Re: LIGO.
- From: "Ken S. Tucker" <dynamics@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Feb 2007 10:26:36 -0800
On Feb 10, 4:53 am, cliff wright <c.c.wri...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
....
I spent most of
my career as an electronics design engineer, and I am an active Amateur
astronomer.
Me too!
....
In a field which I did a lot of work, Acoustics
Me too!
I helped design this little product...
http://earco.travisktucker.com/
....
I really hope this produces some result for us. If they can detect
"something" when something big goes "bump" then it will be well worth
the money.
Me too!
Best Regards Cliff Wright.
Sure is nice to find someone agreeable :-).
Even IF LIGO remains mute, it will still rank
as one this century's greatest experiments.
It would contribute to unified field theory.
I understand the LIGO type detectors to be
basically MMX type interferometers lying on
the ground, simple in principle but techno-
logically challenging, noise vs signal processing
algorithm, (you'd know a lot about that).
Regards
Ken
.
- References:
- LIGO.
- From: cliff wright
- Re: LIGO.
- From: dlzc
- Re: LIGO.
- From: harry
- Re: LIGO.
- From: dlzc
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Bullion
- Re: LIGO.
- From: dlzc
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: LIGO.
- From: sal
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Joe M .
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: LIGO.
- From: cliff wright
- Re: LIGO.
- From: Martin Hogbin
- Re: LIGO.
- From: cliff wright
- LIGO.
- Prev by Date: Re: The relationship between meter, speed of light and c
- Next by Date: Re: LIGO.
- Previous by thread: Re: LIGO.
- Next by thread: Re: LIGO.
- Index(es):
Loading