370 reputation
29
bio website
location South Hill, VA
age 36
visits member for 3 years, 3 months
seen Apr 10 at 0:39

Studied undergrad physics at University of Massachusetts/Interned at SLAC. Currently an aborist, but attempting to keep up with this field while waiting to resume full time study. Appreciates all answers and apologizes ahead of time for the occasional gaff, poor phrasing, or outright amnesia.


Mar
26
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
@ Dilaton Describe the personal opinions... Really I'm not just expressing a personal belief...
Mar
25
revised Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
annunciation
Mar
25
answered Why is centrifugal 'force' perpendicular to line of inertia
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
Also doesn't this new evidence require a modification of GR to encompass? In particular the introduction of a field that does not exist in the present experimental era?
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
I understand the top is not built into the theory as gravitational waves are... but the beauty of a theory does not necessarily mean it's truth....
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
@JerrySchrimer- so the predictions of GR are more validated than those of Quantum Theory? In particular I'm concerned with your statement of the top quark and QT.... if the top quark is not as necessary as gravitational waves in GR then would the predictions of QT be consistent with it's absence? Does QT "work" without including the existence of a third generation of matter as an experimentally verified theory? I know further generations of matter are ancillary to Quantum Theory. Yes QT is mathematically consistent. But it doesn't "prove" itself by assuming corollary's of its own theory true
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
Finally- can you describe which mathematical model of inflation is supported by this?
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
on a historical note the existence of the top quark was not claimed upon discovery of the tau and a then theoretical idea of the three generations of leptons... it took many more years before claims of the top quarks existence were made... the B-mode polarization is being presented as proof of inflation and gravitational waves...
Mar
22
revised Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
question changed from original
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
and is the subtlety "I'm missing" that the evidence of B-mode polarization does not provide evidence of inflation unless the theoretical model of gravitational waves is taken into account?
Mar
22
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
I like your answer.... but the first sentence in the last paragraph is dead wrong... and the association of the Hulse-Taylor binary was not presented by me nor misrepresented by me... my comments in regard to that concern the fact that the first comment to my question involved it as proof of gravitational waves... I only claimed one relied on the other in accordance to the first comment on my question as it implies relevance to what I ask. I merely attempted to dissuade that apparently much appreciated comment and misleading comment...
Mar
19
revised Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
clarity
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
@JohnRennie Still concerned that popular newspapers that cater to the non-scientifically educated portray BICEP2 as proof of inflation via analysis of gravitational waves- when gravitational waves are not a method of experimentation/observations like say EM waves...
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
forget to put @JohnRennie but I disagree with your above comment- there is no scientific evidence for gravitational waves (it's why we still fund and upgrade LIGO's) anyone who saw the BICEP2 data would have broadcasted "gravity wave" even if the other didn't show indirect proof
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
It just seems to me from my science class when I was 12: a scientific model is assumed correct by scientific evidence- not by as of yet unproven evidence proposed by another scientific model... Or am I misjudging the rigors of scientific proof?
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
@JohnRennie- with the exception that one is being used to support the other :)
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
@EmilioPisantry wikipedia directly misrepresents the Hulse-Taylor binary as proper scientific evidence of gravity waves too :)
Mar
19
comment Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
the Hulse-Taylor binary is considered indirect proof of gravitational waves... nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1993/press.html- they are not supported by direct evidence- yet
Mar
19
asked Is the interpretation of BICEP2 data being due to “graviational waves” concerning considering the negative results of the LIGO's experiments?
Mar
15
comment How long does it take for a black hole to form?
Can you explain to me how the idea of an apparent horizon does not assume that there is a constraint on the time coordinate for an external observer- in particular, given enough time in any frame the apparent horizon shrinks, correct? So we must still see a collapsing object yet no barrier?