HILTON RATCLIFFE: “Discovery” of Gravitational Waves | Thunderbolts Podcast

HILTON RATCLIFFE: “Discovery” of Gravitational Waves | Thunderbolts Podcast


Welcome to the Thunderbolts.info
Podcast for February 22nd 2016. On February 19, 2016, The
Thunderbolts Project™ posted the much-anticipated analysis of
our chief science advisor Wal Thornhill on the purported discovery
of gravitational waves. Within science media and
throughout the popular press, we’ve seen, in essence, zero skepticism
of this so-called discovery. Given the mathematical and
technical complexities involved, it seems that the general
public is basically being asked to accept as a matter of faith
that the discovery is valid. However, it’s not merely proponents of the
Electric Universe Theory who are skeptical of the detection of
gravitational waves. Today I’m going to read a statement,
that an astronomer has written, which explains in comprehensible terms
why this claim may be truly fantastic if not unbelievable. This statement is written
by the self-styled dissident astronomer and
mathematician Hilton Ratcliffe. Now Hilton Ratcliffe is the
author of such books as; ‘The Static Universe: Exploding
the Myth of Cosmic Expansion’ and ‘The Virtue of Heresy: Confessions
of a Dissident Astronomer’. Now Hilton Ratcliffe is not a proponent
of the Electric Universe Theory, but he has given us permission
to read this statement here on the Thunderbolts
YouTube channel and I think it should serve as a nice
complement to Wal Thornhill’s presentation as we continue our ongoing
coverage of this developing story. I shall begin reading
the statement now. On Thursday the 11th of February 2016,
a group of some 1,000 scientists co-authored a paper announcing that
the LIGO interferer metric array had, after more than a decade of
fruitlessly accumulating data, positively identified the
signature of gravitational waves coming from a deep space event. This was a phenomenon predicted by Albert
Einstein’s general theory of relativity. Its actual discovery would have
enormous implications for science, consequently we ought to be properly
skeptical of any claims made in this regard and subject the data and the
experiment to rigorous testing before we incorporate them into
the body of scientific knowledge. On September 14th 2015, LIGO (Laser
Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory) observed a “chirp” lasting
about a fifth of a second. Analysis of the signal suggests that it
was produced by the cataclysmic collision of two black holes a
billion light-years away. The momentary nature of the detection
immediately begs the question; how could the almighty collision
between two supermassive bodies produce a wave lasting
just a fifth of a second? Be that as it may, there are several more
troubling aspects of this alleged discovery. I shall list a few of them: – The instruments that comprise LIGO were
set up to try to achieve a specific goal, consequent to the predictions
of general relativity theory. The observatory consists
of two identical stations. One at Hanford, Washington and the other at
Livingston, Louisiana, some 3,000 km apart. Each station
consists of a system of optical, electronic, mechanical
and hydraulic components and each has 3 optically polished surfaces
across which the light signal must pass. The mirrors in the interferometer
are set 4 km apart. The exactness of this
linear separation is absolutely crucial to the
success of the experiment, because what it seeks to measure is
a minute variation in that distance. The expected change in distance
over the 4 km separation, in layman’s language, is 1,000
trillionth of a millimeter. Let’s try to put that expected variation
into some sort of comprehensible perspective; it is equivalent to a 10 millionth
of a diameter of a single atom or in slightly more
familiar terms, increasing or decreasing the distance
from the Sun to the next nearest star, 42 trillion km, by the
width of a human hair. That is probably
unimaginable to most people. So, let’s try to add
further perspective. The best precision mirror
surfaces are polished to match the ideal, nearly parabolic,
surface to about 25 nanometers. A nanometer is a millionth
of a millimeter. That is incredibly
fine tolerance, but it pales when compared with
what LIGO claims to measure. Put another way, the most precisely
polished astrophysical mirrors, like those used in LIGO, can have 25 peaks nanometer above and below
the theoretical surface plane of the mirror meaning that some parts of the
mirror can be 50 nanometers further from or closer to
the points of observation. 50 nanometers is a billion times bigger
than the gravitational wave signature. Because of this, it is practically
impossible to measure the distance between the two mirrors in each
interferometer to the required tolerances. So they have had to take an average, which
is no more than a guessed approximation. Some distinguished
scientists have found additional worrisome aspects
of the LIGO discovery. Dr. Abhas Mitra, a theoretical
physicists and astrophysicists from the universities
of Calcutta and Mumbai, found that the alignment of
the Hanford-Livingston axis, required for an even approximately
accurate fit with theory, is almost impossibly fortuitous. Dr. Mitra stated in a
letter to the author: “The distance between the two LIGO
detectors, at Livingston and Hanford, is 3,000 km measured over the
curvature of Earth’s surface. The radius of Earth is
approximately 6,370 km, so we can calculate that the direct
linear distance is about 2,500 km between the two
measurement stations. For the claimed event, the hypothesized
collision of two black holes more than a billion
light-years distant, to produce anywhere near the anticipated
time delay of 8.3 millionths of a second it would have to meet
two critical criteria. Firstly, it would have to
be almost exactly aligned with the line drawn through the Earth’s
crust between Livingston and Hanford and secondly, the wave would have to propagate
through 2,500 km of the rocky crust without degrading
in the slightest. But barring such cosmic conspiracy, for a
source located 1.3 billion light-years away, one would expect a delay much, much less
than the theoretical 8.3 milliseconds or the measured
7 milliseconds. In fact, one may expect
only a microsecond delay, 7,000 times smaller
than LIGO found! LIGO’s conclusion is therefore
extremely improbable. Dr. Bibhas De, a radio
astronomer, some 40 years experience and a PhD in Applied Physics from the
University of California San Diego, found the following anomalies
in the LIGO results. First, there is little doubt
that gravitational waves exist and are there for us
to try to detect them; second, a high-energy spiked release is
the best chance of detecting these waves. So the detection of the
gravitational wave by LIGO reported recently
should not be surprising, they would be commendable. The detectors at Hanford, Washington
and Livingston, Louisiana detected the wave 7
milliseconds apart. So far so good. Note now, number one, there can be hardly any question that the
two detectors are seeing the same thing, the exact same “wavefront” passing
through them 7 milliseconds apart. Number two, the Livingston detector is recording lower
signal level in the main body of the arrival, elsewhere, before the arrival
and after the signal is passed, the two detectors seem to be
recording the similar strengths. This could readily be ascribed to instrumental
differences between the detectors. If so, we should simply be able to
linearly expand the blue signal and make it match up with
the red signal everywhere, but clearly this does not work. Two conclusions are possible. Number one, gravitational
wave has been observed, but there is a lot
of explaining to do that has not been done in the
Physical Review Letters paper. Number two, something other than
gravitational waves has been observed and the difference in amplitude in
the main body of the signal is real. To sort out item two above,
consider, among other possibilities, the well studied effect of geomagnetically
induced currents in long metal structures. Such currents would be induced effectively
in the, 2 km long, LIGO metal vacuum tubes. These currents in the Earth’s magnetic
field will create stresses on the tubes. These stresses, though vanishingly
small for all purposes, may still be non-negligible for LIGO
response in some complicated way given the extraordinary
sensitivity of the instrument. The time scale and the form of the signal
seems suspiciously right for this. Furthermore, September 14, 2015, was a day
specifically noted for geomagnetic disturbances. Since these disturbances originate in the
ionosphere, they would affect both detectors. The unavoidable conclusion is that LIGO
did not observe gravitational waves! It simply recorded a sudden geomagnetic
disturbance by virtue of its design.

58 thoughts on “HILTON RATCLIFFE: “Discovery” of Gravitational Waves | Thunderbolts Podcast

  1. Could having everyone believe in the theory of gravity be an agenda? Is the Electric Universe that threatening? It just makes so much sense to me. Even we are electric. Every cell is a capacitor. Consciousness is electric.

  2. Wastes huge amounts of money and resources, detects an infinitesimally small tremor, jumps to the conclusion that it was black holes colliding, creates justification for continued funding. Welcome to the science ponzy scheme.

  3. Very informative presentation. Thank you for pointing out the lacunae in the mainstream scientific declaration. The necessary tolerances needed for accurate measurement are truly astounding—1,000th trillionth of a millimeter (or)10 millionth the diameter of a single atom. And given the tolerances of the mirrors being millions of times too big, I can't understand how such a conclusion of 'fact' came about. I'd say it has a lot to do with jobs and funding.

  4. I was really surprised to hear Bibhas De's name mentioned in Hilton Ratcliffe's statement. Bibhas De was one of Harlton Arp's post-doctorate students and has always condemned many bogus big bang theories and other claims that science media would readily accept in a heartbeat. TBP you should try and get in contact with him. Your ideas and his essays and papers on electromagnetic theory and philosophy of science would resonate quite well I would imagine.

  5. TBP: is the distance between the LIGO detectors important in their calculations? If it is, what about earthquakes that have happened between the 2 detectors since they have been built? wouldn't those have changed that distance, even by a few millimeters?

  6. Gravity results from the exclusion of electromagnetic fields from closed 4 pi radian matter topologies. See Tetryonics for full details of…..everything.

  7. They are most likely approaching a period of "begging for funding", much like NASA, they release amazing-outrageous comments then walk them back(with much less vigor) after they receive said funding. Anyone recall the "water on Mars" hoopla released just before Matt Damon movie? Even though they "confirmed" months earlier? Then after Omni-bus budget passed the walked it back, on page 6.

  8. Have other people noticed that at certain times , static seems to build up very quickly? I work in a timber yard with forklifts and steel racking and have noticed an increase in static discharges that are much more spectacular then over the previous years. Could be the same magnetic fluctuations that are though to be gravitational waves be at play in this phenomenon?

  9. To the Ephesians 6.10-13  … Finally, go on acquiring power in [the] Lord
    and in the mightiness of his strength. Put on the complete suit of armour from God that YOU may be able to stand firm against the machinations of the Devil;  because we have a wrestling, not against blood and flesh, but against the governments, against the authorities, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places.  On this account take up the complete suit of armour from God, that YOU may be able to resist in the wicked day and, after YOU have done all things thoroughly, to stand firm.

  10. Great stuff, but please don't abuse "begging the question". You mean, "which asks the question". Begging the question is a kind of logical fallacy and not what you mean to say in this context, EU team.

  11. two black holes colliding produce only one chirp? they had their answer ready before they had an observation. years of nothing to show for the millions of dollars wasted so they claim success for the first glitch they see.

  12. Electric Universe =Labratory provable science=access to free energy=release from debt slavery for the Human race= break down of the Rothschilds Control sytem=Freedom for your soul .

  13. this is sad. we are in the middle of a second dark age, only the new religious dogma is imposed by much more refined and advanced tools. this is going to cost us a lot, since we now need science more than ever to take us out of the present global crisis.

  14. true nature of gravitational waves. .. all of space time matter would be a result of an energetically charged vibration. all of everything would be creating gravitational waves, every single quanta of anything.
    there is no quantic anything.

  15. 2:20 A "chirp" – Wow that's incredible!
    I was working at my desk and I heard a chirp outside my window. At first I assumed it was two black holes colliding. But then I realized it was a little bird. A sparrow, I think. Now I'm thinking, obviously, that sparrows cause black holes and gravitational waves (even though they can fly). I gotta write another (bullshit) paper and earn my keep. That about sums up modern Standard Model Cosmology.

  16. anyone else laugh at the end to the whole concept of this gravitational waves mainstream science wants to shove down our throats. (Red from the 70's show) Dumbass

  17. The general public will eat up any thing spoon fed to them by the media .
    The sad thing is now that they have claimed ultimate fact of gravitational waves nothing will stop them from continuing to claim ultimate fact unless there is enough push back from independent media .
    Tesla over Einstein any day .

  18. Lets just think about this for a moment. What is more probable?

    a) Detection of some phenomenon here on earth or very close to earth.
    or
    b) Detection of some extragalactic phenomenon millions of light years away, millions of years ago from the fantastical object – black hole.

  19. In the video Hilton Ratcliffe refers to some concerns raised by Abhas Mitra, based on his view that the straight-line distance (chord length) between Livingston and Hanford through the earth is 2500 km. Unfortunately, he miscalculated (see https://plus.google.com/+AbhasMitraDr). Taking 3002 km as the arc length between Livingston and Hanford, and 6371 km as the average earth radius, the angle (theta) that L and H make with the earth’s centre is: (3002 x 360) / (2 x pi x 6371) = 27 degrees. The chord length between L and H is therefore: 2 x 6371 x sin(theta/2) = 2975 km (not 2500 km) (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CircularSegment.html). The time delay between L and H was 0.007 sec, in which time a wave moving at light speed travels 2099 km. Therefore if the wave was travelling at light speed, the angle the wavefront made with the chord between L and H = arcsin (2099/2975) = 44.9 degrees.

  20. https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/research/conferences/convergence/roundtable-discussion-questions/what-are-lessons-quantum
    Perimeter Institute: "Quantum mechanics has one thing, time, which is absolute. But general relativity tells us that space and time are both dynamical so there is a big contradiction there. So the question is, can quantum gravity be formulated in a context where quantum mechanics still has absolute time? Or does time have to give. The answer, yes or no, is interesting. If the answer is no, then perhaps some experiment can probe whether or not time is absolute?"

    The experiment is already a fact: Gravitational waves discovered by LIGO showed that "space and time are both dynamical" so quantum mechanics in its present version will have to be discarded. Unless… LIGO's discovery is a fraud.

  21. Genuine question: Why do you believe the Thunderbolts project over thousand of scientist and space agencies world wide who have successfully deployed thousands of satellites, many of which you use yourself? This question extends beyond the Gravitational Waves announcement and into your rejection of the Standard Model of physics which is used as a basis for said successful projects.

  22. An interesting piece, and one that seems to have some merit to it, but I have a hard time juxtaposing this with the fact that this guy calls himself "Hilton Skywalker" on his own page (I mean, okay, I'm a geek, too, and I know how that is, but… come on, really?) and posts blogs full of Islamophobic rhetoric, including ignorant or misleading posts about Apple's issue with the FBI with regard to the San Bernardino shooters' phones (which the FBI has no trouble breaking into in the first place — the FBI's motives in this are entirely political; that is, they want Apple to build backdoors into EVERYONE'S (yes, YOUR) Apple products so that they don't have to do the decryption that they have no difficulty in doing — and in case you're foolish enough to bring out the "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about" canard, take heed: a backdoor for them is a backdoor for anyone else).

  23. Simply if planet would be the source of a gravity wave then the wave would pool the planet with it when trying to propagate away…
    But those sciencefictionists learned the nonsense science enforce by legacy dogma…
    See why and how:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIQ99zaO7RE
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhldn0ef138&feature=youtu.be

  24. Most people would be astounded to learn of the tenuous nature of the data used to claim "Gravity Waves!" It makes me practically sick, as this is the state of "science. It's about being right rather than true.

  25. The usual fantasy structure of official science. There are no black holes in reality, let alone gravity waves. Bunch of fools, and the abusive ones are mentally unbalanced.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *