Showing posts with label you. Show all posts
Showing posts with label you. Show all posts

Thursday, May 3, 2012

More on LISA/NGO and What Would You Ask a Scientist?

LISA/NGO Update

On May 2nd, the ESA officially decided to accept their Science Programme Committee's recommendation to choose the JUICE (JUpiter ICy moons Explorer) mission for the 2020ish launch opportunity.  While this is unexpected, it is still a disappointment.  A thoughtful article on possible factors contributing to why LISA/NGO was passed over can be found here.

While this is disappointing, all isn't lost.  The scuttlebutt is that LISA may have a good shot at being the next mission chosen when the next mission selection takes place in 2015. (I know...  That's still a long while off.)  The science case for LISA/NGO has always been strong and by then the results of the LISA Pathfinder mission will be in (it appears that it will fly in 2014, not in June like I cited from the NASA website on my last LISA post).  Assuming success, many of the technical concerns should be resolved.

As LISA/NGO detects lower frequency gravitational waves than LIGO ever can (since seismic vibrations create too much noise for LIGO to be sensitive there), it is a beautifully complimentary observatory.  Who wouldn't love a detector where your main noise source is detecting too many gravitational waves at the same time (which is exactly the case for LISA/NGO)?

I'm looking forward to it!

What Would You Ask A Scientist (or Engineer, etc.)?

One of the reasons that I started this blog is that I wanted to show people that scientists are real people.  I've been told too many times to count that I look too young, normal, etc. to be a "real" scientist.  I know that they are trying to compliment me, but the subtext of this is that they thought I wouldn't be human like them.  So, since not all of you can come to visit me, I figured I would share some of my experience and life with you.

Well, it turns out that I am not as interesting as I thought I was (actually, I never thought that - I like vampire books, I have migraines, and I love my job at LIGO - that is me in a nutshell).  But the LIGO Scientific Collaboration is made up of over 800 scientists from across the country and around the world and I am guessing that you may like to find out more about them.

Here is what I am thinking...  I have a few basic questions I would like anyone profiled here to answer:
  • What is it that you do for a living?
  • What motivated you to choose this career?
  • What kind of education do you have/need to do your work?
  • Where are you from?
  • Please tell us something unique about yourself.
I also have a list of questions that I would like the person being profiled to pick and choose from (not all are appropriate for everyone or would produce interesting answers).  Of these, I would love to know that you think is most interesting.  This may help guide the person being profiled in choosing what they wish to answer (or I can ask that your favorites be answered).

So, what would you like to ask someone who works on LIGO?  I have a survey you can click below and there is also a link just below the blog banner called "Survey" where you can respond.  Please note that the last option is where you can put your pressing question that isn't already listed.  Also, feel free to let me know if there is anyone in particular from LIGO that you would like me to profile!  Hope to hear from you!!!

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Q: Are there really Vegas odds on GW detection?

@Astroguyz  asked:

Are there really Vegas odds on GW detection?

The answer to this is yes, there were Vegas odds on the detection of gravitational waves.

This story starts in latter half of August of 2004.  Ladbrokes created a special category of wagering based on successful scientific discoveries by 2010.  These were the discovery of life on Titan, a fusion (rather than fission) nuclear power plant, finding the Higgs Boson, understanding the origin of cosmic rays, and the discovery of gravitational waves.  Originally, the odds were set at 500:1.  Well, those of us in the know thought that the broker was way off and we had a lot to gain by taken them up on their offer - so many that the broker realized the same thing.  Within just a few weeks (I cannot find the exact date but the news articles I've read implied it's between 2 and 3 weeks), the odds were slashed from 500:1 to 100:1, 10:1, 6:1, then 2:1 before they finally closed the bets.  If I wasn't a broke graduate student in 2004, I even I would have jumped on these!

Here is some of the news coverage of the betting:
   26 August 2004 - New Scientist
   31 August 2004 - BBC News
   29 July 2010 - The Economist

If you read through these, you will note that the same LIGO Science Collaboration member is quoted: James Hough from the University of Glasgow.   I asked him about this in an email and he wrote:

"I think my bet was for 25 pounds at 100 to 1 but the chair of the UK oversight committee had 50 pounds at 500 to one.
Unfortunately as you know we did not succeed.
But you can imagine my excitement over the Big Dog event!!  I was on tenterhooks for weeks!"
As James notes (and as I have mentioned on this blog many times), LIGO has yet to make the first direct detection of gravitational waves.  In the end, Ladbrokes cleaned up.  I do hope that they open bets like this again though since I know that Advanced LIGO will be able to reach 1000 times more of the Universe than it did during its last data run in 2010 (when we started the aLIGO upgrades).  Instead of maybe seeing gravitational waves, we expect to be able to see tens of gravitational waves every year after aLIGO reaches its design sensitivity.  I can't wait!

If you are interested in making bets on odd things, Ladbrokes does still have a "Specials" category with all sorts of odd things you can wager on.  If you have a gambling problem, please consider contacting the National Council on Problem Gambling at 1-800-522-4700.

...

P.S.  As I wrote this blog post, it is to the horrible background music of uninterruptable power supplies (UPS) in my and neighboring offices beeping due to a power outage here at LIGO Livingston (loving my office with a window!).  This is when our computer staff really gets called into action - all of the computers that run the instrument AND the supercomputer that is located here need to be powered down before their UPS fails (they are only supposed to be good for minutes to give you time to shut down) and then they get to power everything back up again once the power is back on.  And there is an order to powering the computers back on!  So I guess this blog post comes to you today courtesy of my laptop battery :) 


The picture above is looking down on the large assembly area (not far from my office) where systems like seismic isolation are being put together for Advanced LIGO.  The lights that you see are emergency lighting so no one hurts themselves trying to leave in the dark.  This is a view I've never seen before.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Science Summaries on ligo.org - FEEDBACK WELCOME!

A new initiative the LIGO Science Collaboration (LSC) is undertaking is composing science summaries of all of our newly published papers so that everyone can keep themselves up to date on what new science LIGO and her sister observatories produce.  Today's post gives you a look into my experience writing one of these summaries.

One unfortunate thing about science is that almost all publications are written for an audience of other experts in the field.  This allows us to communicate to one another in efficient terminology that is all but alien to non-experts.  Some research is so specialized that it can be difficult for experts in a related sub-specialty to understand papers without careful study.  However, most physical science research is funded through government agencies - that means with your tax payer dollars.  LIGO is funded by the National Science Foundation (that's right kids, the same people who pay Elmo pay me!).  So, for the same reasons that I write this blog (to let everyone see inside of LIGO) the LSC is publishing these science summaries of recent publications.

There have been several already published (click on "science" and then on "science summaries"), but I wanted to talk about my experience writing one on the a paper titled "Implementation and testing of the first prompt search for gravitational wave transients with electromagnetic counterparts".  Of course, the title for the summary is a bit more succinct, "Optical, X-ray, and Radio Telescopes Seek Explosive Sources of Gravitational Waves".  This is that paper that outlines the development of the procedures and software needed to alert optical telescopes when we think LIGO may have seen a gravitational wave (I wrote about working on this in a previous blog post).

Before I started writing this summary, I re-read the paper.  Wow.  This paper wasn't too difficult to read because of jargon, but there were so many details that I thought were important (... of course I did!).  So I sat back and asked myself how I would explain this to my mother, who is a real estate appraiser and not an expert on what I do (even though she always smiles and nods when I ramble on about work).  What are the most important points I would want her to know?  The first is that we were successful in creating a system that would give us a good chance of imaging the source of a gravitational wave if we were to have a real detection.  The other was that we made partnerships with scientists who operate telescopes around the world (and they are just as excited to work with us as we were with them - but we don't talk about that in the paper).  After I determined these 2 major points, I made sure to detail the who, what, when, where, why, and how as well.  Then my draft went to the rest of the group who did the work described in this paper for their opinions.

I got many helpful comments from the project group.  There are so many small changes I was advised to make so that my prose would be better understood (I am sure my regular readers can tell me many ways that, if I just changed the way I said this or that, my blog would be improved).  Once everyone was comfortable with the summary draft, it then went to the Education and Public Outreach (EPO) group in the collaboration for review.  This is where all of us who are interested in sharing LIGO's work with the public get together to plan events, etc.  The comments I got from this group had me doing some major reworking of the summary.  You see, I answered most of the who, what, when, where, why, and how questions in a few very long sentences right at the beginning.  Instead of this, it was suggested that I give a more introductory paragraph that established background instead of a flood of facts.  After these major revisions, my summary wasn't any longer and still contained all of the same information but in a much more digestible manner.

Now that the summary has been published, I am wondering what your thoughts are on it.  What could I have said better?  I've learned so much from my colleagues in writing this, but in the end, they are still experts that are just as biased as I am towards jargon.  I would love to learn from you!  Please feel free to leave comments below!

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Q: How can gravitational waves help mankind?

UPDATE:  [11 Feb. 2015] Gravitational waves have been detected!  Read more about it here.

@HughScot asked:
What do you hope to discover about gravitational waves that will help mankind in the future?
There are many things that we hope to observe through gravitational waves especially since they have the advantage of being able to travel through matter and come out the other side unchanged, unlike the different forms of light used in traditional astronomy.  This gives us the opportunity to observe things that do not emit light, like black holes or to observe systems that would otherwise be obscured by intervening material.

But this question asks how gravitational waves will improve mankind in the future - as in what are the applications of gravitational waves.  I get this question often when I am giving tours of the facility.  Well, the primary use of gravitational wave observations will be to understand our Universe better.  Most people's reactions to this are that our efforts can better used for other endeavors.  But this view is a little short sighted.  One of the things we forget is that when we understand more about the Universe in general, we know more about the world around us.  We are a very small part of the Universe, but we are a part of it nonetheless.

One of the direct uses for gravitational waves will be to use them to turn the Universe into our own laboratory.  There are many things that we cannot replicate on Earth, like the dense cores of neutron stars.  Under extreme conditions like this, nuclear physics and thermodynamics can theoretically do some interesting things.  However, we can't investigate those directly because we cannot create these environments ourselves.  That's when we turn to the Universe for our laboratory!  Prime candidates that will allow us to use gravitational waves to investigate this include pairs of neutron stars merging into one star, starquakes on these stars, or even rapidly rotating neutron stars with "mountains" on them (and I put mountains in quotation marks because neutron starts are believed to be so perfectly spherical that a deformation a few millimeters [a quarter of an inch or so] is 'huge').  Knowing the details of how nuclear physics and thermodynamics changes in these environments can have applications on Earth, although I can't tell you what they are yet.

Another application of gravitational wave observations will be testing Einstein's general relativity.  Even though gravity is the force that holds the Universe together, we have a very difficult time testing it since it since it is also the weakest force in the Universe (there is no negative mass to cancel the effects of positive mass like happens between positive and negative charge).  Since the mass needed to conduct experiments to test general relativity is so great, lab experiments are very few.  Again, we must turn to the Universe to be our lab.  Directly observing gravitational waves with LIGO and detectors like it will allow us to perform tests on general relativity that we have never been able to before.  For example, it is expected that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light but there really isn't anything in the theory that constrains them to that speed (they could travel slower).  Detecting gravitational waves with multiple detectors across the planet and observing light from the same source in the sky would allow us to test this.  (By the way, even though general relativity is difficult to test, every time it has been tested it has proven to be right!)

We already use an application of general relativity in our everyday lives: a consequence of special and general relativity is that time passes a different rates based on the speed of an observer or the strength of the gravitational field that the observer is in.  No matter what, your time will always be the same, but you may observe the clocks of others who are at rest or traveling slower than you ticking slower than yours (this tutorial does an excellent job of explaining how this time dilation works).  If corrections for this effect are not taken into account, the clocks on GPS satellites would quickly become out of sync and the GPS in you car, etc. would not be able to accurately locate you!

Besides the benefit to mankind due to the information the gravitational waves themselves will bring us, we have also developed a significant amount of new technology to make LIGO work.  We have developed new seismic isolation techniques that allow less than 1 billionth the energy of normal ground vibration into our instruments, we have required and received the most precisely polished mirrors, and we have developed new suspension and control systems to stabilize our optics.  These are just a few of the advancements the search for gravitational waves have made.  I am sure that there are many other applications for these new developments (although I haven't explored them myself).  Using technology developed for other purposes is a well known phenomenon in science and technology call spin-off technology.

In conclusion, we will never be able to commercialize or weaponize gravitational waves themselves.  However, they will carry information to us about some of the most extreme environments in the Universe which we can use as a laboratory for environments we cannot create here on Earth.  This information can tell us more about how the physics around us works in subtle ways that can have profound implications.  What those are are yet to be seen.  That's the exciting thing about science - you never really know the full potential of new discoveries until after the fact.


Today's picture is of an engineer (my husband Derek Bridges) dressed in clean room garb (so as not to contaminate the equipment that will be placed into LIGO's interior vacuum).  The blue stands he is leaning on are part of the seismic isolation system mentioned in the text above and the big steel chamber behind him is one of the many used to contain LIGO instrumentation in its vacuum.  This picture was taken at the Advanced LIGO testing lab at MIT.

I hope this answered your question!  If not, please feel free to ask me more about this or anything else!

Friday, November 4, 2011

2 Questions: "Can there be a gravitational wave detection before Advanced LIGO?" & "What does it mean if gravitational waves aren't detected with aLIGO?"

Sorry for being away from the blog for as long as I have.  What has been keeping me away from you, you say?  Well, I got sick :(  The one thing that I am very susceptible to is sinus infections (ever since I was a kid) and autumn is prime time for me to catch one.  That kept me basically in bed for about 4 days with a few days before and after still feeling miserable but ambulatory.  My waterfall of post-nasal drip has begun to slow down but my coughing is starting to taste funny again.  I'm off to the after-hours clinic tonight to see if I need antibiotics to clear this up.

There was also a meeting at the LIGO Livingston Observatory where I work that brought astronomers and LIGO scientists together to discuss what data of ours they would like to have access to and what is the best way for them to get the data.  This is all in an effort to make the data the the American taxpayer has paid for available to other scientists.  This is an interesting topic because most of us here at LIGO have neuroses about making a detection claim that later turns out to be false.  Because of that, we tend to keep our data close to the vest until we are certain what is in it.  Anyway, I will talk about this more in a later blog post.

Now, back to answering reader questions!  Since I have been away so long I figured I would answer 2:

QUESTION #1

@AstroGuyz asked:

You know the question on every science bloggers' mind is the Big One; "When will LIGO discover gravity waves?"  Are the prospects for gravitational wave detection good before AdLIGO goes online?  Think we'll nab it before the Higgs?
First off, there is very little probability of detecting gravitational waves before Advanced LIGO is ready.  Notice I didn't say it was impossible.  There are 2 situations that could produce a pre-Advanced LIGO detection.

The first possibility is a joint run between two or more detectors outside of the United States.  This happened over this past summer when GEO and Virgo were both operational and while we are still looking at this data, we haven't seen anything yet.  Now that Virgo has commenced its upgrade efforts in earnest, there isn't really another chance for a joint run until Advanced LIGO is ready.  (FYI: you can see what gravitational wave detectors are operating right now on the GWIstat page, which is always displayed under my "Interesting Links" to the right.  Note that not all of these are interferometric (laser) detectors.)

The second chance for detection is going to rely on a single detector, mainly GEO, to be operating when a significant astronomical event is observed using other astronomy observations.  For example, if a supernova is detected in the sky at the same time a very strong event is detected in GEO, then chances are that these two events are related and there is a real gravitational wave detection.  That is why GEO is continually running while LIGO and Virgo undergo their upgrades - so that we don't miss something that is basically obvious.

So, unless one of these two situations happens, we will all need to wait for Advanced LIGO to be done.  And I wouldn't expect a detection as soon as we turn it on either...  It will take a while for us to get all of the new equipment "tuned-up" to the point that it is working to the best of its abilities.  Don't quote me on this, but I wouldn't expect anything until 2016-2017.

As far as detecting gravitational waves before the Higgs particle, I can't say but I am thinking about writing a post about what all the excitement over this particle is about in another post!

QUESTION #2

@EclipseMaps asked:

What are consequences for theory of gravity/relativity if null results for gravitational waves after extended observations?
From my last question, I mentioned not to expect a detection of gravitational waves until about 2016-2017.  Even if that time comes and goes, I still wouldn't get too worried.  However, if 2020 or so comes by (remember, this is just my opinion and not that of LIGO) and we firmly see no evidence of a detection, then this does have some implications.

The first thing most people would think is that LIGO has been a failure.  Actually, that is very far from the truth.  I, along with over 800 scientists in the LIGO Scientific Collaboration, have dedicated our careers to this as well as used taxpayer dollars to search for gravitational wave and we haven't done this on a hunch.  The 1993 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded for proof that gravitational waves exist by observing their affects on an astronomical system.  We simply want to detect them affecting our own detectors so that we can do astronomy with them.

Not detecting gravitational waves after we have detectors that clearly should be detecting them tells us that there is something we don't understand about general relativity (the theory where gravitational waves originate) or that we don't understand enough about the composition of our universe, namely how many of those things we expect to produce detectable gravitational waves exist.  This would be extraordinarily interesting (although a bit disappointing to me).  So much so, that there would be whole conferences of physicists and astronomers debating the populations of gravitational wave sources to exotic interference such as gravitational waves leaking into separated universes (see my discussion about how gravitons behave in string theory here).

PICTURE FOR THE DAY:

My "Lucky Yen"
This is my "Lucky Yen".  There really isn't anything special about it other than it was given to me by my first physics professor in college, Dr. Plitnik, who gave this to me on my birthday in 1997.  It was just after the Fall semester started.  I know it is kind of dumb, but it meant a lot to me and I have carried it in whatever bag I used through college, grad school and now.  It has even earned its own coin case (which has a higher market value than the coin).

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Q: How Does Einstein@Home Search for Gravitational Waves?

@umbonfo asked the following question:
What about the Citizen Science project Einstein@Home? I'm running it but I don't know which GW data it's analyzing.
This is a great question and there is so much I want to tell you all about that I am going to break this down into smaller questions:

What is Einstein@Home?

If you aren't familiar with Einstein@Home (read more, sign up), it is a screensaver that looks for gravitational waves in data collected by LIGO and other detectors like it.  Basically, users allow Einstein@Home to become part of a large supercomputer seeking gravitational waves but ONLY when the users are not using their computers.  How many times have you gone to bed at night and left your computer on?  If it doesn't have anything to do, it just sits there.  Einstein@Home gives it something productive to do that comes at no additional cost to the user.  Below is a screenshot of Einstein@Home as it is running on my computer.  It shows you where the two LIGO detectors are (the green and blue 'L' on the starsphere), where the GEO detector in Germany is (the red 'L') and where on the sky this program is looking for gravitaional waves right now (the orange cross-hairs).  To learn more about what you see on the screensaver, click here.


This is a screen shot of the Einstein@Home screensaver from my laptop just moments ago.
How does Einstein@Home get data?

Once you install the Einstein@Home screensaver, the central data servers (at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee) send a small portion of data to your computer for it to analyze.  Once your computer is done looking at that data, it sends a message back to the central computers telling them if there was a candidate gravitational wave in it.  Regardless of the result, 1 to 2 other computers also process the same data to make sure that they all get the same results (and we are sure that there isn't someone out tampering with the software to report false results).  If the same results are found and there is a candidate gravitational wave in the data, then it is looked at more closely by physicists who specialize in data analysis (like me - although I look for different kinds of gravitational waves than Einstein@Home looks for).


What kind of gravitational waves does Einstein@Home look for?

Einstein@Home looks for a very specific kind of gravitational wave call a continuous gravitational wave.  The are expected to be emitted by rapidly spinning, dense objects like neutron stars.  If there is even a small imperfection in the spherical shape of these stars, they will be constantly emitting a gravitational wave (if you were to put the signal of the gravitational wave through speakers, it would sound like a single tone).  We look for this kind of gravitational wave by breaking down the data collected from the detector into its different wave components.  Think of the data as the sum of a collection of many different waves each with a constant frequency.  We can then take a chunk of data and break it up into its component waves.  (This is called a Fourier transform.)  Since we know what a continuous wave should look like, Einstein@Home then inspects each of the component waves to see if it could be a gravitational wave.

Does Einstein@Home do anything else?

Why, that's insightful of you to ask!  :)  Einstein@Home also processes data from the Arecibo radio telescope looking for pulsars - a special kind of neutron star that emits radio waves from their magnetic poles.  Every time that the star spins its jet of radio waves across the Earth, radio telescopes can detect it.  The data analysis in not quite the same as when Einstein@Home looks for gravitational waves, but the basic process of breaking down the data into its component waves is the same.

Why is Enstein@Home interested in discovering pulsars?

Knowing more about where pulsars are in our universe lets us know better where to look for them in our gravitational wave data (notice that the screensaver has crosshairs that show you specifically were Einstein@Home is looking for gravitational waves) and, since pulsars are a special kind of neutron star, we can get a better sense of how many of them are out there in the Universe which give us more accurate measures of how often we should expect to detect gravitational waves from them.

What has Einstein@Home found?

Well, since there has been no direct detection of gravitational waves yet, it is obvious that Einstein@Home has not produced a real gravitational wave yet.  However, it has found over 10 previously unknown pulsars including the fastest known spinning pulsar!

All of this would not be possible without users like you!  When all of the computing power of Einstein@Home is combined, it is within the top 20 or so supercomputers in the world!   


I hope I answered at least most of your questions about Einstein@Home.  As always, feel free to ask me questions by leaving a comment on this blog or tweet me @livingligo.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Q: What are gravitons?

duhoc asked the following question in a comment to my post calling for reader questions:
I love cosmology and physics but understand very little about it.  What are gravitons, in simple terms? 
Gravitons can be complicated.  To that end, I want to state that I am no expert on the subject...  But maybe that's just right for a simple answer.  If my answer here doesn't do the job, let me know and I will track down a friend who researches quantum gravity or string theory to do a better job.

Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces, along with electromagnetism, strong force (which holds the nucleus of atoms together) and weak force (which is responsible for radioactive decay).  Every other fundamental force has a particle associated with it that communicates the force.  Electromagnetism has the photon, the strong force has gluons an the weak force has W and Z bosons (I know the least about these).  The only exception here is that gravity does not have a fundamental particle associated with it that has been observed.  However, it is safe to work on a theory that establishes the graviton as its communicating particle.  [Constructing theories by extending observations from similar situations to a new one that is not completely explained has proven effective before - the neutrino was a theoretical particle assumed to exist to account for the missing energy carried away in some forms of radioactivity and it was later proved to be true!]

One of the reasons that it is so difficult to directly detect the graviton is that gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces (even though it holds the Universe together - that's because there is no negative mass and we don't know why that is either).  The weaker the force, the more effort there is needed to detect it.  For the graviton, it isn't a lack of motivation on scientists' part but a limit on technology... Just the contamination shielding for a detector the size of Jupiter, which would let us observe a gravitation once every 10 years, would be so massive that it would collapse into a back hole.

So, instead of observing the graviton directly, we can observe the effects of gravitons and gain knowledge about the its properties.  One of the most promising ways is by observing gravitational waves (and I know a lot about this!).  You may (or may not) have hear that we expect gravitational waves to travel at the speed of light.  The reason we expect it to is that we expect the graviton to be massless and massless particles cruise through the Universe at the speed of light.  But, if we detect a gravitational wave and it takes significantly longer the the time light would take to travel between the LIGO detectors and her international partners, then that would imply that the graviton has mass.  Think about that for a second...  Gravity exerts forces between masses and if the particle that communicated this force has mass itself, that can really complicate things.  There are theoretical physicists who spend their careers thinking about what if some detail of general relativity that hasn't been thoroughly verified is different than we think; what would be the consequences of that?  They know and they have more complicated theories worked out and the results of a massive graviton has been pondered by them as well.  Again, I am not a theoretical physicist but I do appreciate the complications involved.  However, one property of the Universe that has been shown time and time again is that the simple solution is usually the correct one which is why we say the we expect gravitational waves to travel at the speed of light.

There are some really interesting theories in cosmology that focus on the graviton.  For example, in string theory it is theorized that our Universe lives on a brane inside a higher dimensional bulk (where there are more dimensions than length, width, depth and time).  Here, gravitons are able to travel to other branes (universes).  If this theory is correct, then this could explain the missing mass in the Universe we call dark matter.

I like to include pictures with each of my blog post to help keep things interesting.  But, since the graviton has never been observed I haven't been able to find any strictly scientific images for this post.  However, if you would like a graviton of your very own to cuddle with, the Particle Zoo (which sells stuffed versions of elementary particles) has one you will be attracted to (ha, ha...  get it?):

I'm not endorsing or advertizing this product, I just thought it was interesting.
I hope this answers your question.  If not or if you anyone has more question, feel free to leave a comment below or ask me on Twitter @livingligo.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Q: What Was/Will Be the Detection Range of Initial/Advanced LIGO?

REMINDER: I DO NOT speak for the LIGO Scientific Collaboration or the Virgo Collaboration.  Therefore, these answers are mine alone as are any mistakes.

@vicnice137 asked the following question:
What's the effective range for LIGO? and for adv LIGO?  Will it include Virgo Cluster?  
The answer to this includes calibrations (which are fundamental to any experiment), astronomy, and General Relativity (I promise, no math).

First let's talk about calibration.  Any time you do an experiment, you use an instrument to measure something and before you can make statements with any confidence about your result, you need to know exactly how your instrument responds or works.  For LIGO, that means we need to understand how the light at the output of LIGO (where the interference pattern between the arms and gravitational waves are observed) changes when the mirror moves a known amount.  This is a bit more complicated than it sounds since there are feedback systems in LIGO that serve to keep the mirrors still (mostly to cancel vibrations of the mirror from our environment).  There are measurements that are made at the beginning and the end of each science data run that are used as reference characterizations of these feedback systems and there are measurements of small vibrations with a specific frequency that are purposefully and continually applied to the mirrors to characterize the calibration of LIGO at a given time.  (These calibration vibrations only affect our ability to detect gravitational waves at that specific frequency.)  Together, this information allows us to convert the intensity of the interference pattern LIGO produces into the change in length of LIGO's arms (which is what a passing gravitational wave will induce).

Now that we understand how LIGO responds to passing gravitational waves, we need to establish a reference gravitational wave that we will use to talk about how far out into space we would be able to detect that specific gravitational wave.  This reference source is known in traditional astronomy as a standard candle.  There are four main kinds of gravitational waves:
  • binary inspiral mergers (like 2 dense stars, 2 black holes or a dense star/black hole pair that orbit each other rapidly and then merge to become one), 
  • continuous gravitational waves (like from deformations on otherwise spherical rotating stars),  
  • stochastic gravitational waves (weak gravitational waves from many sources at once; perhaps the relic gravitational waves from the Big Bang), and 
  • burst gravitational waves (these are short gravitational waves from previously unknown sources or sources that are not well modeled - like what happens inside a star as it collapses right before the bright burst of light from a supernova).  
Since there is more than one kind of gravitational wave to choose from, we need to establish a priority and LIGO's priority is that:
  1. The gravitational wave should be from a source we theoretically know very much about.  That is, a simple system that produces a well characterized gravitational wave.
  2. The gravitational wave source should be abundant in the near Universe so that we can reasonably expect to detect it as one of the first direct gravitational wave measurements.
From these priorities the binary inspiral mergers stand out since bursts are inherently unknown, stochastic gravitational waves are inherently weak and the population of sources that produce continuous gravitational wave is not well established.

Now that we have settled on a source, we want to use a pair that is representative of the source but not exceptional in strength (otherwise, we would be overestimating how far out into space we can realistically expect to detect these gravitational waves).  LIGO chose a 1.4 solar mass neutron star paired with another 1.4 solar mass neutron star (FYI: 1.4 solar masses is on the lower limit of the expected mass of a neutron star so LIGO picked a very conservative measure for our detection distance measure).  Since General Relativity tells us how strong a gravitational wave this source will produce with respect to how far away the source is, we can combine this with our calibration (or current sensitivity) of LIGO to establish how far into the Universe we can expect to detect this representative gravitational wave.

This is such an important measure to us, that we constantly measure this value and project it on the wall at each of the control rooms in LIGO (there are 2 LIGOs: the one I work at in Louisiana and the other in Washington state).  By glancing at this and other figures-of-merit, we can quickly assess how the detector is working at that time.  Below is an example figure-of-merit that shows how far away we could detect two 1.4 solar mass neutron stars inspiraling:


The green line represents the detection range for the LIGO here in Livingston, Louisiana (known to us as L1) and the red line is other range of the LIGO detector in Hanford, Washington (known to us as H1).  The horizontal axis shows what time the measurement was taken (going back in time moving from right to left; the far right [Time = 0] was when this plot was produced) and the vertical axis measures the distance into space in Mpc (megaparsecs).  Parsecs are a somewhat odd unit of distance to anyone who doesn't study astronomy but it is equal to about 3.26 light years.

During the last data run with LIGO before the advanced LIGO upgrades began, you can see from the plot above that we were able to detect our neutron star pair out to about 20 Mpc or 65 million light years.  This did indeed encompass the Virgo Cluster of galaxies (which are between 53.5 and 54.1 million light years away).  However, LIGO was not able to maintain this detection distance all the time (you can see on the plot above that starting at about -1.5 hours the L1 range dropped from about 20 Mpc to about 15 Mpc - this was due to increased seismic activity in the region that was beyond our control).  Since the Virgo cluster is located at about 16.5 Mpc, you can see that it was not always within our detection range.

Advanced LIGO will increase our sensitivity, and therefore our detection range, by 10 times.  Once advanced LIGO reaches its design sensitivity, we will be able to detect our standard candle gravitational waves out to about 200-300 Mpc (or 650-978 million light years).  This will enable us to see 1000 times more of the Universe (since volume is proportional to the radius [distance] cubed and 10x10x10 = 1000):

Each dot in this illustration is an entire galaxy, not just a star!
It is also important to consider the limitations of this detection distance since we are limiting ourselves to thinking about only one particular kind of gravitational wave.  For example, I specialize in searching for burst gravitational waves.  These were not chosen as our standard candle because we don't know much about them (we like to call them the gravitational waves that go bump in the night).  But to apply the detection distance measured in our figure-of-merit based on a different class of gravitational waves would be short-sighted since bursts could very well be stronger (gamma ray bursts are some of the most energetic light signals astronomers have observed and, not only do we not know what causes them, many of them are VERY far away).  When we use a catalog of galaxies to target our burst searches (after all, a gravitational wave is much more likely to come from an area on the sky containing a galaxy unless we lucked out and had a nearby gravitational wave from our own galaxy), we include all known galaxies up to about 2.5 times the standard candle detection range (about 50 Mpc, or about 163 million light years).

I hope this answered this questions satisfactorily!  I know this is a bit long, but I wanted to be thorough and explain as much jargon as possible.

If you have questions about this or anything else, feel free to ask in a comment below or send it to me on Twitter @livingligo!

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

What Do You Want to Know About?

In all of my posts so far, I have talked about my day-to-day life as a LIGO scientist (which is the point of the blog after all).  That means I tell you about the things I think are interesting (otherwise I wouldn't be writing about them).

This time, I would love you hear from you!  What do you want to know about?  I can tell you more about becoming a scientist, answer questions about my research or general questions about LIGO and gravitational waves - whatever.  Let me know what you want know!


Post what your interested in as a comment below or tell me on Twitter @livingligo.


Below is a picture of me in my office not two seconds ago as seen from my laptop's webcam:

Bye!