I understand that Einstein@home is about searching the sky for pulsars. In the screen saver there are a bunch of known pulsars. Can't the scientists point the detectors to the known pulsars, to try to detect gravitational waves?
I mean, why search for more pulsars? If the detectors are not sensitive enough, that could be calibrated by using the known pulsars. Surely the pulsars in our own galaxy are the nearest to us.
Copyright © 2024 Einstein@Home. All rights reserved.
Why search for more pulsars?
)
I am no scientist, and certainly I don't think $300m+ would be invested in a detector if easier methods were available. I wasn't stating fact in this quote, I was just thinking to myself that a search of the whole sky seemed strange.
I don't need an explanation. I'll leave the science to the scientists.
There is one question I have. After the S4 and S5 data is analysed, and if no gravity waves are found, will that be the end of the project? Will there be conclusive proof either way either that gravity waves exist or that they don't?
I don't want this just to be a search for unknown pulsars.
Hi, verty I'm not sure how
)
Hi, verty
I'm not sure how well this answers your questions - it's a few things mentioned by Ben Owen, in this thread: ”What's up with the data?”
Another good thread to have a look at is 'How can they “aim” a LIGO?'
It does say, on the Einstein@Home main page, that the search is for 'spinning neutron stars (also called pulsars)', but I don't think it necessarily implies a search for “more”...
Hopefully that's correct,
Chip
Thank you. I know all I need
)
Thank you. I know all I need to now.
RE: I understand that
)
We've done this, but not seen anything. No surprise -- the known pulsars are too far away. Journal-ref: Phys.Rev.Lett. 94 (2005) 181103 read it here
Pulsars are detected via their electromagnetic emission: they are rapidly spinning neutron stars. Our hope is that there are many more such stars, closer to us, that are not visible electromagnetically, but instead via their gravitational radiation.
Bruce
Director, Einstein@Home
RE: Our hope is that there
)
Hmm, it sounds like a long shot. I suppose you make do with what you can. If no such pulsars are detected, that won't be a refutation of gravitational waves per se, just a refutation of near pulsars, right?
RE: but I don't think it
)
Sorry about that, verty – I was quite wrong.
Thanks for the correction, Bruce, and for helping to make a complicated science easier to understand (not to mention advancing it!).
RE: We've done this, but
)
Bruce – Thanks for the suggested reading, a group of us here have also had the same question as "Chipper O", and your provided link renders an excellent answer.
Keep-up the good work,
TA
Theory of Gravitational Waves & LIGO
Laser Interferometer Space Antenna - LISA
JPL-Caltech
RE: RE: Our hope is that
)
Verty: Basically, yes. See this post.
Hope this helps,
Ben