of how well (or not well) we could communicate with one another. Maybe that's not what's being asserted, but just listening to the words, that's what it sounds like.
Wonderful presentation, professionally delivered. I understood about 1% of it, but was surprised by even that much of what was explained. 🙌🙌
Your insights and findings make a lot of sense.
FASCINATING. And outstanding work, too - very nice.
excellent work and presentation!
Just wanted to say wow! What a great presentation, very clear even to a layman like me and of the least gobbledegooky and at the same time positive messages I've heard about the work going on to try and crack quantum gravity. Great stuff!
Wow, this was great! I hope he can see what he's looking for soon!
It’s weird how a video like this attracts random guys throwing their brain farts, taking a tiny grain of a fact they know and then follow with claims completely disconnected from reality.
Are you talking about the people who write essays in the comments that usually include assertions to the effect that “everybody is brainwashed”, “they refuse to see the truth”, etc?
@@AdrianBoyko From this video: "speed of light is an assumption", "gravity is just time", "moon's gravitational distortions which should be millions of times more powerful" - and it goes on and on...
@@aliancemd I just saw: “It’s the three body problem all over again”
can someone tell me at 10:22 the massive pieces leave behind the old one, what it is (spiral). Doesn't even the sun leave behind a pod like that when it moves?
the spiral is the ripple in spacetime,between two black holes orbiting or colliding
There is a brilliance at work here, no question. I grasp how he goes step by step. I think the pitfall, if there is one, is that the shortcuts (algorithms) may not accurately illuminate correctly one or more of the steps. The concept of permanent change due to the gravity waves is fascinating.
It seems to me that everything, then, generates gravity waves, even bouncing a ball on the ground should generate gravity waves. If there was equipment sensitive enough to register even the smallest gravity waves, would these gravity waves cancel out other gravity waves, even down to the quantum level? That means that there would be memories leftover. It seems to me that this will greatly complicate the search for a way to describe Quantum Gravity, should it even exist.
Incredible just how much man has learned in one million years!
Last thousand years
@@AdrianBoyko I meant since man’s recent evolution
@@quranjadeed sure you did
Hey, Caltech has rediscovered a great sonic breakthrough unknown for at least a week: if you point a microphone at a hard wall you can get awesome echoes!
That's a good summary. I've found a lot of discrepancies in GR over the years, but I'm not sure what would be a better solution as the very language we talk about this stuff is built upon GR.. Like a lot of the hokus pokus is staged around an assumption of relativistic mass, which acceleration doesn't cause an objects mass to increase.
Although, I would wager that there aren't any infinite waves. Even waves should curve space at some point as it's positive energy density in space. That should give the universe a slight curve, like a sphere, although mathematically a smidge below infinity.
It's been an amazing performance and and wonderful presentation
Space/Time is all about geometry and dimensions. It makes energy follow that geometry. The reason why gravity is so weak is because it is a side effect of geometry. There are no gravitons.
So what are the observed gravitons?
@@Just.A.T-Rex no one has observed a graviton, it is postulated. They have been trying to fit space/time in and it won’t go. Energy and space/time are separate.
i was trying to discern if the universe has a natural memory device or something like that so im interested in this lecture
Couldn't the arms be made shorter if they used a blue or UV laser? What's the reason they chose red light here?
The waves generated with hi frequency light have even higher frequencies that are more dificult to detect with electronics
I was wondering the same thing but electrons instead of photons.
I guess it probably would be harder to differentiate the distortion from gravitational waves from the self-noise if the light was of even shorter wavelength (the way i understand it, what they use for the detection is the differences in phase, so the changes in the overlap of the light waves caused by the gravitational waves passing, at shorter light wavelengths it probably is harder to detect the changes in the phase because the frequency waves of light are much closer together
Also, blue and UV lasers are way harder to produce than infrared and red ones (uv lasers for example are used in semiconductor production, and they cost millions of dollars and consume thousands of watts just to produce a couple tens of watts in the UV range, they're also nearly the size of a whole room)
@@KibitoAkuya it's probably something like that, the quality (beam quality, frequency etc) of the light they need might be such that it can only be done with red light. Yes, it's the difference in brightness they measure, after interference with its own light. From what I remember, the interference is caused by an insanely small fraction of a single wavelength and that was part of the difficulty of measuring the wave. You saw the noise in their chart. So yeah, of course they considered other light colors but I don't remember the choice of red being explained.
Man this stuff is friggin so cooooool!🎉
If it travels as waves, then it follows an inverse square law, meaning planets or stars that are together like this binary system would be creating waves that exhibit strong effects on each-other, much greater than effects perceived at a distance. Doesn't seem that's the case though? Something seems to be missing.
I'm not sure he explained the source of the DC shift. Obviously, after the merger of the two black holes, the distribution of that mass in space is going to be different but I don't know if that is what is supposed to be detectable.
Great talk btw.
Did anyone bothered asking why the Michelson Morley interferometer was not rotated vertically? Never mind.
Hi Jatigre. Mondo question… I imagine Kip & company contemplated such a thing. I suppose it would involve lowering extremely sensitive apparatus down into a 1 km bore hole produced by, say, oil well drilling equipment. I presume this would have made the whole project at least an order of magnitude more expensive. But I love the idea. In fact, I would suggest a ‘star pattern’ of many arms of the detector, perhaps in space.
Now that the giant team of people have shown that gravity wave detection is possible, the scientific doors may swing open. Maybe someday some enterprising optics PhD will invent a silicon wafer mini gravity detector ‘array’, allowing imaging… a gravity telescope. Cheers.
@@SystemsMedicine As the immortal Norm Macdonald once said: "no offense but it sounds like some commie gobbledygook". ua-cam.com/video/7T0d7o8X2-E/v-deo.html
@@SystemsMedicineProbably not, since gravity waves are huge. So huge that we’ll need much LARGER detectors to make the observations we’re interested in. We’re currently hampered by the small size of systems like LIGO.
@@AdrianBoyko Hi Adrian. I generally agree with you, with some caveats. [My knowledge here is highly suspect, so I am unreliable about this stuff.]
I think the highest gravitational wave frequency detectable by Ligo is about 20kHz. This would imply a wavelength of about 15 km. Ligo, being about 4 km long, is already a ‘quarter wavelength antenna’ for these gravitational waves. But Ligo is said to detect waves as long as 5Hz (this seems extraordinary, but then the whole project does). From elementary antenna theory, there would be nothing actually preventing a ‘sixteenth wavelength antenna’, except additional losses in antenna sensitivity.
However, at this point, it is a practical impossibility to operate a Ligo style apparatus in a ~1km or deeper bore hole. In any case, the Japanese version of Ligo adds a synthetic aperture ‘perpendicular long arm’ to the existing detectors. Other detectors will almost certainly be added around the globe. In principle, the future of this technology holds tremendous potential.
[Space based systems might be many orders of magnitude longer and more sensitive.]
@@AdrianBoykomaybe distribute gravity wave detectors around the solar system?
Ahhhhh… the folly of attempting the ‘live demo’ under pressure…
why not use stationnary satellites to detect gravitational waves,sending lasers beams at each other at great distances separeting them,?🤔
Sounds too logical.
NASA is actually collaborating with ESA to build a project called Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (or LISA for short), which, as the name implies, is exactly what you described
I think that there should be a simpler way to test for gravitational memory.
Bouncing a photon up and down on earth’s surface causes redshift on the way up and blueshift on the way down. If one repeats the experiment long enough, given gravitational memory, one should see that the photon changes its wavelength overtime.
Waves of what? upon what ? by what ?
What makes up the known universe? Energy waves. All existence is as a result of the quantum field. Everything exists within and of that.
@danielpaulson8838 Both "Energy" and waves have no physical properties how can they wave?
@danielpaulson8838 Both "Energy" and waves have no physical properties how can they wave?
@@nathanhill2044 Turn on your radio and tune into your favorite radio station.
How does that energy, wave? You interact with it the moment you hear it. Yet the wave that carries it to you is still there. Miles away, someone else can tune into the same energy wave.
Stand naked in the sun and get burned from invisible Ultraviolet radiation. How does that seemingly invisible but obviously there energy get here?
Physical properties are assigned to matter and matter is made up of trillions of discrete tiny wave elements we call particles.
Matter is mixed energy waves, tied up in particle density.
It's not basic science. It's a tad deeper into physics. Solid matter is actually not solid. It has more empty space between the particles that the particles themselves. That's because particles are small wave packets and are vibrating.
@@nathanhill2044 The posts are showing up slowly. I replied and am waiting to see if it shows up.
What is forgotten is you have gravity inside matter and outside . Gravity from the space of the universe and gravity from space within matter that holds matter together.
So glad you cleared that up for cal tech.
A century of hardly any progress on QM and Relativity suggests Caltech needs all the help it can get.
So Cooper didn't have to dive into Gargantua afterall? 🤔
Very interesting
how is ligo calibrated, other than by believing and trusting
They have published all the details of how it was constructed. They have published All the details of how it has behaved since construction was completed. They have published their analysis of how this all relates to the theory of general relativity. You can read all of this for yourself and decide if you believe that it’s probably true or probably false.
@@AdrianBoyko many theories can be put forward and they have no value if they are not experimentally confirmed, until then it is a world of believers
@@pekkavirtanen5130 Yeah, LIGO was built to experimentally confirm general relativity’s prediction of gravitational waves.
Same way a cesium clock is.
@@Just.A.T-Rex the clock runs, how does it prove Ligo's functionality?
He uses the word "simply" a lot 😄
Its all about memory and information ..
Phew! Did I forget to breathe?
I believe that Einstein was right, the problem lies in the definition. The understanding of Entropy for example, let's be honest, there can only be peace and order, if everyone is in their place. We humans are just bad in accepting a higher order, if it doesn't benefit us.
He is talking about a right choice of coordinates, in a so called 3+1 spacetime, but that is not how it works. Remember, in Spacetime you can't move in one direction, without effecting at least a second one. That is what causes length contraction and time dilation after all. And there is no velocity, everything there is in time is interacting at the same time. If the universe is a room, there is no outside, because anything can move in space without changing time. There is no emptyness in our universe of light. The universe is a light switch and god is a kid with the abilities to switch it faster than the speed of light. Is it on, off or 50/50?
I believe, if you want to show the different structure through a binary system, you shouldn't do it with only one representation of the binary system. There is a reason we have 2 brain hemispheres, one uses symbolic reasoning and the other subsymbolic reasoning. The keyword here is cumulative binary weighting. Otherwise there is no way of showing the complexitiy of spacetime's structure.
I know it might seem like I disaprove this video, but I am greatful for it. Thank you for the love you put into your work.
Fields of color.
Remember..magnetism is caused by length contraction
Radiation is the result of c being a limit
This is interesting stuff. Granted, not everything is number.
If gw goes super luminal does it cause a light speed boom
The guy who asked about Terrence should’ve ashamed of him self…
Seems kind of snotty saying Einstein numbers are wrong and quantum numbers are correct. It is just as possible that both sets of numbers are incorrect.
I got here beacuse i watched Sean Carroll videos.
Like actors. Remember it's a business guys.
So, y'all have been listening...🤔/⚫️
..the WORD Universe is a slang for 2 Words: Uni & Verse..Uni is Union & Verse is Version.....Universe is a Union of 3 Infinites..1. Infinite Space ABOVE, 2. Infinite Lands BELOW & 3. Infinie Waters in the MIDDLE..Only 1 VERSION OF Universe...Infinite Space is not a Fabric or Cloth..Space is made of Nothing...Fabric or Cloth are Matter that can only occupy Space..Earth is not a Matter that can occupy Space & Float Indefinitely...Only Matter with solar Masses or Photonic Masses can Float or stay Indefinitely in Space..
Well, that solves that.
sigh
GR is a complex mathematical language to describe the path that an object takes through Space but it does not explain Gravity and it does not push out Newton. The "Gravitational Radiation" that is being measured is not the Gravitational Force Field (GFF) itself. The GFF is not limited by the speed of light. Another wrong path steep in speculation down a never ending complex mathematical rabbit hole.
Gravity is limited by the speed of light because its information is ruled over by causality, as all things appear to be. We have proven this logically and empirically.
@@null2470 FYI, the late Tom Van Flandern, PhD, Yale graduate, specializing in celestial mechanics, said it was impossible to determine correctly the location when calculation planetary solar objects if done assuming gravity moved at light speed.
“The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous."
"As astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here. It seemed incongruous to allow for the finite speed of light from the body to the Earth, but to take the effect of Earth’s gravity on that same body as propagating from here to there instantaneously. Yet that was the required procedure to get the correct answers.”
Physics continues to ignore obvious facts that disagree with the dogmatic held position because they cannot see how to deal with facing this error.
@@null2470 FYI, the late Tom Van Flandern, PhD, Yale graduate, specializing in celestial mechanics, said it was impossible to determine correctly the location when calculation planetary solar objects if done assuming gravity moved at light speed.
“The most amazing thing I was taught as a graduate student of celestial mechanics at Yale in the 1960s was that all gravitational interactions between bodies in all dynamical systems had to be taken as instantaneous."
"As astronomers we were taught to calculate orbits using instantaneous forces; then extract the position of some body along its orbit at a time of interest, and calculate where that position would appear as seen from Earth by allowing for the finite propagation speed of light from there to here."
Physics continues to ignore obvious facts that disagree with the dogmatic held position because they cannot see how to deal with facing this error.
@@null2470 New Scientist website says causality is not all figured out.
its the 3-body problem all over again 🙂
The event horizon of black hole is the place where all our souls located and our body is inside the black hole our physical reality here is a projection or the shadow of whats going on on the boundry of the univese and all our behavior as souls are memorized so its all about memory ans information its a virtual reality and the player is the soul
Chill on the meth
He's good
he's gooder than good
How much of ligo tech has gone into UFO detection.
Gravity is time / possibility of one black hole star being older the memory effects are going to be different looking back looking forward maybe the same.
How about finding if quantum world has any morality and pass it along to the scientists and politicians 😅
Guys. Hello. this Img quality goes to wat daaaa. It's Ca Tech. Deserves better. Not geeat
If a far distant black hole collision can cause LIGO to "wobble" with gravitational wave distortions, why not detect the moon's gravitational distortions which should be millions of times more powerful?
it does not detect the gravity. it detects the gravity distortions. And gravity can be distorted with high frequency movements of high mass objects. Moon neither moves in high frequency, nor a high mass object. So, it can not distort the gravity enough to ligo to detect. I hope my language is understood.
That’s a good question. We orbit the sun because it has the biggest gravity monopole moment. The moon dominants the tide (induced quadrapule moment) because it has the biggest gravity gradient.
Gravitational waves require a high rate of change of mass quadrapule, which looks like a spinning dum bell. Moon is a tiny mass spinning monthly.
Ligo saw 60 solar masses spinning 10 to 100 times per second.
@@emrahyalcin It is said that it is detecting space-time curvature ripples, which the moon should also create on a much more massive yet much slower scale.
@@DrDeuteron Shouldn't LIGO be slowly Stretched out by the moon's space-time curvature distortion over time?
@@merlepatterson maybe. What matters is the difference in the moon gravity at each end, and the lever arm is only 4 km. But the problem is the frequency response, which he does show at some point….LIGO just doesn’t see waves at one micro Hz (one over two weeks).
Also, as with electromagnetism, there are near field effects that are not radiative (c.f. The credit card chip), so it may not even count as gravitational radiation. But I don’t know enough about it. If you find an equation, the terms that fall off faster than 1/r…those are non radiative, and tidal effects fall off as 1/r cubed.
Wikipedia has nice expansion for EM dipole radiation where you can see it action.
Miracles: there are conservation laws! Who would have thought it?
Every time someone relies on an assumption, I get stuck and cannot listen anymore. You have already assumed without question that light speed is constant. It's the only thing taught, so what else are you going to think. Constant-light-per-observer is not an observation, it is a declaration that you support by "transforming" your numbers AFTER the fact ON PAPER! There is a Doppler shift in the light BEFORE you transform your numbers (big contradiction). After you assume, you are explaining what's left by assuming gravity waves are changing the dimensions, but there could be a change in the production of light or a change in the speed of light. Dimensions are how all of this got started in the first place. Dimensions don't exist outside of math. They are also in your head. Prove me wrong. Analogously correct math answers don't have to be real for people to worship them. You are CREATING your favorite theory by changing the board you play on by changing the dimensions. You believe it, and it is a belief system that you all share which makes me a quack. Relativity says that if you change YOUR speed, then the ENTIRE Universe INSTANTLY changes shape along that axis JUST FOR YOU! This is just goofy.
Terence is that you?
One of the key take always from relativity is that the way you see the universe depends entirely on your coordinates, and the other take away is that the universe doesn’t care about your coordinates.
Which is what your last sentence says.
@@DrDeuteron No, the key is that you believe it and will not question it. Math allows rote memory thinkers to thrive in physics, so when math lies to you, you will never see it. You don't arrive at Relativity from any logic. It starts with a postulate, which is a declaration, not an observation. You create the postulate with transform equations, which means that there is a NON-transformed reality left behind. Each "velocity" has INFINITE definitions, so I don't think nature even knows what a velocity is. A massless medium would have no points to be relative to. It is the accelerations at each end of it where physics BEGINS, and ALL observers agree. This is 100 years of wasted physics based in shadows, because they are easier to see.
@@jnhrtmn actually, when I split atoms I need relativity to tell me where the two halves go, and when I do com with deep space spacecraft, I need relativity to get the frequency and pointing right. I’ve also shined lasers on antimatter positron beams, and it bounces back as a gamma ray….relativity required.
Now one thing you got right is that a lone photon in space doesn’t have a wavelength ….that depends on who looks at it.
And ofc the very existence of antimatter is only explained by special relativity
@@DrDeuteron It's the only thing you've ever known, and like I said, you use it, and you believe it, but you changed your data in order to believe it. It's not like Relativity is fixing something broken in the NON-transformed world. It seems to work just fine without your belief system. You have experience with something that works, and I never challenged that it works for you, but you don't dare question it, and that I challenge. You think angular momentum causes the gyroscopic effect (after a right-hand rule), and this is BASIC mechanics, not subatomic or far away. It's in your face, and you didn't see it. Math got this wrong too, which is saying that math can predict by analogy AND lie to you. Look at my Proof video about the real cause. Modern science doesn't even know what cause is anymore. They get it from math.
God, Everyone dies.
Can't we send information back in time to prevent a tragic death?
Or can't we send a message to the future and ask them to tell you how to do it?
/
Please, Can anyone make it possible to sending messages to past?
My father Kim Kyu Dong died SNU hospital at 2024.04.15.
I must prevent that death.
/
Both light and electromagnetic waves are called waves.
Is the wave going out from point A to point B?
Or is it already at points A and B like the sea, but only the waves are transmitted?
In modern science, it seems to be seen as the former...
/
What about time and space?
In modern science, time and space are the latter, don't you think?
/
In other words, space-time comes first, and light, photons and protons go along that path...
/
So the Einsteinian school's absolute speed of light is strange?
At the absolute speed of light, is not the speed determined by light, but by the time and space that already exists?
Isn't speed the time to move from point A to point B?
If time and space are not absolutely fixed, why does the speed of light have absolute speed?
/
Therefore, the absolute speed of light can also be wrong.
Isn't the absolute speed of light a space-time dimensional barrier?
If it exceeds the absolute speed, will it jump to another dimension?
/
Einstein's theory is based on the dimension only now, so if you go beyond this dimension, is not it beyond the constraints of Einstein?
/
The question is whether you can find an object faster than light or accelerate light.
Or is space-time and massive mass spread out in front of us, and can not we cross the space-time dimension using space-time and massive mass?
/
In this sense, I think we should study whether there is a way to send signals to the past.
We don't have to worry about who in the past will get this signal, do you?
We're already receiving a 24-hour signal from radio telescopes and various receivers.
/
If we think deeper...
Light has a slower speed as it passes through the medium.
/
It is not that we can not accelerate light, but is not the absolute speed of light the highest speed of light observed in our dimension?
/
Is not it observable only at a constant speed in the dimension we are in?
/
If we accelerated the light at all, for example, if we shot light on a spacecraft, or if the light of the sun already moving at a high speed exceeded the observable absolute speed, would not it have passed to another dimension?
/
Whether there are eleven dimensions, or even larger dimensions, is not there necessarily a overlap with our dimension in the end?
/
Would not light or radio waves that went to another dimension come back to our dimension as slow as passing through the medium?
/
Can't we do an experiment like this?
/
Why don't we measure the amount of electromagnetic energy by accelerating it with magnetic force?
Or how about measuring the amount of light coming out of the sun to accelerate to the mass of Mercury or Venus?
blah blah blah. This video begins at 15:00
Quantum mechanics is right.
Einstein is wrong.
If we haven't detected it,it isn't a phenomenon, its a hypothesis.
So he is banging the money drum to get funding for "research" to find the mythical memory theory....
Cmon man,get serious.
Hi George. Testing hypotheses comprises a great deal of leading edge physics. An example would be the discovery of (predicted) Higgs bosons. [This is somewhat different than what scientists often do in industry.] Of course there is also sheer ‘data collection’. An example would be the huge amount of data collected by all the Mars landers and rovers. But these data can be a source for hypothesis testing as well. An example would be that Thomas predicted ‘dust devils’ on Mars, and then confirmed their existence via photos previous taken via satellites orbing Mars. [All these projects were speculative and expensive.]
Wouldn’t putting a massive mass at the end of the laser vacuum increase the distortion to the spacetime when the gravity waves were closer to the mass 😂
How rude can you look. playing with phone during introduction.
Someone PLEASE show me 1 dimension outside of math -something real. Math needs them to grip what you see, and theories that make them adjustable are completely insane when they are not real. This includes time. Send a pendulum into space and tell me about relative time. I'm not saying that space is not flexible, but it's not according to modern science. Math is a procedural path that allows rote memory dependent people to thrive in physics. This is their belief system. There is NO causality in modern science, and without math, they are lost. They just need it to work on their paper -reality forgone. Maxwell's equations use a cross product, and this turns number perpendicular FOR NO REASON! Describing what you see it do is not an understanding. I want to know "why" they are perpendicular. EVERYTHING is like this.
As if the universe was came to be excatly by the math that we use, and it not just a way through we can better understand it...comon...let me guess you are a militant atheist too
@@gyorgytolvaj67 You are not "better understanding it" if you are replacing reality with analogies. Look at my gyroscopic effect explanation ("Proof..."). Formally trained people CANNOT see the cause, because they were taught angular momentum describes it perfectly, and they will even tell you that angular momentum is a pseudo vector, and STILL they ignore my causal explanation that says spin velocity only sets a rate for perpendicular tilt velocity changes to happen. It is based in accelerations. Understanding cause is an understanding. Describing what you see it do is NOT an understanding. A perfect analogy will fool you forever. Everyone is spending all of their time trying to master the paradigm, so they don't have time to question it. If you do, it falls apart, and most just don't want it to fall apart. If you would rather just boil it down to believers and nonbelievers, that just makes it sadder -like the ability to believe is somehow greater than being gullible?
Well..i still think watchin girls shake their butt on tiktok is the best way to learn all i need to know about gravity..or relativity for that matter
that's right...I myself prefer HOT LATEX BABES
And when the universe reaches heat death, this all goes away too.