Posts Tagged ‘What did they know and when did they know it?’

LIGO NOBEL: A Duty-to-inform message

October 20, 2017


nobel prize, nobel prize 2017, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, nobel fraud, kip thorne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nobel committee for physics, nobel committee for physics 2017, france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, david reitze ligo, physical review letters, pierre meystre, nobel foundation, royal swedish academy of sciences, kungliga vetenskapsakademien, nils martensson, olga botner

nobel prize, nobel prize 2017, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, nobel fraud, kip thorne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, kip thorne nobel prize, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, rainer weiss nobel prize, nobel committee for physics, nobel committee for physics 2017, france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, david reitze ligo, physical review letters, pierre meystre, nobel foundation, royal swedish academy of sciences, kungliga vetenskapsakademien, nils martensson, olga botner

Advertisements

LIGO FIFTH FRAUD

October 19, 2017


france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, thomas f. rosenbaum caltech, rafael l. reif mit, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, royal swedish academy of sciences, laura cadonati ligo, ligo neutron star merger, neutron star merger, binary neutron star, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, ligo science collaboration, lsc collaboration, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, thomas f. rosenbaum caltech, rafael l. reif mit, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, royal swedish academy of sciences, laura cadonati ligo, ligo neutron star merger, neutron star merger, binary neutron star, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, pierre meystre, physical review letters

LIGO COURTROOM DRAMA: Trial Part 8

October 13, 2017

TRIAL PART 8

ON THE WITNESS STAND: Rainer Weiss (for the Defendants)

VINO MOSCATO (Attorney for the Defendants): Professor Weiss, it is an honor to have you here. Congratulations on your Nobel Prize. Now, we know that you do not read stuff Dr. De puts out on the Internet or his book on LIGO. But at my request, you read that book before coming here. What is your reaction?

RAINER WEISS: I believe he cannot understand that LIGO is a novel instrument which cannot be judged by conventional instrumentation concepts.

MOSCATO: So is his entire book dismissible?

WEISS: I believe so.

MOSCATO: Is it correct to conclude that Dr. De is wallowing in his own misunderstandings in his book?

WEISS: I think that’s right.

MOSCATO: Thank you, Professor Weiss. I will not burden you further with this sort of thing. Your witness, Ms. Veritas.

ASSUMPTA VERITAS (Attorney for the Plainfiffs): Good Morning, Professor Weiss. Let’s get right down to it. Does the LIGO instrument have an input signal and an output signal, and if so, what are they? Also, for the ease of understanding, let us use the term wiggle for signal.

WEISS: Yes, there is an input wiggle and there is an output wiggle. The input wiggle would be a time trace of a number that is the linear size of something that is being sequentially contracted and expanded by the passage of a gravitational wave. The output wiggle would be this same wiggle as reported by the LIGO measuring system.

VERITAS: And the two wiggles are different?

WEISS: Yes.

VERITAS: So, is Dr. De correct in describing LIGO as a two-port instrument with an input port and an output port?

WEISS: We don’t look at it this way, but that description is OK up to a point.

VERITAS: And is he correct in saying that the input wiggle and the output wiggle – which are different – are related by an Instrument Transfer Function which must be determined and reported for LIGO to be a valid scientific instrument?

WEISS: This is where his confusion begins. What we do with LIGO is take the output wiggle as reported by LIGO, remove the noise component from it, and what remains is the input wiggle. This process is our equivalent of the conventional Transfer Function. The Instrument Transfer Function procedure is not applicable to LIGO.

VERITAS: Thank you for that clear statement. And the stuff you remove as noise, where does it come from?

WEISS: There are very many sources of noise – seismic ground vibration, a truck passing by, waves lapping on shore, distant thunder, … , And then there are also many types of instrument-origined noise.

VERITAS: When you speak of noise here, anything that is not gravitational wave signal is noise. Is this correct?

WEISS: Yes.

VERITAS: Very good. So, let us make a list of all possible external noise sources and label them A through K, say. Then all instrument-origined noise L through P, say. And let Q be the gravitational wave signal. So when your computer takes out the noise part, does it subdivide the noise into all these categories A through P, and show the tabulated values for the categories?

WEISS: Of course not. Our sophisticated digital technique can distinguish between signal and noise, and remove all that it identifies as noise, namely, A through P taken as a consolidated lump. Only the signal Q then remains, and that is the input wiggle. This is what we compare with the theory wiggle for black hole merger.

VERITAS: But the instrument-origined noise L through P is different from external noise A through K. The latter is not dependent on LIGO, the former is. It is more likely than not that L-P is correlated with Q, the input signal. The “noise” L-P could be harmonics of Q, for example. If your algorithm has instruction to take out out L-P, would not it take out some of Q as well? Or wouldn’t it leave some of L-P with Q? You simply cannot lump together A-K and L-P for the purpose of extracting Q. It may be convenient for the computer, but it is wrong physics.

WEISS: Now we are getting into complicated areas.

VERITAS: Not at all. We have just clarified your misunderstanding. It is the components L through P that necessitate the Instrument Transfer Function, not A through K. You are mixing up and mishandling them, and you are doing so to your benefit. By bypassing the Transfer Function procedure, you have given yourself leeway to make up your custom discovery wiggles from the data. There is nothing about LIGO that cannot be described and analyzed in terms of conventional instrument concept. What is your response to that?

WEISS: As I said, this subject is too complicated.

VERITAS: OK, let’s move on. As Dr. De has pointed out in his book, there is no written evidence anywhere that you have taken into account the Earth’s static magnetic field on the LIGO instrument all these years. What do you have to say about that?

WEISS: This effect is being studied.

VERITAS: So are your discoveries valid even though you left out this effect?

WEISS: This effect cannot be so important as to invalidate our discoveries.

VERITAS: And then Dr. De has also pointed out that you take the hypothetical properties of gravitational wave as true and operative, to deduce the passage of gravitational wave. You assume that the mirror motions are invisibly entangled (because a gravitational wave is passing through) to prove that a gravitational wave has passed through. There is absolutely no experimental evidence of any kind that the mirror motions are in invisible entanglement. This is a pure flight of fancy that leads you to report a tangible discovery.

WEISS: As I said, this is too complicated.

VERITAS: Dr. De has also shown that LIGO is not a complete scientific instrument. I believe the expression he used is “it is not all there.” LIGO cannot detect gravitational waves even if they existed and traversed LIGO. That is because it is the invisible entanglement of the mirrors that LIGO must experimentally demonstrate to report the detection of the wave. And LIGO has no way to do this.

WEISS: We have detected gravitational wave – four times now.

VERITAS: So you say. Professor Weiss, who is wallowing in his own misunderstanding, you or Dr. De? And what about your 1000 colleagues?

MOSCATO: Objection, Your Honor. There is no cause for this kind of taunt.

JUDGE: Overruled. You started this, Mr. Moscato!

VERITAS: Your Honor, I have no further questions.

JUDGE: The witness is excused.

LIGO COURTROOM DRAMA: Trial Part 7

October 13, 2017

TRIAL PART 7

ON THE WITNESS STAND: France Cordova (for the Defendants)

VINO MOSCATO (Attorney for the Defendants): Dr. Cordova, would you please tell the court who you are and what your connection to LIGO is?

FRANCE CORDOVA: I am the Director of National Science Foundation which is an autonomous agency that funds scientific research. The agency has supported LIGO research to detect gravitational wave for decades. Through good times and bad, our support has remained unwavering.

MOSCATO: And what is the total amount NSF has invested in LIGO thus far?

CORDOVA: It is about a billion dollars.

MOSCATO: Was it worth it? If yes, would you tell the court why?

CORDOVA: It was worth every cent we spent. LIGO gave us the greatest scientific discovery ever made. An entire new field of astronmy – called gravitational wave astronomy – has opened up. It gives us a new window on the Universe. We today speak already of multi-messenger astronomy.

MOSCATO: That’s great, Dr. Cordova. And how sure are you that the discovery is solid?

CORDOVA: I am absolutely sure. I have said so repeatedly in public and I have promised our continued support.

MOSCATO: And just to cover all grounds, has your agency’s Inspector General received any complaints about LIGO?

CORDOVA: None that I am aware of. There is no cloud hanging over the LIGO discovery as far as the agency is concerned. It is one of the most vetted scientific results in history.

MOSCATO: Thank you, Dr. Cordova. Your witness, Ms. Veritas.

ASSUMPTA VERITAS (Attorney for the Plainfiffs): Good Afternoon, Dr. Cordova. You have given us a picture of LIGO within your agency that is one hundred percent worry-free and trouble-free. But that’s not quite the case, is it?

CORDOVA: I don’t know what you mean.

VERITAS: Well, your IG may not have received any complaints about LIGO. But did you?

CORDOVA: Well, actually, a referral to the White House about LIGO was forwarded to us. It had some concerns about LIGO.

VERITAS: Do you recall who made that referral?

CORDOVA: I believe it was Dr. De who is sitting here in the courtroom.

VERITAS: And what did you do about those concerns?

CORDOVA: We had actually supported – regardless of that complaint – a study of the role of geomagnetic disturbances on LIGO that was one of Dr. De’s concerns.

VERITAS: OK, just so the jury can follow this issue, geomagnetic disturbances are of earthly origin while gravitational waves come from the far reaches of the Universe. The issue is which one of these LIGO is looking at. Looking at gravitational wave would mean a discovery. Looking at geomagnetic disturbance would mean no discovery. Is this correct?

CORDOVA: Yes, this is correct.

VERITAS: So then, what did that study conclude?

CORDOVA: I believe the study concluded that geomagnetic disturbances could mimic gravitational waves with respect to their simultaneous observation at multiple stations as well as the frequency content of the signal observed. It recommended that every LIGO station have the dedicated means of monitoring geomagnetic disturbances at a high level of accuracy. This monitoring is done with devices called magnetometers.

VERITAS: I will now read portions from the above study: “Going forward, Advanced LIGO and Advanced Virgo will have low noise magnetometers installed at each observatory site. It will be important to use the magnetometer data to identify coincident magnetic transient events, and veto those times…. Correlated
noise will be a real and legitimate concern for gravitational-wave searches using ground based detectors.”

In view of these findings, why aren’t the past discoveries suspect? If geomagnetic disturbances will be of such crucial importance in future, why were they not an issue in the past? Why aren’t the discoveries thus far suspect?

CORDOVA: We received assurances from the LIGO leaders that their discoveries thus far were shipshape.

VERITAS: Did it not occur to you that such assurances had to be false because no geomagnetic monitoring was available in the cases of the past discoveries?

CORDOVA: We took their word in implicit trust.

VERITAS: So you did not pursue this issue further?

CORDOVA: We had no reason to.

VERITAS: Would it have been within your authority to commission an independent engineering study of the LIGO instrument – independent of the LIGO organization? Such a study could be peformed, for example, by a high-tech consulting company likeThe Aerospace Corporation?

CORDOVA: It would have been within my authority, but that thought never ocurred to me.

VERITAS: Is this a failure of imagination?

CORDOVA: It is not usual for the agency to go outside the scientific establishment and order independent scientific investigations.

VERITAS: So – to summarize – you did receive a complaint about LIGO. You did conduct a study on it. The study gave categorical support to the complaint. But then you closed the matter based of assurances from LIGO and/or from LIGO proponents.

CORDOVA: We attended to the complaint. It had no merit. We moved on.

VERITAS: Who determined that it had no merit?

CORDOVA: The LIGO scientists did.

VERITAS: So you dismissed a complaint that is in scientific evidence as having substance, based on the recommendation of the very project against whom the complaint was made? And all this you did in a secret two-party dealing – NSF and LIGO?

CORDOVA: There is nothing secret about it. The study of geomagnetic disturbances was published.

VERITAS: Exactly where was it published?

CORDOVA: It was published in a special issue of the Journal of Classical and Quantum Gravity.

VERITAS: Is this even a remotely logical place to publish this study on the influence of geomagnetic disturbances on the LIGO instrument? Where do we get gravity here – classical or quantum?

CORDOVA: I cannot say why they decided to publish a paper in a particular journal. We do not micromanage the projects we fund.

VERITAS: Well, it seems to me that for various reasons the paper had to be published, but it was not desirable for it to become widely known. So it was buried in a journal where nobody would look for it.

MOSCATO: Objection, You Honor. Counsel is testifying.

JUDGE: Move on, Ms. Veritas.

VERITAS: Dr. Cordova, was the public informed of this highly significant geomagnetic study in any of the many LIGO public outreach forums where LIGO progress and LIGO developments were constantly being broadcast, bandied about and gloried upon?

CORDOVA: I don’t know the answer to that.

VERITAS: And after that study you still maintain that the discovery is one hundred percent solid?

CORDOVA: I certainly do.

VERITAS: Did it occur to you to inform the Nobel folks of this little-known but highly relevant study you conducted, a study that placed the LIGO discoveries in serious question?

CORDOVA: We do not get involved with the Nobel process.

VERITAS: Are you aware of two other independent studies – one from Japan and one from Russia – suggesting LIGO may have observed just geomagnetic disturbances? These studies were published even as LIGO was undergoing evaluation for the Nobel Prize.

CORDOVA: No. We are not researchers ourselves. We would not know of such studies unless LIGO or others inform us.

VERITAS: And now learning about those studies, you still maintain that the discovery is one hundred percent solid?

CORDOVA: Obviously I cannot answer that without having those studies you mention looked at, and receiving advice.

VERITAS: And who would be doing that looking and advising? LIGO? Would you be satisfied with more assurances from LIGO leaders?

CORDOVA: I suppose a completely independent report could be commissioned from outside the scientific establishment.

VERITAS: It would be a little late, wouldn’t it? The Nobel Prize has already been awarded and it is irrevocable.

CORDOVA: We are not responsible for what the Nobel people do.

VERITAS: I have no further questions for this witness, Your Honor.

JUDGE: The witness may step down.

LIGO COURTROOM DRAMA: Introduction

October 12, 2017


Scientific fraud – especially fraud at the highest, most rarefied levels of physics – cannot be understood by public in general. The best they can do is listen to generalized expert opinions and decide who they can trust. However, it is usually the party at fault which controls what is communicated to the public. This is certainly the case with LIGO.

So I have long wondered how I can effectively explain the LIGO fraud to the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker. How can the trusting public understand the hanky-panky that goes on in the backrooms of the inviolate temple of learning?

I have watched some courtroom drama on TV. And it has occurred to me that this can be a very effective vehicle to adopt here. The award of the Nobel Prize for this fraud has now prompted me to compose such a drama.

Starting with the next post, I will relate a courtroom drama series on LIGO. This is completely imaginary. Although I will use real names of real people (in public life and/or on public payroll), the statements I will have them making are not statements they ever made. But these statements will be consistent with the public persona they have presented in promoting and installing the LIGO fraud.

Now for the setting:

The LIGO Organization has been sued in the civil court by a taxpayer group that calls themselves The Guardians of Civilization. This group seeks to make LIGO regurgitate the public funds and to have a judge direct their criminal prosecution by the Government for science fraud and taxpayer fraud. Remember the following names:

Assumpta Veritas, Attorney for the Plaintiffs
Vino Moscato, Attorney for the Defendants
Asha Solomon, Judge

SERIAL SCIENCE FRAUD AWARDED NOBEL PRIZE

October 3, 2017

.

.


nobel prize, nobel prize 2017, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, royal swedish academy of sciences, nobel foundation, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, kip thorne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, thomas f. rosenbaum caltech, l. rafael reif mit

nobel prize, nobel prize 2017, nobel prize physics, nobel prize physics 2017, royal swedish academy of sciences, nobel foundation, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, kip thorne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, france cordova nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, scientific misconduct, science fraud, physics fraud, thomas f. rosenbaum caltech, l. rafael reif mit

LIGO FOURTH DETECTION

October 1, 2017


ligo fourth detection, Ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, france cordova nsf, ligo nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, pierre meystre, physical review letters, kip thorne, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss, rainer weiss ligo, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, gabriella gonzalez ligo, tarun souradeep, somak raychaudhury, breakthrough prize, kavli prize, gruber prize, shaw prize, korber foundation prize, princess of asturias prize, udan-zhongzhu science award, Frédérique Marion ligo, Giovanni Losurdo ligo, fred raab ligo, Jo van den Brand ligo

ligo fourth detection, Ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, france cordova nsf, ligo nsf, nsf ligo, national science foundation, national science board, pierre meystre, physical review letters, kip thorne, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss, rainer weiss ligo, david reitze ligo, david shoemaker ligo, laura cadonati ligo, gabriella gonzalez ligo, tarun souradeep, somak raychaudhury, breakthrough prize, kavli prize, gruber prize, shaw prize, korber foundation prize, princess of asturias prize, udan-zhongzhu science award, Frédérique Marion ligo, Giovanni Losurdo ligo, fred raab ligo, Jo van den Brand ligo
</FONT

LIGO: Where exactly does the buck stop?

August 29, 2017

Thomas F. Rosenbaum caltech, France Cordova nsf, L. Rafael Reif mit, Sen. John Thune, Rep. Lamar Smith, LSC Collaboration, LIGO Science Collaboration, scientific misconduct, science fraud

Thomas F. Rosenbaum caltech, France Cordova nsf, L. Rafael Reif mit, Sen. John Thune, Rep. Lamar Smith, LSC Collaboration, LIGO Science Collaboration, scientific misconduct, science fraud

Thomas F. Rosenbaum caltech, France Cordova nsf, L. Rafael Reif mit, Sen. John Thune, Rep. Lamar Smith, LSC Collaboration, LIGO Science Collaboration, scientific misconduct, science fraud

LIGO: The world demands answers

August 22, 2017


LIGO scientific collaboration. ligo collaboration, lsc collaboration. ligo gravitational waves, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, american physical society, american institute of physics, european physical society, institute of physics, physical review letters, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss ligo, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, dst india, david shoemaker ligo, gabriela gonzalez ligo, laura cadonati ligo, david reitze ligo, fiona harrison caltech, jacqueline hewitt mit, maria zuber mit, harry collins gravity’s kiss, govert schilling ripples in spacetime, janna levin black hole blues, karsten danzmann, korber foundation, breakthrough prize, kavli foundation, gruber foundation, shaw foundation, princess of asturias foundation, dennis overbye new york times, davide castelvecchi, miles obrien pbs, ethan siegel forbes, adrian cho science, laura greene aps, Christine Jones-Foreman aas, pierre meystre, pierre meystre prl, pierre meystre physical review letters

LIGO scientific collaboration. ligo collaboration, lsc collaboration. ligo gravitational waves, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, american physical society, american institute of physics, european physical society, institute of physics, physical review letters, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss ligo, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, dst india, david shoemaker ligo, gabriela gonzalez ligo, laura cadonati ligo, david reitze ligo, fiona harrison caltech, jacqueline hewitt mit, maria zuber mit, harry collins gravity’s kiss, govert schilling ripples in spacetime, janna levin black hole blues, karsten danzmann, korber foundation, breakthrough prize, kavli foundation, gruber foundation, shaw foundation, princess of asturias foundation, dennis overbye new york times, davide castelvecchi, miles obrien pbs, ethan siegel forbes, adrian cho science, laura greene aps, Christine Jones-Foreman aas, pierre meystre, pierre meystre prl, pierre meystre physical review letters

LIGO COVER UP

August 18, 2017

See previous post for reference.


lsc collaboration, ligo collaboration, ligo gravitational waves, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, kip thprne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, david shoemaker ligo, david reitze ligo

lsc collaboration, ligo collaboration, ligo gravitational waves, ligo hanford, ligo livingston, ligo virgo, ligo kagra, ligo india, nsf ligo, france cordova nsf, kip thprne, kip thorne caltech, kip thorne ligo, rainer weiss, rainer weiss mit, rainer weiss ligo, david shoemaker ligo, david reitze ligo