DIY experiment proving graviton is a particle

[Steve]

What is that supposed to mean?

Gravitons man! They are out there by the bucket load! And they react exactly the way philippeb8's personal physics requires, regardless of what actual physics (which is a century old scam, remember) actually says.

 

[Crossbow]

Thank you Scotty, you will not be disappointed.

Great!

So start producing these items and you will easily become the richest person in all of recorded history.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

And Fig S5 below confirms other experiments all return similar sinusoidal residuals:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.09084.pdf

The sinusoidal residual means that at 6 pm and 6 am, when the gravimeter is perfectly perpendicular to the Sun, it measures the highest discrepancy between what is predicted and what is measured. And this is very consistent.

Quoted from that paper, with my highlighting:

Because our laboratory is about 4.5 km east of the San Francisco Bay, the ocean tidal loading effect on gravity at our location is significant and is not accurately described in available models (31). Figure 2B shows that the residual gravity variation is correlated to the water-level variation measured in the Bay. As shown in Fig. 2C and 2D, the ocean tidal loading leads to the peaks in the Allan deviation and the power spectral density in a period-band between 6-24 hours....

....Because the local gravity is affected by the tidal effects, the inaccurate tide model at our location constrains the accuracy of the long-term stability measurement and the systematic effect evaluation. A gravity comparison at a geophysical observatory would allow us to characterize them more accurately (34). With these improvements, a more accurate measurement of the ocean tidal loading effect may be useful....

Figure S5 compares "measured gravity and the solid-earth tide model", without correcting for ocean tidal loading, so the residuals seen in Figure S5 are explained quite well by the correlation shown in Figure 2B.

 

[philippeb8]

Quoted from that paper, with my highlighting:

Figure S5 compares "measured gravity and the solid-earth tide model", without correcting for ocean tidal loading, so the residuals seen in Figure S5 are explained quite well by the correlation shown in Figure 2B.

It is common knowledge the residual is sinusoidal:



https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0026-1394/51/5/452

 

[jsfisher]

It is common knowledge the residual is sinusoidal:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/74489620d0d651ff5e.png[/qimg]

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0026-1394/51/5/452

Ummm, your cited article makes a similar claim as W.D.Clinger: "Red points represent the experimental data, black solid line is the theoretical tide model without correcting the ocean loading of the Earth."

On the other hand, your cited article does not support your claim, "It is common knowledge the residual is sinusoidal".

 

[philippeb8]

Ummm, your cited article makes a similar claim as W.D.Clinger: "Red points represent the experimental data, black solid line is the theoretical tide model without correcting the ocean loading of the Earth."

On the other hand, your cited article does not support your claim, "It is common knowledge the residual is sinusoidal".

The ocean loading is a consequence of the Earth's tides anyways.

Furthermore let's not silently dismiss the flyby anomalies.

 

[jsfisher]

The ocean loading is a consequence of the Earth's tides anyways.

Furthermore let's not silently dismiss the flyby anomalies.

You really have trouble staying on point, don't you?

W.D.Clinger made a claim, a claim you seemed to want to discount, but ended up just supporting. Are we done with that, or do you have other non sequiturs to introduce?

 

[philippeb8]

You really have trouble staying on point, don't you?

W.D.Clinger made a claim, a claim you seemed to want to discount, but ended up just supporting. Are we done with that, or do you have other non sequiturs to introduce?

So you are just proving you tend to silently dismiss important facts such as the flyby anomaly that is apparently explained by a dark matter cloud surrounding the Earth. Seriously?

Anyway my point was the ocean loading is affected by the Moon and the Sun but doesn't change the overall Earth gravitational acceleration because the overall mass doesn't change.

 

[jsfisher]

So you are just proving you tend to silently dismiss important facts such as the flyby anomaly that is apparently explained by a dark matter cloud surrounding the Earth. Seriously?

I prove nothing of the sort. You continue to flutter from topic to topic without completing one before interjecting the next.

Anyway my point was the ocean loading is affected by the Moon and the Sun but doesn't change the overall Earth gravitational acceleration because the overall mass doesn't change.

But that wasn't the point in W.D.Clinger's post, now was it? Let's close out that item, shall we? And then you can move to a new (singular) next point.

 

[philippeb8]

But that wasn't the point in W.D.Clinger's post, now was it? Let's close out that item, shall we? And then you can move to a new (singular) next point.

The 3 experiments I've presented are not all next to the ocean. Even if they were then in what way should it change the Earth's gravitational acceleration? It's not worth the efforts to calculate that because it's obvious.

 

[catsmate]

The ocean loading is a consequence of the Earth's tides anyways.

Furthermore let's not silently dismiss the flyby anomalies.

Oh look, a Gish Gallop......

 

[Crossbow]

Edited by jimbob: 

moderated content removed

I suggest that you produce those force fields, those tractor beams, and those anti-gravity devices that you said you could produce and then you would no longer have to produce replies.

 

[Crossbow]

Edited by jimbob: 

moderated content removed

Great!

By producing those tractor beams, those force fields, and those anti-gravity devices you will become the richest person in all of human history.

As such, you will no longer have to respond to anyone that you do not wish to respond to.

 

[Crossbow]

As for me, I sure am looking forward to getting those force fields, tractor beams and anti-gravity devices that 'philippeb8' will be producing.

I install the anti-gravity device on my car so that it will float about 50 cm or so about the road,
then I will use the tractor beam to be pulled along by vehicles which are travelling more or less my way,
then I will use the force fields to protect my modified vehicle from getting dirty and/or theives,
and if necessary, I will use the car in a conventional way.

Just think of all the gas money, oil change money, tire money, and so on that I will be saving.

Woo hoo!

With all of this savings, then I will finally be able to buy my own Girl Scout cookies.

 

[abaddon]

What is that supposed to mean?

It means some people can only think in two dimensions. Not meant as a criticism, but I have happened upon a lot of that lately in various folks. Where to place the blame for that? The education system? Dunno. I can still remember in my youth 3D spatial reasoning tests. Later on, my own kids had similar.

I consider the lack of 3D spatial reasoning to be one of the reasons why the flat earth wingnuts exist along with some other reasons.