Is LIGO’s 2nd detection of gravitational waves mostly just noise? Why is the data so very different (and seemingly noiseier) from the first set of data from a supposedly similar black hole merger event?
LOL LIGO! BREAKING LIGO NEWS! LIGO DETECTS MORE GRAVITATIONAL WAVES! LIGO DETECTS ANOTHER BLACK HOLE! LIGO BAGS NEW BLACK HOLE! LIGO DETECTS MORE GRAVITAIONAL WAVES!
Welcome to the era of click-bait “science.”
SECOND LIGO DISCOVERY! LIGO SEES 2ND GRAVITATIONAL WAVE! LIGO DETECTS ANOTHER BLACK HOLE MERGER ! LIGO BAGS NEW BLACK HOLES MERGING! LIGO DETECTS GRAVITAIONAL WAVES!
And yet, I bet, not one single regurgitator/reporter could explain a gravitational wave to you, let alone an interferometer.
The remarkable thing about the data from this second “discovery” of a black hole merger is that it looks absolutely noting like the data from the first black hole merger.
There is no spiraling in nor ring-down data present.
Here is the data for the new gravitational wave “discovery”–and please note that the black signal was scribbled over the noise by the LIGO lovers. Yes. That is right. The signal they are selling to the public was scribbled over the LIGO noise.
It is almost as if LIGO is desperate to call any tiny, faint, post-scribbled bump a “black hole merger,” and a “gravitational wave” so as to demonstrate reproducible results.
But the thing about reproducible results is that the actual results must be reproduced, which, in fact, they weren’t. Not even close. Here is the data from the first “detection”:
Note how the second detection seems to be a lot of noise, while the first detection may or may not be a black mole merger, as the experiment has never been reproduced.
But simple facts do not matter to the multi-billion-dollar ,click-bait science industry which hates both God and Science in Spirit, favoring stringy multivere maniac hype over the reproducible results and repeatable experiments favored by Newton, Galileo, Einstein, Bohr, Feynman, and Heisenberg.
Well, more analysis of the data soon! We will be showing the graphs of the second “detection” beside those of the first when they become available!
LIGO NEWS BREAKING!
Nanoweek reports that this second signal was not like the first, as this “signal” was “burried in detector noise.” It wasn’t “seen” until it was filtered to match a pre-conceived signal. The question then becomes, how easy is it to filter noise so as to match a pre-conceived signal?
The event was much weaker than the first detection on September 14 and was buried in the detector noise. A so-called “matched-filter” search was essential for the detection. In such searches, the data are compared to or filtered with many predicted signals in order to find the best match. The predicted signals are based on highly accurate gravitational-wave models developed by scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics (Albert Einstein Institute). It was thanks to these models that the LIGO science team was able to show that the signal was caused by the merger of two black holes.