Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Discussion Tag Cloud

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).

nLab > Latest Changes: gravitational wave

Bottom of Page

1 to 20 of 20

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMar 24th 2014

    just to make links work, I have started a minimum at gravitational wave.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 12th 2016
    • (edited Jan 12th 2016)

    On occasion of the spreading rumour that they have been detected, I added to gravitational wave a pointer to a source that recalls the mathematical derivation. Of course most any other lecture note or textbook would do, too, but this one is nicely done and as good as any other.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeJan 12th 2016

    What was the final status of the BICEP2 affair? We should probably link to some ’it was dust’ source.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 12th 2016

    BICEP2 was all dust, yes. I had added a corresponding remark a year back at BICEP2.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2016

    OK, sure.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 13th 2016
    • (edited Jan 13th 2016)

    By the way, since we are at it. What I had become aware of only after the hype about BICEP2 and about the model it preferred (Linde’s “chaotic inflation”) faded away was that in missions both before and after BICEP2, the solid PLANCK satellite mission’s data best fit is the Starobinsky model of cosmic inflation. I thought that was more interesting even, because Starobinsky inflation in turn hints at supergravity. Now even though the PLANCK documentation states that Starobinsky is preferred by their data, elsewhere I hear that the preference is not statistically significant enough to already count as convincing. So this is something to keep an eye on.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 11th 2016

    And there we go.

    I have added today’s “Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger” LIGO 16

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavidRoberts
    • CommentTimeFeb 11th 2016

    And I expanded a bit, and changed the future tense reference to the announcement to the past tense.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 16th 2016

    have added to the References the first correct article by Einstein on gravitational waves, which differs from his first article on the phenomenon two years earlier. A brief account (one page) of the convoluted early history of the idea is in Steinicke 05

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 19th 2016

    Pierre Cartier kindly reminded me tonight that it was notably Thibault Damour who made some of the theoretical computations for the precise shape of the gravitational wave signal of, in particular, binary black hole mergers Damour 14. Damour gave useful talks about this earlier, e.g. Damour 10.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 19th 2016

    Oh, and now I see that just today IHES put up a video of Damour lecturing on his first predictions from 2000 in comparison to the recent measurement: Damour 16.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 15th 2016

    The second detection of a gravitational wave chirp from a binary black hole merger is now official, too: Nature article

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2019

    re-organized the references into subsections “General” and “Theoretical predictions” and “Experimental observation”

    diff, v19, current

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 30th 2020

    added pointer to

    diff, v21, current

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeOct 7th 2020

    added pointer to today’s

    diff, v22, current

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 10th 2020

    added pointer to today’s

    • Salvatore Vitale, The first five years of gravitational-wave astrophysics (arXiv:2011.03563)

    diff, v23, current

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 21st 2021

    added pointer to today’s

    • Ligong Bian et al., The Gravitational-Wave Physics II: Progress (arXiv:2106.10235)

    and then also dug out Part I and added it:

    (why would Oxford University Press leave that “The” in title?!)

    diff, v24, current

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 2nd 2022

    added pointer to today’s

    diff, v26, current

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 8th 2023

    added pointer to:

    diff, v27, current

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTime4 days ago

    added pointer to:

    diff, v28, current

1 to 20 of 20

  1.