Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About DParlevliet

  • Rank
  1. Measuring gravitational waves

    In the new exibition of the museum Boerhave in Leiden (Netherlands) I saw the MiniGRAIL, a gravitational wave measuring device which prooved to be not sensitive enough. It was based on mechanical resonance in a copper ball. So gravitational waves loose energy in mass.
  2. Measuring gravitational waves

    I think this part of a publication gives the answer. Only free masses will follow the gravity wave, with solid mass the atomic forces prevent this mostly (except elastic):
  3. Measuring gravitational waves

    I have been looking for a scientific description of LIGO and gravitywave detection (difficult to find) and found a probably misunderstandig from me. According Wikipedia: "measure gravitational-wave induced motion between separated 'free' masses" and another website: "uses widely-separated test masses freely suspended as pendulums". So the mirrors are not fixed on a solid base as I expected, but can freely move and therefore follow the gravity wave, without interatomic forces preventing it. But there is still the question of a solid metal ruler and: Simple answers "no" and "different phenomena" are no science. Explain what is the physical effect on space of space expansion and gravitywave and differs in what. I think only in the shape. Expansion/scrinking of space results in large/smaller distances in space and a gravitywave does the same. So why would in one case interatomic forces prevent this in a solid mass and in the other case not?
  4. Measuring gravitational waves

    Or a better question: suppose the arms of the LIGO are made of solid iron on with de detectors/mirrots etc. are build. If a gravitywave passes this iron, why would the interatomic forces not prevent the space expansion or contraction of the wave?
  5. Measuring gravitational waves

    Is a gravity wave also a natural expansion/contraction, but now in ~~sinus schape? Or: what is the difference?
  6. Measuring gravitational waves

    But if the universe would be solid iron.
  7. Measuring gravitational waves

    So when the universe would be fully (homogeneous) massive mass, this mass would expand with space and the distance between atoms would be expand too? When this type of universe would be half the present size, the distance between atoms would also be half the present distance?
  8. Measuring gravitational waves

    Nothing, but the difference of theory is important. As a result of StringJunky's answer: LIGO measures an invariance in licht speed during a gravity wave, so not a constant light speed. I have never realised that. So when we were there when the universe was half the present size, we would measur a different light speed: twice faster or slower (not sure yet what).
  9. Measuring gravitational waves

    Why? What is the diference between expanding universe, and expanding during a gravity wave. Both are expanding space. I think the arms are not expanding/shrinking, but the space in between. Only light is effected by that. Now I understand why one cannot measure a gravity wave with a ruler: it would measure no expanding/shrinking of the arms because there is none. It's the space between the detectors which expands/shrinks.
  10. Measuring gravitational waves

    Brian Greene mentioned it as being a force. So a ruler will not expand with space and so will not follow a gavity wave, which essentially expands/schrinks in sinus form.
  11. Measuring gravitational waves

    But what about the size of a planet. I have read that a planet does not expand, because the force of the expanding universe is very small compared to the atomic forces. Then I would expect that a ruler also does not expand. Or an other example: at the time the univers was half its present size, would the earth (and distance between atoms) also be half the size?
  12. Measuring gravitational waves

    A gravity-wave expands/schrinks space. If a mechanical ruler would expand/schrink in the same way, it is not possible to measure the gravity wave with a mechanical ruler (in theory, in practice it is not possible anyway of course). Or simple: if space expands, does a ruler expands with it?
  13. Measuring gravitational waves

    On the radio I heard the explanation of a scientific writer about measuring gravity waves (or better: space waves). He told that in principle one could not measure these with a ruler, because this would follow the wave (therefore it is measured with light). However I also read that while the universe (space) is expandig, that matter does not expand in the same way because the forces between atoms is much larger then the expension forces of space. But to my understanding a gravitation wave is an expension/shrinking of space in sinusform. So why would a mechanical ruler follow these waves?
  14. Doubt on Gravitation

    I suppose that in Einsteins equations there is time, which always proceeds, and that is the "movement" in the fourth dimension we are talking about. In the model that is visualised by multiply time by c, then all four axis have the same dimension space in which there is always (invisable) movement in the time axis. In the model of Migl the same: the travel North is the movement in time. A model without movement would be a model without time, and that is really not reality.
  15. Doubt on Gravitation

    It was a reply to studiot, not to you. Indeed if two objects does not move relative to each other then gravitation (by curvation of spave) can only be explained in a model with movement in time. Thats is what the video showed. That is what Migl showed if one of its axis is time. But studiot did not agree with the video. Then explain how gravity exist in the case Sooryarikan proposed.