

Gravity Wave Detector Ready For Business 53
Arthur Embleton writes "The BBC has an article about a Gravity Wave Detector. There are two L shaped set-ups. One in Washington, the other in Louisiana. They've got a Laser pointing at a mirror 4km away, watching for the reflection and if it is distorted then it shows that there has been a gravitational pulse, possibly by two Black Holes colliding. The detectors are apparently so accurate they can measure to one-thousandth of the width of a proton! How did they test that it works?"
Really.. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think that's the problem. These detectors should work in theory, but gravitation waves are so minute when they get to us that it's _really_ hard to be able to get a reading on them. My bet is the first to provide fairly solid evidence of gravitational waves gets a Nobel.
Re:Really.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Really.. (Score:2)
My vote goes to Kip Thorne. He recommended building these things a long time ago and is still a key member of the project.
Black Holes and Time Warps [amazon.com] is a very good book (for the layperson) on the topic.
Re:Really.. (Score:1)
You win your bet. Russell Hulse and Joe Taylor won in 19xx for their work on the slowing down of a binary pulsar. The slowdown matches the expected orbital energy loss for dissipation by gravity waves. But you knew that, didn't you?
I believe gravity waves also make their presence known in the large angle fluctuations of the cosmic microwave background.
Some people will argue that those effects could be caused by something else, but such a coincidence seems as least as large as a simultaneous* jiggle in two places. What excites me about gravitational wave telescopes is that they are just that...telescopes that use something other than light. Black holes and supernovae tend to be dense and opaque, so gravity waves should reveal things that light (or even neutrinos) cannot.
* with the appropriate semblance of simultaneity, of course.
They'll probably find something else (Score:1, Interesting)
Kind of a serendipity type situation. Hell, maybe there's some sort of unanticipated effect of some sort of technology we have on earth that will be picked up by the thing. Oscillations from the sun. Maybe the earth is ringing sympathetically with the gravity waves that pass through it.
Too bad they can't rig this thing up with a bunch of elements. Maybe generate images of a sort.
so many things about it (Score:4, Interesting)
2)here [caltech.edu] toward the bottom of the page you can LOG IN to their system and view all the logs. the password and login is blatantly displayed on the site. we should all email [mailto] the site admin to have this changed.
3) I hope they figured it out for 300 million dollars, but wouldn't changes in gravity wave stretch / compress the tubes AND CAUSE REDSHIFT / BLUESHIFT in the lasers therefore cancelling out the effect?
I must correct myself (Score:2, Funny)
Observing this fantastically tiny effect is equivalent to detecting the motion of Saturn if it were to move closer to the sun by the diameter of a single hydrogen atom
so it's not the diameter of a proton but the diameter of a hydrogen atom. A lot better, but well, still pretty small.
Re:so many things about it (Score:1)
Re:so many things about it (Score:2, Insightful)
However, I am proposing that since there will be corresponding red/blue shifts in the two shafts, the lights will oscillate the same amount of cycles before merging again, therefore nullifying any potential phase difference, and hence eliminating the possibility of obtaining any result.
I'd think that building these tubes parallel (with a lot of distance between) would be better, because then you would really get phase-shifts from the finite speed of the gravity waves, a positive shift and then a negative shift between the two beams, as the wave affects them sequentially.
Of course, I am just armchair researching - like I said, sure hope they got this right for 300 million dollars.
Re:so many things about it (Score:3, Informative)
What you are saying makes sense only if there were some way a gravity wave could make one tube shorter and one tube longer the same amount at the same time, AND the same photon had to travel through both tubes.
However, it seems that blue/red shift issues are moot anyway, since the device works by basically measuring a relative shift in arrival time between two photons, not my measuring spectrum shift.
=Smidge=
Re:so many things about it (Score:2)
You mean like this [slashdot.org]?
Incidentally, they need two perpendicular beams at each location because they don't know in advance from which direction the gravity waves will be coming.
Re:so many things about it (Score:2)
Re:so many things about it (Score:1, Offtopic)
Why not build one IN SPACE (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Why not build one IN SPACE (Score:2)
And the price of launching something into space would probably be so huge that it would be smart to test the setup on earth before launching it anyway ;-)
They are building one IN SPACE (Score:1)
-Gabe
Re:Why not build one IN SPACE (Score:2)
"This week's finds" on LIGO (Score:4, Informative)
Re:"This week's finds" on LIGO (Score:2, Funny)
And what a versatile person; folk music AND advanced maths..
Oh, wait.. you said JOHN Baez?
Oops.
They got them elsewhere too (Score:2, Interesting)
All of them I approve, but what's up with Japan? Japan gets some 1,200 minor earthquakes per DAY. how in the world do they expect to overcome the seismic noise floor (pun somewhat intended)?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Doesn't matter (Score:5, Interesting)
If that were the case, I doubt that they would have gone through 4 hard years of painful undergraduate courses, followed by even harder grad school, then working through a post-doc position... all to secure a good pension. People like that just go into business.
They're in it for the hunt, the dream, the achievement... the advancement.
Interference (Score:3, Interesting)
As a physics student, I know of many who question the reliablility of such instruments, especially when they're on the surface of the Earth. The earth's crust is composed of constantly moving, shifting layers of rock that create almost constant imperceptible geologic disturbances. It's nearly impossible to completely negate these.
The scientists responsible for the experiments claim that the non-proximity of the two locations will negate any interference, but there is plenty of seismic data that shows that even the smallest tremors can be picked up by delicate equipment on the other side of the globe!
Re:Interference (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interference (Score:1)
Seismic waves are sounds, so they travel at the speed of sound. But you are still right because we are talking about sounds waves in rock and rock is more dense than air, so the seismic waves (in rock) are faster than sound (in air).
Re:Interference (Score:2)
More info (Score:5, Informative)
More slides here. [caltech.edu]
LIGO home page. [caltech.edu]
HTH.
Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:2)
Any reader here who can explain?
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:2)
And how would one go about making a 4km-long thing rigid, even if only in one axis?
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:1)
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:2)
But in any case, while vibrations almost perpendicular to both the axes would not interfere, that's only a very small percentage of the vibrations, and how many vibrations do you get coming from the air above or from the center of the earth? Remember, you've got the installation basically on the ground and most vibrations travel along the ground.
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:5, Informative)
They don't. They damp out a certain amount of vibration via clever mountings, etc.
Then they make sure that all the rest happens at very specific frequencies. You can think of a guitar string. When you jolt a guitar, the string will "sing" at its tuned note. I think the LIGO mirror supports are incredibly precisely tuned.
Now they only look for gravity waves at other frequencies, mainly ones away from where seismic noise mostly is.
Finally, they compare respoonses from two remote detectors and look for "matching" events separated by the speed of light, instead of the speed of seismic waves.
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Insulation from vibrations noise... (Score:1)
Showing that it works (Score:4, Funny)
As everyone is well aware, a gravaton pulse has a 78.2% probability of overloading the power conduits leading to microfractures in the dilithium chamber and a chain reaction that causes a rift in the space-time continuum.
Basically, Seven of Nine appeared briefly, bad mouthed someone about something they may do one day in an alternate future, recalibrated the sensors not to detect her, and never appeared in the first place.
Scientists analysing the situation need only to look for a slight seemingly-random deviation in the operational parameters and one operator who feels insulted for no particular reason, in order to prove this theory.
How did they test it? (Score:1, Funny)
hmm... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:hmm... (Score:1)
-Gabe
Really real? (Score:2)
I've been thinking maybe a particular object is flagged out of an optical catalogue then the total data chunk is parsed for waves that should be coming from that particular object. I'm imagining the detector as like a dipole antenna and having two of them a particular object is tracked using a sort of gravitational Doppler shift between the two (soon to be three) sites. Am I close or do I need a few more physics classes? Can anybody in the know shed some light (pun intended) on this problem for me?
Re:Really real? (Score:1)
At this point, there is no way to look at a particular celestial object as I understand it; the basic objective is just to prove the existence of gravity waves.
Re:Really real? (Score:2)
Re:Really real? (Score:1)
Basically they have a good idea what a gravity wave will look like when it comes from a particular object. They are simply looking for a similar 'signature'.
You can't actually focus the detectors for this, they just interpret what is detected.
If the fact that there are more than one of these detectors confuses anyone... They are simply (or not so simply) used to filter out the vibrations coming from our own planet. The detectors should see the waves coming from space the same way. Any differences (above a tiny margin) are considered to be coming from earth.
So, I guess you could say that they focus, but rather than focusing on a particular object in space, they focus on all objects outside our planet.
Re:Really real? (Score:1)
To be less confusing:
another way to measure (Score:1)
A guy in Brazil wanted to build a detector like this (3m in height) for US$ 2million. Let's see what he can do with that... there would be hundred of those in the USA for that amount.