LIGO Inspiral Events Confirmation
The LIGO was designed to detect binary inspiral events.
Only one detection has a possible confirmation that the event claimed to be detected, actually occurred.
LIGO '[looks] for inspiral signals, which can occur when two compact objects, such as neutron stars or black holes, form binary systems. Over time, the objects spiral in toward one another, producing gravitational radiation.
Of the 29 LIGO events only 11 have an identified binary.
GW150914 _ BH-BH
GW151012 _ BH-BH
GW151226 _ BH-BH
GW170104 _ BH-BH
GW170608 _ BH-BH
GW170729 _ BH-BH
GW170809 _ BH-BH
GW170814 _ BH-BH
GW170817 _ NS-NS
GW170818 _ BH-BH
GW170823 _ BH-BH
The other events are just candidates
S190421 96% chance of BH-BH
S190426c 49% chance of NS-NS
GW170817 was claimed a NS-NS merger.
It is the only LIGO event having some form of separate confirmation, with an observed gamma ray burst.
These [NS-NS] events are believed to create short gamma-ray bursts.
A source with remarkable similarities to GW170817, the first source identified to emit gravitational waves and light, has been discovered.
This new object, called GRB 150101B, was first seen as a gamma-ray burst in January 2015.
Follow-up observations with Chandra and several other telescopes at different wavelengths uncovered common traits between the two objects.
Chandra images showed how GRB 150101B faded with time, a key piece of information.
Chandra explicitly noted a slow dimming.
From a later story:
In October 2018, astronomers reported that GRB 150101B, 1.7 billion light years away from Earth, may be analogous to the historic GW170817, a gravitational wave detected in 2017
The two gamma ray bursts had 'remarkable similarities.'
LIGO reported 3 BH-BH events in late 2015 but no events in January.
LIGO had no events in 2018.
The 'historic' GW170817 is claimed to validate LIGO.
Black hole mergers leave no trace because the black hole will clear the scene.
This type of inspiral event is impossible to confirm.
When LIGO claims to have detected an event it should provide confirmation of that event.
A simple analogy: I could announce I can detect earthquakes with a new app for a cell phone. I could claim it has successfully detected some number of quakes. Of course this claim needs confirmation by an actual earthquake at the location of the claimed detection.
Otherwise I should be laughed at in derision.
With only one possible confirmation of the 11 we just accept all events as valid.
Is this certainty justified?
Hit back to go to previous page in history.
Here is the list of topics in this Cosmology Topic Group .
Ctrl + for zoom in; Ctrl - for zoom out ; Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit; pinch for zoom change; pinched for no zoom