Neutrino trigger could reveal gravitational waves

This is what Richard Feynman would call 'cargo cult science'. It has the looks/form of science but without the content. This is a reference to the South Pacific cargo cults induced in the local islander populations by the airborne supply of troops in WWII. After the soldiers had moved on, they set up runways, huts and all sorts of airstrip related wood-based icons in the hope of luring an aeroplane to land. With all the good stuff on board. They even fashioned headphones and microphones, while doing their best to incant the radio chatter.

I don't mean factual content so much ( although that matters ), more that it lacks the rigor of self examination, external review and intellectual honesty. A researcher/theorist ought be the first and best discreditor/disprover of their work. As I've indicated elsewhere ( ad nauseum likely ) if you leave this type of test out then you ain't doing science.

I glanced at some of the linked papers. They are clearly eloquent exercises in language but are absolute drivel. Alas the general public ( & let's hope there are no investment cues ) won't know that his word usage/meanings are utterly unrelated to anyone else's. But that's the trick, of course. If I call an apple a banana, while showing you the apple then that's an immediate pick up. But if I obscure the ( semantic ) substitution one is likely to be none the wiser.

Cheers, Mike.

( edit ) Although I do see on their forum that someone knows how to rattle their cage. From the 'undecided questions' area - 'If the present might lead to multiple futures, why can't it also have emerged from multiple pasts?'. Nice one .... :-)

( edit ) As for the original thread paper, that's the first I've seen of such a narrow prediction of GW vs. neutrino timing for supernovae. And there is some interesting discussion from one the researchers on that web page too ..... a good example indeed of reflection upon one's own work.

There was also another thread, I can't find it alas, discussing an excess signal in some of the frequency bins ( raw data ) from S4 I think. But as it was pointed out by one of the project scientists ( in the IFO logs ), it was not out of the behaviour bounds of usual fluctuations like laser shot noise. Plus what is considered 'excess' is also sensitive to the choice of width of the bins. Essentially : if you run a roulette wheel you will get clusters of numbers and there is no need to invoke any explanation of special bias. Machines like the LIGO IFO's are subject to all sorts of unrelated and thus asynchronous influences ...... it's not like the local noodle takeway shop where one takes a numbered ticket and waits in sequence.

Cheers, Mike.

Hi Tullio,

The paper linked in the quoted thread seems to indicate that it was a room-temperature detector involved, here are two quotes:

CU
Bikeman