Date: Oct 5, 2017 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: Fake Gravitational Waves Paralyzed Physics
On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 11:01:27 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, Pavel Naselsky, June 27, 2017: "As a member of the LIGO collaboration, Ian Harry states that he "tried to reproduce the results quoted in 'On the time lags of the LIGO signals'", but that he "[could] not reproduce the correlations claimed in section 3". Subsequent discussions with Ian Harry have revealed that this failure was due to several errors in his code. After necessary corrections were made, his script reproduces our results. His published version was subsequently updated. [...] It would appear that the 7 ms time delay associated with the GW150914 signal is also an intrinsic property of the noise. The purpose in having two independent detectors is precisely to ensure that, after sufficient cleaning, the only genuine correlations between them will be due to gravitational wave effects. The results presented here suggest this level of cleaning has not yet been obtained and that the identification of the GW events needs to be re-evaluated with a more careful consideration of noise properties." http://www.nbi.ku.dk/gravitational-waves/gravitational-waves.html
> James Creswell, Sebastian von Hausegger, Andrew D. Jackson, Hao Liu, Pavel Naselsky, August 21, 2017: "In view of unsubstantiated claims of errors in our calculations, we appreciated the opportunity to go through our respective codes together - line by line when necessary - until agreement was reached. This check did not lead to revisions in the results of calculations reported in versions 1 and 2 of arXiv:1706.04191 or in the version of our paper published in JCAP. It did result in changes to the codes used by our visitors [LIGO conspirators]. [...] In light of the above, our view should be clear: We believe that LIGO has not yet attained acceptable standards of data cleaning. Since we regard proof of suitable cleaning as a mandatory prerequisite for any meaningful comparison with specific astrophysical models of GW events, we continue to regard LIGO's claims of GW discovery as interesting but premature." http://www.nbi.ku.dk/gravitational-waves/gravitational-waves-comment2.html
> Was there noise correlation in the fourth, GW170814, "discovery" of gravitational waves? If there isn't noise correlation anymore, why are LIGO conspirators silent about the essence of the problem and the way they have fixed it?
> Of all the scientists in the post-truth world, almost no one could think of a reason why such questions should be answered. Blatant fraudsters are admired, not interrogated.
> Pentcho Valev
Honestly they are to small to be claimed to be measured.
Their to small effect in space-time interval can not be
measured. Nobel Prize people ought to see that.
They are claiming the impossible measurement or