Posts Tagged ‘Covering up science fraud’

THE LIGO COMMENTARIAT

February 18, 2017


LIGO gravitational wave, LIGO scam, LIGO fraud, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, Dennis Overbye, Dennis Overbye NYT, Dennis Overbye New York Times, Adrian Cho, Adrian Cho Science, Miles O’Brien, Miles O’Brien PBS, Geoff Brumfie, Geoff Brumfiel NPR, Davide Castelvecchi, Davide Castelvecchi Nature, Hamish Johnston, Hamish Johnston Physics World, Ian Sample, Ian Sample The Guardian, Joel Achenbach, Joel Achenbach Washington Post, nsf ligo, nsf oig, ligo india, ostp, ostp white house, DAE India, DST India
ligo_reporters

LIGO gravitational wave, LIGO scam, LIGO fraud, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, Dennis Overbye, Dennis Overbye NYT, Dennis Overbye New York Times, Adrian Cho, Adrian Cho Science, Miles O’Brien, Miles O’Brien PBS, Geoff Brumfie, Geoff Brumfiel NPR, Davide Castelvecchi, Davide Castelvecchi Nature, Hamish Johnston, Hamish Johnston Physics World, Ian Sample, Ian Sample The Guardian, Joel Achenbach, Joel Achenbach Washington Post, nsf ligo, nsf oig, ligo india, ostp, ostp white house, DAE India, DST India

BOOKS ON LIGO DISCOVERY

February 17, 2017


LIGO discovery, LIGO books, LIGO book knopf, LIGO book MIT Press, LIGO fraud, LIGO scam, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, Janna Levin, Harry Collins, Bibhas De, Black Hole Blues, Garvity’s Kiss, Unchallenged Privilege, LIGO gravitational wave, Janna Levin book, Harry Collins book, Bibhas De book

ligo_books

LIGO discovery, LIGO books, LIGO book knopf, LIGO book MIT Press, LIGO fraud, LIGO scam, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, Janna Levin, Harry Collins, Bibhas De, Black Hole Blues, Garvity’s Kiss, Unchallenged Privilege, LIGO gravitational wave, Janna Levin book, Harry Collins book, Bibhas De book

NO SOUP FOR LIGO’S KAVLI LAUREATES!

February 10, 2017

2014-obama-kavli

2014 Kavli Laureates visit President Obama

Since the first award of the Kavli Prize in 2008, it has become an integral part of the Kavli award ceremony to have photographs taken of the awardees with the President of the United States. This happened in 2008 with President Bush, and in 2010, 2012 and 2014 with President Obama (The Prize is given every two years.) So a standing agreement is in place in this regard.

As far as I can find out, President Obama did not meet publicly with the 2016 Kavli Laureates (they include the LIGO pioneers Ronald Drever, Kip Thorne and Rainer Weiss.)

There were a few months after the 2016 awards were given out in Oslo and before President Obama left office. Surely his office could have found a few minutes for this traditional ritual!

There are two possibilities.

Kavli Foundation requested the meeting with President Obama and the White House did not arrange it. (Why?)

Kavli Foundation did not request the meeting with President Obama. (Why?)

In the second case, it may be that the Kavli Foundation for some reason preferred to wait for President Trump. In this case the ritual may take place yet and keep the vaunted tradition unbroken. We may yet see the 2016 version of the above photograph.

WHY US SCIENCE-FUNDING NEEDS NEW MODEL

February 2, 2017


I use the LIGO example to clearly illustrate what is wrong with the overall US science-funding model: Control by powerful cabals, rampant cronyism, unwillingness to reform and willingness to cover up. The science-funding mechanism today verges on racketeering by intellectuals, their ‘marks’ being the taxpayers.

[Am I generalizing to all fields of science from a single field? No, they are all corrupt, to one degree or another. If you want another example from a very different field, consider medical research. Check out the case Fazlul Sarkar v John Does wending its way through the courts. A high-flying academic fraud was thriving very well with great funding until Internet dissidents exposed him.]

An example of how far this corruption has advanced is the effort in the National Science Foundation (NSF), the funder of LIGO, to shove down the gullet of India the LIGO fraud. The US Ligonauts have enlisted some useful fools in India, and are now about to install another copy of their 8-km high-tech dowsing rod in India with the help of the native fools. In this way India will help legitimize the US fraud, and the enterprise will be strengthened.

Recently NSF, on the advice of the National Science Board (NSB), declared certain funding priorities as follows:

The Astrophysics and Cosmology Theory program supports proposals that primarily are involved with theoretical particle astrophysics and big-bang cosmology as well as more speculative string theory-inspired cosmologies.

Big Bang Cosmology is in plain scientific evidence as a field of science developed through a series of experiments that are either scammed or fraudulent.

String Theory is frou-frou science that has been going nowhere very fast and very loudly for more than three decades. It is a vehicle of intellectual masturbation by a chosen few.

But this is not all. If you do not do fraud science or frou-frou science, you are being asked to take a hike by the gatekeeper of this exclusive club. You have go fight for funds in another milieu altogether:

Research in cosmology and astrophysics topics not mentioned above is supported by the Astronomy and Astrophysics Research Grants Program in the MPS Division of Astronomical Sciences.

Ligo gravitational wave, LIGO India, LIGO fraud, LIGO scam, scientific misconduct, science fraud, National Science Foundation, NSF LIGO, NSB, National Science Board, France Cordova, France Cordova NSF, France Cordova LIGO, Maria Zuber, Maria Zuber MIT, Allison Lerner NSF, NSF OIG, OSTP, OSTP White house, caltech ligo, mit ligo

Ligo gravitational wave, LIGO India, LIGO fraud, LIGO scam, scientific misconduct, science fraud, National Science Foundation, NSF LIGO, NSB, National Science Board, France Cordova, France Cordova NSF, France Cordova LIGO, Maria Zuber, Maria Zuber MIT, Allison Lerner NSF, NSF OIG, OSTP, OSTP White house, caltech ligo, mit ligo

WOLFGANG ENGELHARDT’S LETTER OPPOSING 2017 NOBEL PRIZE FOR LIGO

January 31, 2017


Today is the Nobel Prize 2017 nomination deadline. It is certain that powerful LIGO nominations are in – powerfully written recommendations from powerful physicists.

What do we have to counteract these nominations? Professor Wolfgang Engelhardt has renewed and updated this year his past year’s referral to the Physics Nobel Committee:


To Professor Nils Mårtensson (chairman),
nils.martensson @physics.uu.se, info @kva.se

2017-01-14
Dear Professor Mårtensson,

you are certainly aware of the Open Letter to the Nobel Committee for Physics 2016. Unfortunately, the uncertainties concerning the LIGO experiment have not been removed during the past year. On the contrary, neither an event of similar magnitude as GW150914 was detected, nor was the calibration paper arXiv:1602.03838v1 [gr-qc] 11 Feb 2016 published in a peer reviewed journal. The co-authors Prof. Bruce Allen and Prof. Karsten Danzmann do not even list this e-print among their publications in ResearchGate, although this report was cited in reference [63] of PRL 116, 061102 (2016) as an integral part of the ‘discovery’. There is no doubt, without proving experimentally LIGO’s ability to measure 10 oscillations of heavy mirrors with an amplitude of one thousandth of a proton radius within 200 milliseconds as allegedly induced by GW150914 one cannot claim any discovery.

Nevertheless, some authors of the ‘discovery paper’ PRL 116, 061102 (2016) express in the media their expectation that LIGO must be awarded a Nobel Prize in 2017. I am sure, your Committee will not comply with these unfounded and unreasonable requests until a solid experimental proof of a real discovery of the hypothetical gravitational waves has been published.

Yours sincerely,
Wolfgang Engelhardt

This is a very good step. Think about it: The Nobel Committee and their consultants may not be reading about the Internet dissidence. So, without such a referral sent directly to the Committee, they may never even know that there is anything the matter with the LIGO discovery.

Over spring and summer and going into fall, look for the LIGO gang “servicing” the Nobel nomination: Great presence and posturing in the media, accompanied perhaps by announcement of a few more confirmatory discoveries. They will also continue to build up the larger-than-life LIGO heroes. And of course the great physics commentariat will do its part in the campaign.

LIGO: Instrument design philosophy

January 8, 2017

To this day there has not been any questioning of the LIGO discovery from within the mainstream physics community.

Internet criticisms of LIGO science can be divided into three categories:

CATEGORY A CRITICISMS

– Questioning General Relativity;
– Questioning the existence or the properties of black holes;
– Questioning the existence or the properties of gravitational wave.

CATEGORY B CRITICISMS

– Basic instrument “philosophy”;
– The execution of that philosophy;
– The functioning of the instrument;
– The instrument environment;
– Non-gravitational wave causes of simultaneous signals at two detectors;
– Non-gravitational wave causes of upchirp (increase in frequency with time of the signal).

CATEGORY C CRITICISMS

– Questioning suspicious timings and coincidences and circumstances;
– Invoking sabotage, hacking, injecting of artificial signal etc;
– Conspiracy to report false discovery.

I have not been concerned with C, and I am not knowledgeable on A. So my own investigation concerns B.

While all criticisms have something useful to offer about one aspect or another of the LIGO science, in the end it all boils down to the fact that the instrument concept is inherently unsound at the very core, right off the bat. When this is realized, all other criticisms (including some of my own) become redundant.

So I want to rehash this point: The instrument “philosophy”. There are two clear reasons why this instrument should never have been developed.

The first one has been expressed succinctly by Professor Claes Johnson:

We see a combination of a biggest possible cause/input and a smallest possible effect/output in a certain mathematical model. The conclusion comes from using this mathematical model in inverse form, where a smallest possible signal is used to identify a biggest possible origin of the signal. This means that the mathematical model in inverse form is extremely ill-posed and as such cannot be used to draw conclusions.

What does an ill-posed mathematical problem mean in physics?

The first LIGO discovery saw the conversion of about three solar masses to gravitational wave energy. This energy was said to be near the high end of expected energy releases in the universe. The LIGO signal in this case was barely above the noise threshold.

The second event released about one solar mass and the signal was buried deep in the noise.

Recent improvement of about 25% in LIGO sensitivity was said to about all that can be done. This hardly changes anything.

So:

Infinitely large explosions in the universe cause LIGO signals that are buried below the noise threshold or barely rise above it. This is the inherent nature of LIGO: An ill-posed physics problem.

Let E be the total energy released in a black holes merger (in Joules, say).

The total energy received by the LIGO “aperture” during the passage of the wavefront – which can be calculated from the strain signal observed – is infinitely small in comparison, as the Ligonauts have explained. Let us call this e (Joules).

So, for LIGO instrument design purposes,

e/E = 0.

This is true even if it is possible to write down an actual large number for E (e.g. 10**48 Joules) and an actual small number for e. Simply writing down a numerical value (ten to the power …) for what is essentially infinity, and one for what is essentially zero (in comparison) does not make infinity and zero tractable in instrument design.

By differentiating above equation:

Δe/ΔE = e/E = 0;

ΔE/Δe = E/e = ∞

Thus a measurement uncertainty Δe cannot be related to an uncertainty ΔE in the source.

So this is the imagery to carry in your mind: The sources release energies covering the whole expected range, but the needle of the LIGO meter remains stuck near the left in a grey-shaded band representing noise.

Conclusion: LIGO is not a proper scientific instrument.

The Ligonauts have tried deliberately to detract attention from the fact that they are dealing with infinity vis-a-vis zero, by plastering the world with fantastic but well-scripted stories about both the large end and the small end – making them each a finite concept.

On the source end the storyline is:

… this is the biggest explosion since Big Bang…

Since the (bogus) Big Bang explosion is something everyone knows to be hardcore reality, the black hole explosion is thus brought under the umbrella of quantitatively tractable phenomena.

On the detection end the storyline is:

… our technology is so advanced that we can measure displacements as small as 1/10,000-th of the proton diameter …

Since proton diameter is a known physics parameter, the zero is elevated to a finite, tractable context.

The Ligonauts are easily the most organized and the cleverest deceivers in the history of man. They have transformed today’s highly refined art of propaganda into a science. They can pass off total absurdity as an act of great genius.

The other instrument philosophy point is the invisible entanglement of the two mirrors. The two LIGO end mirrors are, by design, mechanically independent (isolated). They vibrate freely of each other. But when a gravitational wave passes through, the mirror motions become entangled. This is the effect of the gravitational wave, according to theory. This entanglement is what the LIGO instrument has to demonstrate as happening – first and foremost.

Instead, the Ligonauts assume in retrospect that the independent mirror motions must have suddenly changed to entangled mirror motion in the case of a ‘discovery’ wiggle. Some machine Manitou or Maxwell’s demon must have been sitting in there to synchronize the mirrors on cue at discovery time. This is ridiculous nonsense.

There is zero experimental evidence that the independent mirror motions suddenly experience an invisible – almost telepathic – entanglement at discovery time. This also means that there is zero experimental evidence that LIGO ever saw a gravitational wave.

Conclusion: LIGO is not a proper scientific instrument.

But now for a little levity. Just this last week Kip Thorne addressed a big conference in India. Here he escalated the linguistic bombast about LIGO. The title of his talk:

Exploring the universe with Gravitational Waves & Ultra precise technology

Ultra precise indeed!

Remember COBE’s 50 ppm accuracy and BICEP2’s seven sigma confidence level?

COBE and BICEP2 were worthless jalopies. So is LIGO.

Together they cost the American taxpayers billions of dollars. The Indian taxpayers are next in line to be led to the the American-style fleecing house that is being set up there.

PHYSICS AND PHYSICISTS AT THE THRESHOLD OF 2017

January 2, 2017

[Sorry, tectonic misspelled in the graphic!]

american institute of physics, american physical society, optical society of america, society of physics students, physical review, physical review letters, physics today, nature magazine, science magazine, science news, pbs nova, ostp, ostp white house, nsf, nsf ligo, mit ligo, caltech ligo, nasa, ligo gravitational waves, ligo india, cobe satellite, big bang cosmology, big bang theory cosmology, bicep2, harvard smithsonian center for astrophysics,kip thorne ligo, kip thorne caltech, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss caltech, john mather, john mather nasa, john kovac harvard, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize physics, physics nobel prize, kavli prize, gruber prize, shaw prize, breakthrough prize, time magazine most influential person, 2016 breakthrough of the year, scientific breakthrough of the year, nature’s 10, scientific misconduct, science fraud

american institute of physics, american physical society, optical society of america, society of physics students, physical review, physical review letters, physics today, nature magazine, science magazine, science news, pbs nova, ostp, ostp white house, nsf, nsf ligo, mit ligo, caltech ligo, nasa, ligo gravitational waves, ligo india, cobe satellite, big bang cosmology, big bang theory cosmology, bicep2, harvard smithsonian center for astrophysics,kip thorne ligo, kip thorne caltech, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss caltech, john mather, john mather nasa, john kovac harvard, nobel prize in physics, nobel prize physics, physics nobel prize, kavli prize, gruber prize, shaw prize, breakthrough prize, time magazine most influential person, 2016 breakthrough of the year, scientific breakthrough of the year, nature’s 10, scientific misconduct, science fraud

LIGO SONG for the Jungle Drums

December 29, 2016

Folks, towards the year’s end the pace of awards and accolades to LIGO has reached a crescendo! Never has the world seen such high level and such intense promotional campaign mobilized behind such garbage science.

There is underway a systematic effort by the establishment-media axis to get the world to accept fraud science as science that is established beyond question. Even PBS and NOVA have become party to this.

Breakthrough of the Year, Breakout of the Year, … They are doing everything possible with the word ‘break’ except telling you that what they are really doing is breaking wind in public.

That’s the post-truth nature of physics for you. It is unfolding in parallel with the post-truth nature of world affairs.

But I noticed a significant silence from one quarter: The Jungle Drums. The Jungle Drums they know only one thing – the Plain Jane truth. So on my urging my primate buddies from the bushveld have issued this little number.

Post-truth or Plain Jane truth – your choice!


Ligo, Ligo gravitational wave, ligo science collaboration, ligo india, Kip Thorne, Kip Thorne Caltech, Kip Thorne ligo, Rainer Weiss, Rainer Weiss MIT, Rainer Weiss ligo, France Cordova, France Cordova NSF, nsf, nsf ligo, Breakthrough prize, breakthrough prize ligo, Yuri milner, ligo dissidents, breakthrough of 2016, Science Magazine Breakthrough of 2016, Science Magazine ligo, Smithsonian Ligo, Nature Ligo, PBS ligo, NOVA ligo, kavli prize, shaw prize, gruber prize

Ligo, Ligo gravitational wave, ligo science collaboration, ligo india, Kip Thorne, Kip Thorne Caltech, Kip Thorne ligo, Rainer Weiss, Rainer Weiss MIT, Rainer Weiss ligo, France Cordova, France Cordova NSF, nsf, nsf ligo, Breakthrough prize, breakthrough prize ligo, Yuri milner, ligo dissidents, breakthrough of 2016, Science Magazine Breakthrough of 2016, Science Magazine ligo, Smithsonian Ligo, Nature Ligo, PBS ligo, NOVA ligo, kavli prize, shaw prize, gruber prize

A VERY BRIEF HISTORY OF LIGO

December 20, 2016

11 February 2016

EUREKA! EUREKA!

Kavli Prize
Shaw Prize
Gruber Prize
Breakthrough Prize
TIME Most Influential Man

17 December 2016

MISTAKE! MISTAKE!

LIGO: Mistakes admitted, design change needed

December 18, 2016

Suddenly now, a new tune emerges! Remember that so far the world has been told that the LIGO discovery is 100.00% solid, that there is not an iota of doubt. We have heard of improvements being made to an already perfect LIGO instrument for even greater perfection.

But now a prominent US Ligonaut is speaking of mistakes with the US LIGO that will be corrected while building the Indian LIGO.

Also, so far we have been told that LIGO India will be an exact replica of the US LIGO. Suddenly we hear talk of “a different technology”! They are going to design a new LIGO India.

Given the supremely holy attitude of the Ligonauts, this is nothing less than a total about-face. There is a great deal that should be read into this:

“The need for an Indian LIGO is well justified. Each observatory is different and uses a different technology. We will put the mistakes of US detectors to rest while designing LIGO India. The country’s unique location will help detect gravitational sources more accurately,” said Rana Adhikari, a professor at California Institute of Technology, who is involved in the development of LIGO India.

Here, for comparison, is what the LIGO India plan was as recently as September:

The team currently operating the US detectors will provide the Indian researchers with the hardware for a complete LIGO interferometer that detects the wave signals; technical data on its design, installation and commissioning; and the training required to build and run the observatory. The Indian team will provide the site; all other infrastructure required to house and operate the interferometer; and the labor, materials, and supplies for installing, commissioning, and operating the detector. The plan is to have it operational by 2024.

So given this abrupt admission of mistakes by a senior LIGO scientist, what about the LIGO discovery?

Them Nobel folks have escaped narrowly by not awarding the prize this year. May be they have Professor Wolfgang Engelhardt to thank.

Now I would like to say something to the Indian physics community at large. This new song is yet another deception. There is nothing to fix in LIGO. It is a flawed instrument concept at the very basic level. The instrument philosophy conceived by Rainer Weiss is all wrong. And Rana Adhikari is a student of Rainer Weiss. Baap ka beta, Sipahi ka ghoda; Kuch aur nahi to thoda thoda.

I have explained the central fraud (fraud – not mistake!) with LIGO instrument many times in many ways. Let me try to pinpoint this again.

LIGO has two end mirrors whose axes are perpendicular to each other. The mirrors are not mechanically coupled in any way. Each vibrates independently depending on how it is actuated. That is a necessary principle of the instrument. If you tap one mirror in the back, it will oscillate but the other mirror will do nothing. Similarly, if a geomagnetic or seismic disturbance actuates LIGO, each mirror will vibrate depending on how it is actuated.

LIGO end mirrors

LIGO end mirrors

Now, the theory of gravitational wave says that if such a wave came down vertically (say) and hit LIGO, the two mirrors would be in an entangled mode of vibration. As one mirror moves in towards the corner of the L, the other mirror moves out. The “displacement” curves would be 180 degrees out of phase but otherwise synchronous, and equal in amplitude. This entangled mode of mirror vibration is the desired proof that a gravitational wave has passed through. This is what is to be observed. After this observation has been analyzed to establish the passage of a gravitational wave, the interference waveform between the two mirrors can be used to make inferences about the source of the gravitational wave.

WHAT LIGO SHOULD SEEK TO OBSERVE

BASIC OBSERVATION A: The displacement traces for the two mirrors, showing they are synchronous and 180 degrees out of phase, and have equal amplitudes. (This is the detection of gravitational wave.)

DEPENDENT OBSERVATION B: The interference wave between the two mirrors. (This, in conjunction with a source model, can be used to make inferences about the source of the wave.)

WHAT LIGO ACTUALLY DOES

(1). LIGO dispenses with the Observing Step A, and simply preaches instead that the two mirrors are in entangled vibration. You are told to accept this as Received Truth.

(2). With this preaching, LIGO proceeds directly to the Observing Step B, and reports both the discovery of gravitational wave and its source mechanism.

Step 1 above is the fraud. It amounts to “fixing” the instrument in advance to guarantee the finding of gravitational waves. All they have to do is wait to observe the “right” kind of wiggle to show up that they can fit their source model to – a model that has great flexibility.

The fix is in! It’s in there!

Get out of the LIGO mess while you can! Don’t get pulled in deeper and deeper. If you want to do gravitational wave, do gravitational wave by all means. Start from scratch, conceive your own instrument, and for god’s sake, bring in the right people.