I take your word for it. My mental analogy was a pressure change under a long wave tsunami, where a pressure detector that was insignificant in size to the wave would register the same change regardless of orientation. I assume that is too simplistic.
ETA: Is it really right to equate electromagnetic energy with space distortion. The former is something that can be captured in various ways. Is the latter?
If you rotate the antenna of your radio or television receiver, you get variable levels of signal, and the same is qualitatively true for gravitational waves detectors (though perhaps not quite as pronounced), they are also
directional: if you could rotate the two long arms of a gravitational waves detector while a remote astrophysical source is emitting, you would observe also the signal level varies.
Now, if you want to see a reliable source, I can propose you this quote from the Ligo and Virgo collaborations:
(taken from: "Properties of the binary black hole merger GW150914",
The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and The Virgo Collaboration
(compiled 12 February 2016),
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.03840v1.pdf ).
Assume for example that the remote astrophysical object emits gravitational waves with "+" polarization. Then, from equation (1), you get:
h(detector k) = F(detector k,+)h+
F(detector k,+), which expresses the directional nature of the detector, depends upon the position of the astrophysical object in the sky, so you can in principle try to use your knowledge of the signal amplitude physicists see h(detector k) to determine the source location. This is, however, difficult because the polarization of the celestial object is a priori unknown.
