A.N.M.Mamun- Or-Rashid,

The purpose of building LIGO was not to test the truth of General Relativity.  As soon as General Relativity as a theory of gravitation was conceived then it immediatly logically followed  the possibility of the existence of spacetime wave trigger by two massive stars orbitting rapidly towards each other.  Which mean that these spacetime wave could  be a new type of information that can be detected from far away distance and allowing to gravitationally observed all kind of events that so far are invisible to our other astronomical observation methods.  For example, it was possible with that first LIGO detection event to infer the event of the merging of two black holes, their masses, how much of their energy/masses was transformed into gravitational waves energy. 

I think the so called empty space is not totally empty, its taken just for convention like there is no absolute vacuum possible.

Dark energy, dark matter or some unknown matter or energy may be present, which is not detected yet that provide medium for unknown phenomena to occur, and that may be in higher-dimensions.

If there are some matter as you told dark matter or something else, then there would be collision too among them. Then, inertia will be disturbed or changed, isn't that? Our satellite can move all side of the earth or it cant at the bottom edge? If there is something formed (ripples) at the bottom by gravity, then there would be no air, isn't that in case of earth? This theory is so complex. Need a easier explanation.

Thank you all for your help.

A. N. M.  There are several new insights in the gravitational wave (GW) paper published in Phys. Rev. Lett. that should impact our concepts about gravity. First, they say that the calculated peak power radiated as gravitational waves was 3.6 x 1049 watts. Second, they say that they were able to place limits on gravitons.  The Compton wavelength of gravitons (if they exist) would have to be greater than 1013 km which is about one light year. To these I will add that the detection of GWs, which fit predictions, proves the accuracy of GW equations.  In particular, these equations imply that spacetime is a very stiff elastic medium which is capable of wave propagation.  The impedance of spacetime (Zs = c3/G = 4 x 1035 kg/s) was first obtained from GW equations by Blair.  This is a tremendously large impedance which is more than 20 orders of magnitude greater than the acoustic impedance of osmium. A very small displacement of spacetime by GWs can correspond to a very large energy density.  For example, if we assume 3.6 x 1049 watts emanating from the “surface” of the merging black holes and propagating away at the speed of light, this is an energy density in spacetime of roughly 2 x 1029 J/m3. This is more than 108 times greater than the E = mc2 energy density of osmium.

 How is this energy propagated? If gravity is thought of as a purely geometric effect that is not a real force, then how does geometry achieve this energy density and impedance? If gravitons are thought of as the carriers of gravity, then how do gravitons with a Compton wavelength of greater than one light year carry away this tremendous energy in a few milliseconds?  This tremendous energy density corresponds to a reasonable amplitude of GWs propagating in a medium with impedance of Zs.  Also all the GW observations fit perfectly with the model of spacetime presented in the attached article.  This article also makes a connection between the impedance of free space Zo experience by photons and the impedance of spacetime Zs experienced by GWs.

Article Energetic Spacetime: the New Aether

There is lot of difference between Newtonian gravity and Einstein Gravity. Newtonian gravity is based on potentials generated by massive bodies (like  electrostatic + and – charges) through which they exert attractive force onto each other.  In this theory there is no room for Gravitational Waves. The Einstein General theory of relativity (GTR) is extension of  Special theory of relativity( SR). In SR time and space was merged to form one 4-dimentional entity (4-d space time). The well-known Lorentz transformation of coordinates solved the puzzle of constancy of velocity of light c, of 19th century. However there was another myth of that time- the existence of Ether, a medium filling all the space, was supposed to be a carrier of EM waves (light). That is EM ripples were supposed to be propagated through this medium. Einstein ruled-out the existence of Ether and said light travels without a medium and space is empty (what we call vacuum, now) . I would mention at this point that the actual feat of SR is invariance of Laws of Physics in inertial frames, and indeterminacy of any preferred inertial frame. Lot of Physics is based on principal of invariance or co-variance or contra-variance of quantities we call 4-vectors (similar to interval in 4-space).

Now coming to GTR. Einstein envisaged that all space is set of (so to say, imaginary) points (x,y,z,t), which are uniformly distributed, when there is no relative motion. However they redistribute themselves (according to Lorentz transformation rule), when there is uniform relative motion (i.e. in different Lorentz frames).  He extended this idea to accelerated frames and found that time- space points redistribute themselves and the geometry is actually distorted in these frames. He then applied equivalence principal i.e. gravitational field of massive bodies is equivalent to accelerated frames.    Hence the massive bodies, redistribute time- space points around themselves and distort the geometry according to Einstein GTR equation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity). [The theory is tensor based (complex mathematics, if you are not familiar with) and is highly non linear. But don’t worry about it.]  

 Now the interpretation of bodies moving in gravitational fields actually changed.  The bodies follow the distorted geometry instead of straight line path in vacuum. The Earth around Sun follows its path, determined by distortion (or redistribution) of set of space-time points, created by presence of Sun. This also applies to photons as well. The conclusion is that GTR is theory of space-time geometry and not that of actual Forces. We can solve the Einstein GTR equation in week field limit, and can show that the distortion or ripple generated at one point in space can propagate through the “existing” time-space mesh or distribution of points. This idea however brings us back to square zero, i.e. we have a pre-existing medium, like Ether, which carries these waves (or ripples) form one point in space to the other. Again the geometrical description of GTR is one of major hindrance in unification gravity with other forces. Further geometrical description is posing problems in quantization of fields and determination of graviton. That is why it is “left alone” theory, while others have been unified.

 Although, there are some other theories of gravity but GTR is one that is consistent (so far) with experimental data at Solar system and Galactic Scales.       

Nothing changes now as far as the theory of gravitation or general relativity are concerned.

The kind of gravitational waves they have proven are not a quantization of gravity. Indeed Newton is enough to predict such waves!  Here it is:

a rotating non spherical mass distribution (such as a quarupole > binary system of black holes or neutrons stars) produces a variable attraction with respect to a far point  in space (i.e. detection point = LIGO's mirrors).

In a few words the rotating variable mass distribution generates over time a variable gravitational potential (circularly spread but in our case with respect to the detection point). And whatever is periodically variable mathematically (and physically) corresponds to a wave.

LIGO's mirrors have then been simply attracted with more and less force over time (gravitational wave behavior) but that's not a true quantization of gravity, this acts on a macroscopical level (in comparison to a quantum level).

We need the quanta (graviton or space's quantum, I tend for the second) and their mechanism of action to have true quantum gravity.  So, nothing new for gravity at the moment.

But what is very important with this discovery is a further way we will have to observe the cosmo (more info on powerful gravitational sources such as black holes, neutrons stars etc) and a demonstration in favor of the existence of black holes. However, we still don't know whether they're singularities or just celestial bodies with escape velocity at "almost c" (respecting the schwarzschild radius as an asymptote), so emitting "very" weak light which is at the moment undetectable (as I think, since singularities entail too many problems).

I can comfortably describe what gravitational waves are in relation with a superfluid quantum space (section 1.3 of the attached work).

Article A superfluid Theory of Everything? [outdated version]

Mohammad,

“Now coming to GTR. Einstein envisaged that all space is set of (so to say, imaginary) points (x,y,z,t), which are uniformly distributed, when there is no relative motion. However they redistribute themselves…, when there is uniform relative motion (i.e. in different Lorentz frames). He extended this idea to accelerated frames and found that time- space points redistribute themselves and the geometry is actually distorted in these frames. He then applied equivalence principal i.e. gravitational field of massive bodies is equivalent to accelerated frames. Hence the massive bodies, redistribute time- space points around themselves and distort the geometry according to Einstein GTR equation”, etc.

- either in the SRT, or in the GRT, there is no definitions – what are space, time, and spacetime and, correspondingly and quite naturally in these theories there is no any explanations – why and how “points (x,y,z,t)” relate to the real Matter’s spacetime's points. Including, for example – there is no explanations – what are imaginary either “space” or “time” in the Minkowski and Riemannian 4D spaces.

The introducing of “co-variance or contra-variance” when the spaces allegedly became be “real” [comparing with Minkowski first formulation, where the time coordinate was simply imaginary, as that Poincare suggested], didn’t eliminate this question – in the spaces there exist, of course complex and purely imaginary distances.

When, of course, nobody observed till now imaginary space or time. As well, of course, if something isn’t correctly defined – it is possible to invent for this something any theory; including where this something can have any property.

That above is rather evident ground to think – are or not the SRT and the GRT adequate to the reality?. But seems you truly believe in the truth of them.

- Why?

Besides - similar topic is discussed in the RG already, so more – see (including the last SS post on the thread) https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_gravitational_waves_ripples_in_the_curvature_of_spacetime_or_are_it_fluctuations_of_the_gravitational_field2#view=56c2d59d7eddd31ff68b45e5

Cheers

Sergey

Mamun asked very simple question in a simple way, i.e. difference between Newtonian gravity and Einstein GTR. I replied in a simple way. By the way I used the word imaginary in its literal meaning and not mathematical (iota). What you mentioned is separate discussion. But what we know in STR  that the interval ds2= x2+y2 +z2 -c2t2 is invariant. You can add i with ct and can make it positive on right side.....But it is not very common.

Whole of Physics (after 1930) is based on the co and contra varient formulation of 4-vectors and spinors. This simply tells that Lawsof Physics remain unchanged under Lorentz Boost and Rotation. It has proven to be true to atomic and subatomic levels. However this formulation is not there in GTR, and I consider it different from STR in that sense.

Now your philosophical question. What happens to the matter when it exists in  STR and GTR redefined spacetime points . There are well known paradoxes of STR, Length contraction, time dilation etc. You can read lot about these in literature.  

The thread you mentioned is a very right question. 

"Are gravitational waves ripples in the curvature of spacetime, or are it fluctuations of the gravitational field?"

It indicates right thing. If I rephrase it as follows. 

Is  gravity  a potential due to internal structure of (matter+energy) or  a spacetime curvature due to (matter+energy stress tensor)?

In fact if we prove it to be a potential, then it is Newtonian Theory, along with lot of  non linear terms....

Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, Stephen J., 2012, Neomechanical gravitation theory, in Volk, G., ed., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, p. 53-58. [10.13140/RG.2.1.3991.0483]

Mohammad,

“…I used the word imaginary in its literal meaning and not mathematical (iota)..”

- I wrote noting relating this using;  all in the SS post above indeed is about “…You can add i with ct and can make it positive on right side...” – as an remark that the “co-variance or contra-variance” formalism gives nothing additional to the initial (Minkowski) formulation, where the time is imaginary variable.

Besides, tough, that nobody till now observed some imaginary time (or space), what was as a too clear hint that the theory isn’t adequate to the reality. And the “co-variance or contra-variance” formalism thus only hided to certain extent this fact. Moreover, further in mathematics the Minkowski space was claimed as the real space - see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-Euclidean_space  “…pseudo-Euclidean space is a finite-dimensional real n-space”

– though in this “real” space essential part of distances (“space-like”) are purely imaginary (?!).

“…in fact if we prove it to be a potential, then it is Newtonian Theory, along with lot of  non linear terms....”

- in the SS post above it is pointed out, that in the SRT and GRT there are no definitions – what are “space”, “time” and “spacetime”; when it is evident that if somebody uses in some  logical, mathematical, etc., construction some undefined notions , then this somebody can obtain, introduce, etc., any properties for these notions.

As that is in SRT and GRT, where  are claimed as real  in Matter “relativistic spacetime transformations” - “the dilation”, “the contraction”, “the spacetime curvature”, etc.

When if somebody understands – what are “space”, “time” and “spacetime” in Matter, this somebody at once understands also that all these fundamental notions/ phenomena are only applications in Matter fundamental Rules/possibilities and as the possibilities  constitute Matter’s [5]4D Euclidian spacetime (where, of course, all distances are real – and the spacetime is indeed real manifold also). Which is nothing more  then the “empty container” that has no properties/ structures, etc., besides that in this container can be (and is) placed some “Matter”.

Furthermore, there is no any grounds (besides, of course the GRT’s postulates) to think that the gravitational force differs principally from other physical forces that govern processes in Matter; i.e. this force very probably has a [potential] field, is quantized on some level, etc. And just such gravity force must be studied by physics, starting from Newtonian formulation.

And such study will be much more productive then 100 years solutions of physical problems by using [in this case] the GRT. When, for example yet 100 years already thousands of physicists  “quantize”, quite naturally – without any success,   the GRT's “dynamical spacetime”…

Cheers

Thank you all for your kind information. Really amazing! Too much complexity!!

 I would like to make some reflections to show that there are good reasons to take into account that it is not impossible that gravitational waves are fluctuations of the gravitational field, an idea that is embedded in gravitoelectromagnetism.

I. The existence of gravitational waves is a natural consequence of gravitoelectromagnetism (GEM). 

Indeed according to GEM the gravitational field is described by the Maxwell-Heaviside equations (the “GEM equations”)  and in the attached file: 

1. It is shown that these equations form a mathematically consistent system that is in accordance with the law of mass-energy conservation. 

2. It is also shown how the separation of the g-field Eg and the g- induction Bg leads to the “wave equation”.   Solutions of this equation describe how disturbances of the gravitational field propagate outward from their sources as waves with speed c.

II.  Some comments on the sources of gravitational waves according to GEM.

1.  It can be shown that an harmonically oscillating point mass with invariable rest mass is the source of a gravito-magnetic wave.  (A. Acke - Gravitoelectromagnetism explained by the theory of informatons)

2.  Another phenomenon that is the source of a GEM wave is the conversion of rest mass into energy (what per example happens in the case of radioactive processes).  To illustrate this, let us - relative to an inertial reference frame  - consider an object with rest mass  m0  that -  due to intern instability -  during the period  (0,  Δt)  emits EM radiation.   This implies that that object during that time interval is emitting electromagnetic energy UEM  carried by photons that propagate with the speed of light.   Between the moment  t = 0  and the moment  t  = Δt,  the rest mass of the object is, because of this event,  decreasing with an amount  UEM/c2  from the value m0  to the value  m0'.   This implies that - because the gravitational field of an object is determined by  its rest mass -  its gravitational field is for  t < 0  proportional to m0  and for  t > Δt   to  m0'.   It follows that at the moment  t  the gravitational field at a point  P  at a distance  r >c.t  is proportional to  m0 ,  and at a point at a distance  r

Thanks a lot everyone. 

"1. It can be shown that an harmonically oscillating point mass with invariable rest mass is the source of a gravito-magnetic wave. (A. Acke - Gravitoelectromagnetism explained by the theory of informatons)."

Antoine: Did anyone try a quantitative analysis of PSR1913+16 decay on the basis of gravitoelectromagnetism yet?

Johan,

No, as far as I know but I am absolutely not a specialist in this field. Others may perhaps help?   I’d like to mention that Arbab I. Arbab published on arXiv ( ( http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1911 ) an article “The generalized Newton’s law of gravitation versus the general theory of relativity”, in which “precession of planets and binary pulsars” is discussed in the context of GEM.

With the statement “It can be shown that an harmonically oscillating point mass with invariable rest mass is the source of a gravito-magnetic wave”, I referred to  the mathematical deduction of that phenomenon in §6 in the article "Gravitoelectromagnetism explained by the theory of informatons" that can be consulted on my RG page.

"Others may perhaps help?"

Antoine: Heaviside published his concept of gravitoelectromagnetism back in 1893, and decay of Hulse-Taylor neutron star binary PSR1913+16 was identified in the 1970s. I think there was enough time for theorists to find clear decision on whether or not theory is compatible with observational data in this case. Similarly, J.C. Keith in 1963 published quantitative prediction of rotational drag due to retarded gravitational force interaction on millimeter-sized, high-speed rotors (PDF file appended). Rotational drag as predicted by Keith was definitely observed in the early 1970s in a laboratory setup, and nobody cares.

It's sort of funny to observe that scientists sometimes don't like experimental results as long as these don't fit their expectations and, on the other hand, sometimes like launching spectacular press releases whenever their data apparently do fit their expectations.

Edit: It sometimes has turned out useful to investigate inconvenient experimental data such as, in particular, the negative outcome of Michelson-Morley's interferometer results. 

Dear  Sir Pl see online paper  on gravity  - Link of online journal 

4 Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe  volume 4( part 1)   International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 17, No 1, pp 259-291

5. . Vijay Mohan Das, Atomic genetics and origin of universe  volume 4( part 2)    International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) (2014) Volume 17, No 1, pp 292-324

Thanks 

Dr Das

[email protected]

Dear Sir 

More clear understanding about gravity. 

33 V.M.Das - HOW TO REVEAL THE NATURE OF DARK MATTER AND DARK ENERGY, Asian Journal of Science and Technology Vol.06, Issue, 12, pp.2075-2099, December, 2015,  pp 2075-2099

34. V.M.Das-  Phenomenon of Kepler’s Lawlessness Rather than Two Stars for General Relativity. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1993 does not confirm Einstein theory of gravitation rather it confirms Divine MOND( Modified Newtonian Dynamics )-- IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education Volume 6, Issue 1 Ver.III (Jan. - Feb. 2016), PP 84-123

 35.   V.M.Das - Quantum Consciousness And Divine MONB ( Modified Niel Bohr Or Divine Atomic Model ) That underpin Cardiac Systole And Diastole ( How Matter behaves As Active Matter) The International Journal Of Engineering And Science (IJES) Volume  5 , Issue 3 , Pages  PP -01-22

Thanks

Dr Das