Slashdot Mirror


It's Official: LIGO Scientists Make First-Ever Observation of Gravity Waves (economist.com)

A few days ago, we posted reports that a major finding -- the discovery of the long-predicted gravity waves -- was expected to be formally announced today, and reader universe520 is the first to note this coverage in the Economist : It is 1.3 billion years after two black holes merged and sent out gravitational waves. On Earth in September 2015, the faintest slice of those waves was caught. That slice, called GW150914 and announced to the world on February 11th, is the first gravitational wave to be detected directly by human scientists. It is a triumph that has been a century in the making, opening a new window onto the universe and giving researchers a means to peer at hitherto inaccessible happenings, perhaps as far back in time as the Big Bang. Reader DudeTheMath adds: NPR has a nice write-up of the newly-published results: "[R]esearchers say they have detected rumblings from that cataclysmic collision as ripples in the very fabric of space-time itself. The discovery comes a century after Albert Einstein first predicted such ripples should exist. ... The signal in the detector matches well with what's predicted by Einstein's original theory, according to [Saul] Teukolsky [of Cornell], who was briefed on the results." Update: 02/11 18:08 GMT by T : Worth reading: this letter, inspirational and informative, from MIT president L. Rafael Reif, about the discovery. (Hat tip to Brian Kulak.)

22 of 460 comments (clear)

  1. Cool! by XXongo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Cool!

    Nobody actually ever thought that gravity waves wouldn't exist-- it's pretty much impossible to come up with a version of gravity that doesn't include waves.

    But it's amazing that we can actually detect it.

    1. Re:Cool! by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wouldn't it have been conceivable, assuming some flaw in the theory of relativity

      Yes, absolutely.

      The thing here is that to date Einstein has a perfect track record. Which is pretty remarkable.

      To date, everything they've ever tested says that the theory of relativity, as far as we've been able to investigate, hasn't shown any cracks.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:Cool! by Immerman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, except for the niggling one where it demands a completely different vacuum energy level than the similarly well-tested theories of Quantum Mechanics.

      It's an odd situation - we have two well-tested and widely accepted theories, neither of which show any significant cracks, but which are utterly incompatible with each other.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    3. Re:Cool! by bondsbw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Absolutely. My point was not so much about refuting relativity completely, but observing (at scales far beyond our normal ability to detect) data that suggests that relativity as we know it is an incomplete theory. Which has already happened, mind you, given that relativity did not at the time fully describe quantum physics and other phenomena.

      But discovering that gravity waves didn't follow the pattern might have made LIGO a modern Michelson-Morley experiment, leading to completely new physics, just as relativity was a better description of gravitation and spacetime than Newtonian physics.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    4. Re:Cool! by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Informative

      Finding them means we can start developing better instruments. Primordial gravity waves are our best shot at understanding the inflationary epoch and understanding the Big Bang itself. This is one of physic's greatest triumphs.

      And, of course, it confirms once again that Einstein remains one of the titans of human thought.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    5. Re:Cool! by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Informative

      To date, everything they've ever tested says that the theory of relativity, as far as we've been able to investigate, hasn't shown any cracks.

      That's not quite right.

      - GR breaks down when you go to quantum levels
      - GR does not fully describe black holes (particularly their horizon and the singularity)
      - GR is incomplete with regards to explaining the expansion of the universe (the discrepancy is called Dark Energy)

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    6. Re:Cool! by Immerman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, no, this is a very important result. We've been looking for gravity waves for years, and until now had been unable to detect them despite looking at sources that we should have been able to detect. This detection essentially closes an "uncertainty gap" in the theory - think of it like replacing "Here there be Dragons" on an old map with, "Nothing but open ocean here". It doesn't really change much, unless you happen to want to travel across the previously unknown area.

      In addition, the article doesn't mention it, but by comparing the measured spatial distortions with he predicted values we open the door on the study of why the waves aren't as strong as predicted. Is there a flaw in the machine, or some hither-to unpredicted attenuation factor? The latter could potentially be every bit as earth-shattering as when the study of black-boy radiation revealed Quantum Mechanics.

      It is in looking for confirmation of the predictions in current theory that both confirm that theory, and occasionally expose its flaws, which lays the groundwork for new theories. It may not be as exciting or glamorous as discovering something unexpected and new, but it's the same exact search that does both, and it's largely the luck of the draw as to whether the previously unexplored nook you chose to investigate reveals anything new. Its primarily through the exhaustive search of such nooks that we discover the unexpected phenomena that allows further theoretical growth. And in that pursuit "nothing unexpected here" is vitally important, as it allows future researchers to concentrate their attention elsewhere. Not to mention, it develops the early stages of the technologies that eventually allow us to harness the phenomena for productive uses.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    7. Re:Cool! by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 4, Funny

      I look forward to the day when I can tell Comcast "sorry, I'm switching to gravity."

      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  2. They did what? by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Funny

    Oh, wait, that wasn't LEGO scientists.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:They did what? by RivenAleem · · Score: 4, Funny

      LEGO Scientists are attempting to detect Agony waves which occur when a foot collides with a brick in the dark. It turns out to be a very interesting problem. While most people have problems with a detector sensitive enough to find weak signals, the LEGO scientists are having the opposite.

    2. Re:They did what? by KGIII · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're caltrops and you suffer 1d4 worth of damage as well as having a movement penalty.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  3. Fast by monkeyxpress · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, this must be a world record for slashdot - the press release only just made it out. Having said that, this was possibly the worst kept announcement in the history of science journalism.

  4. Why this matters by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    This matters for a bunch of reasons. First, it helps close confirm predictions of general relativity. We had a lot of evidence already but more is good. Second, if we get more data we might be able to rule out or narrow down our search space for any eventual quantum gravity theory since they have predictions about how gravity waves should behave (although this would require massively upgrading LIGO). Third, this gives us insight into stellar objects that we normally lack the ability to examine. For example, we don't know much about what the cores of neutron stars are like, but different ideas about them give different predictions about what sort of gravity waves two merging neutron stars will create. So this may give us more data about what exotic objects are actually doing. Fourth, this gives us for the first time a way of getting data from very far away sources that isn't in the electromagnetic spectrum. Right now, we can detect neutrino bursts if they come from a few million light years away but pretty much everything from outside our little galactic neighborhood has to come either from electromagnetic radiation or detecting cosmic rays. But LIGO can already detect gravity waves from events that are a billion light years away. So this gives us a whole new long type of data.

    1. Re:Why this matters by ganv · · Score: 5, Informative

      I think you don't understand. We now have an entirely new way to observe what happens in regions of the universe where the mass density is high and changing. In many ways, this is like the first telescope. It is an entirely new way of observing. The reason this is so important is not the single black hole merger they detected. It is because this is the first of what will become a major source of astronomical data. Soon other frequency ranges of gravitational waves will be measurable (see LISA, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...). Just because the first observation agrees with existing theory is no reason to dismiss an entirely new class of measurements as uninteresting.

  5. buh? there's non-Human scientists? by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Funny

    the first gravitational wave to be detected directly by human scientists

    I had to go read the linked story to make sure it wasn't typical /. submitter reading failure.
    Please, The Economist, do tell more, I think you buried the lead there.

    sigh. At least it's not a Forbes link.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  6. Re:So is the 5th or 6th fundamental force? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 5, Funny

    When are white holes going to be discovered? :-)

    #BlackHolesMatter...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  7. Gravity is not instantaneous by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Informative

    Are gravitational waves different from gravity? Because this article would have you believe that the speed at which they propagate is speed of light, where as gravity has instant effect AFAIK.

    Gravity does not have instantaneous effect.

    Nothing physical has instantaneous effect.

    In any case, if you're talking about the gravity of something just sitting unmoving, it doesn't really mean anything to say that the gravitational effect is instant, or delayed. It only makes sense to ask the question when something is accelerated away from sitting stationary, and in that case, the effect isn't instantaneous; the change in effect at an observer is at the speed of light.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  8. Re:So is the 5th or 6th fundamental force? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

    When are white holes going to be discovered? :-)

    Watch the Oscars.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  9. Re:Exciting, but by ganv · · Score: 4, Informative

    It just came out in Physical Review Letters today: http://journals.aps.org/prl/ab...

  10. Physicist's commentary and original article by Soldrinero · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those who are interested, the scientific journal has a companion article here. It describes the design and sensitivity of the experiment, as well as some of the context. There is also a link to the actual journal article to the right, but you may need institutional access to download it.

    --
    I would rather be killed by a terrorist than enslaved by my government.
  11. Michelson-Morley were wrong. Ether exists by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What's sort of amusing here is that the Michelson-Morley experiment, which is EXACTLY what this experiment is, failed to detect Ether. Yet this experiment is actually detecting ether! it's not the ether distortion MM were looking for which is differences in some vaccum substance that supports electromagnetic wave propagation. Instead it is detecting gravity wiggles in in real matter. Yet those gravity wiggles traveled through vacuum too. And according to general relativity my understanding is that should have distorted the vaccuum too. Thus if MM had had a sufficiently sensitive interferometer they would have detected these and attributed them to Ether fluctuations!

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  12. Re:Be Skeptical by ledow · · Score: 5, Informative

    Any science you can explain in a few sentences to a layman will be so full of holes as to be nothing more than hearsay and astrology.

    A big event, that would have created ripples that would arrive here roughly at the time of the experiment, happened. As we listened, at that time, we saw inconsistencies representative of just such a gravitational wave hitting the experiment. It's tiny, but above background noise and experimental error (it's mentioned elsewhere that this basically means 6-sigma certainty), and coincides with a particular event that we were able to "observe" (not literally) in other ways.

    The source of the wave barely matters. We detected gravitational fluxes that would otherwise be unexplained. That we are able to correlate them to one single event, that's just of the type of rare event that we predict might be able to cause such signals "loud" enough to be "heard" by us, and match up the timing means that it's the most likely explanation too.

    But more importantly - 100-year-old mathematics predicts some absolutely insane, bonkers things that - when we are finally able to look for them - turn out to be true. That's all science cares about.
    You can't just make up shit and then - in 100 years - several people invent an instrument that correlates perfectly to the shit you made up, several times, to the satisfaction of major scientific institutions unless - basically - you were absolutely spot-on correct all along.

    That's pretty much what happened. The Einstein field equations are fucking bonkers to understand, let alone try and solve the implications of them. And I'm a mathematician. But they predict stuff like this that we then find. When it came from barely matters. A simplification of the definition of "size" in a mass-media article doesn't matter at all (tell people black holes have no size, and they look at you like you're an idiot).

    So, no, it's not as bad as you make out.