Part 1: Possible Graviton Detection, for Outer Space Treatment of the Gertenshehtein Effect. &amp;lt;i&amp;gt; i.e.&amp;lt;/i&amp;gt; Dyson’s Construction/Analysis Does Not Precludes Earth Bound Generation of Gravitons

Andrew W Beckwith

doi:10.4236/jhepgc.2017.31001

Abstract

We are reviewing Freeman Dyson’s paper which alleged that detection of gravitons via LIGO, or by outer space experiments (due to probabilistic calculations which we review in the document), an impossibility. The disagreement we have with Dr. Dyson is that his probability calculations are taking place in almost infinite spatial domains, which renders the detection protocols, using his probability scheme, impossible. After we summarize the Dyson outer space arguments, and how Dyson got them, we will refer the reader to the very strain calculation done in the referenced PRD article, so cited, as to how a nuclear weapon could generate GW, and then afterwards, refer the reader to a 2nd paper, of how Tokamaks could detect GW/ Gravitons, as detectable by the 3DSR effect. Nowhere are we suggesting DETONITION of a nuclear device to generate GW! The reader is referred to another Li et al. PRD article, 2008, as to 3DSR, as to how detection of GW/Gravitons could occur due to something other than the Gertenshehtein effect, in this paper, i.e. they can look it up, and then in a 2nd follow up paper learn how a Tokamak could be utilized to have a finite sized geometry, for using the 3DSR effect for GW generation. The first paper highlights how if one assumes that only by use of infinite spatial geometry, and by using only the Gertenshehtein effect, that indeed one can convince oneself as to not bothering with the very real prospects of earthbound generation of Gravitons and GW, and that in doing so, GW research will be strictly limited, even with the outstanding results of LIGO, which in no way should be criticized. The entire analysis makes the case that foundational research as to the nature of GRAVITY means moving beyond the mental limitations place on GW/Graviton research by Dyson’s 2009 paper.

Highlights

We are reviewing Freeman Dyson’s paper which alleged that detection of gravitons via LIGO, or by outer space experiments, an impossibility
After we summarize the Dyson outer space arguments, and how Dyson got them, we will refer the reader to the very strain calculation done in the referenced PRD article, so cited, as to how a nuclear weapon could generate GW, and afterwards, refer the reader to a 2nd paper, of how Tokamaks could detect GW/ Gravitons, as detectable by the 3DSR effect
Our paper is dedicated to two hypothesis. i.e. that if one initially evaluates gravitons as interacting in magnetic fields in an infinite spatial domain, that the supposition given by Dyson, in [1] is, correct

Summary

Introduction

Our paper is dedicated to two hypothesis. i.e. that if one initially evaluates gravitons as interacting in magnetic fields in an infinite spatial domain, that the supposition given by Dyson, in [1] is, correct. In the Dyson treatment [1] of the Gertsenshtein effect [2], Dyson hypothesized distances up to many light years for an interaction of magnetic fields, gravitons and photons, for experimental signals which could be detected on the Earth’s surface. In finite spatial geometry, we would have to go to 3DSR, as Equation (2) would effectively force the probability to zero, since D would be tiny This is why the 2nd paper uses the 3DSR paradigm for evaluation of GW/graviton physics [6] i.e. the ironic supposition is, looking at a literal reading of Equation (2) would be that if the frequency were not ultra high, and D light years in distance, that there would be an approach toward having P probability going to 100%.

Dyson’s Analysis of the Earth as a GW Detector

Conflict of Interest