It has come to pass. Gravitational waves detected

Mordok
The problem is that "reality" is a subjective concept, it is built on one's own life experience (which is the experience of one's own / someone else's + theoretical knowledge).
In a very broad sense - it is, but by reality I mean only facts (that is, proven things like "The Earth is round", "The sun is a star", etc.). That is, for example, if some new hypothesis forces us to assume that all stars are in fact the size of a pea, then it will not correspond to reality in this sense.

Of the more modern, quantum mech, which even calls into question the continuity of space (an axiom of the theory of relativity).
At least quantum mech copes with the description of a very small, and the theory of relativity - with a description of a very large ... Hopefully, we will live to see a common alternative to both of them.

I read the topic on the NASA forum in January, look at em engines.
OK, I hope I can find it. ) This

begs the question: why is this a sign of a wave, and not a hedgehog farting a kilometer from there in the bushes?
Well, the noise is filtered out ... Which, as far as I understand, is one of the main difficulties in such work.

JetRanger
In a very broad sense - it is, but by reality I mean only facts
For clarity, I will explain with your example.
DANGER Read in a tin foil hat Speaking of the size of the planets, we mean the metric (as well as for the mass), but!
From the course in differential geometry, we know that the global measurement results can diverge even if the surface is locally everywhere smooth and the metric there behaves like Euclidean.
On surfaces that cannot be covered with a single smooth parameterisation, measurements may differ even locally.
Roughly speaking,
1. even on smooth manifolds one cannot stupidly generalize local deductions to the whole manifold. (you come to this conclusion even in classical mathematical analysis, you don't even have to dig further).
From the same course, we know that without embedding a surface in any space, only a couple of invariants can be learned about the surface. Moreover, even simple conclusions are non-trivial and may not be correct. A classic example: constantly looking in one direction (without turning your head) and walking along a closed line, we may find that we are looking in a completely different direction from which we were looking at first (despite the fact that we were looking in the same direction). It follows from this
2. When studying non-embedded manifolds, we - let alone generalize - even locally cannot be sure of the correctness of the conclusions.

Now what is the problem. The theory of relativity speaks about space + time, but in what dimension of Everything - we do not know, therefore, in order to obtain non-incorrect conclusions (for reasons from # 2), all space + time can be considered only as an unimplemented manifold.
Personally, I do not see any reason (which does not mean that they do not exist) why orthogonal, compact subspaces will affect our space + time, but why not exist the spaces in which we are embedded?
Quantum mech added some more heat: if we accept quantization, then what the hell is such a "smooth manifold" ?? This is a full PPC.

You can also relishly throw in Gödel's theorem: mathematics is not a closed theory (here - the definition of "theory" should be taken from mathematical logic, "closed" - from topology).
What's the bottom line? The day after tomorrow, Pan Pupkin can draw, file down his differential geometry without using the axiom of choice, prove that everyone before him was idiots, and the planets are two-dimensional peas, the projection of which we see (we "walk" along them, because - the projections themselves) and, ska,
be right!

Therefore, "facts" for me are rather an application to a specific theory, rather than some constants on which to rely.
In short, mnogabukaf. If you are interested, you can write questions in private. It's just that, as I understand it, you are interested in this topic. And to smear the sheets of matan on the PeGe forums like on a doctoral thesis on the theory of gravitation, you are nasty)))

Well, the noises are filtered out ... Which, as far as I understand, is one of the main difficulties in such work.
It is precisely this moment that interests: how do they distinguish a wave-hole from somewhere there from a wave-hedgehog in the neighborhood (even a hundred kilometers away)?

stalker7162534
Primitive minds are able to fit only one thing in their minds.
Capable, and primitive. Knowledge is directly proportional to emotion. Those. the more a person really knows any material, the more calmly he can teach it without showing emotions or with their minimal manifestation, and the less a person knows, the more emotions are required in order to convince an opponent of something. In general, the prefrontal cortex does not work, and why, when all the work is done by emotions?) Well, since you touched on the topic of fanatics, then, in fact, by their behavior, you can reveal how much they are really aware of what they are doing, and most importantly, what is the foundation of that on that their fanaticism is directed. Plus, since we humans are social animals, we are subject to all sorts of group effects, most of which are derived from cognitive biases. If we take it in the context of our dispute, then there is a false consensus effect, thanks to which a group of people (let's say the same fanatics) believe that everyone thinks like them. And when they begin to understand that we do not think like them, then they begin to view us as something alien, primitive and incapable of understanding, say, the concept of God. And then the great mission of saving our souls begins. Although, in general, it is apart from self-aggrandizement, since this salvation is not salvation, because we are not in real danger, but is rather a favor, as a sign of the manifestation of our power, since we are once primitive, what can we cognize? And also their concepts are unprovable, but as a result of the same unprovability comes ... bang Vera, and with it, and def. emots. a state that is supported by precisely this unprovability, and phrases like "And you prove that it was not God who created matter, atoms, the Universe,

Mordok
It is this moment that interests: how do they distinguish a wave-hole from somewhere there from a wave-hedgehog in the neighborhood (even a hundred kilometers away)?
Because the same result was recorded at 2 stations 3000 kilometers apart. I think the farting hedgehog disappears ...
And not the nas forum should be read, but the official document that they published https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061102

Bliss.

Garrus-1994
Or they understand the way they were taught at school, i.e. presented for the truth by knowingly suppressing critical thinking, and at school they do just that.
+1 agree) Schools are not taught to think critically, but should.

I finished reading and even understood something ... It seems to me at least :)
From what I understood: The
constructed device from the sleeves measures the frequency differential. The sensor results are extrapolated in two ways (taking into account general relativity models, and mathematically) and an integral equation is obtained (in time), the solution of which will be the mass of the object under study, and a simple integral (in time) of the extrapolation result gives a wave parameterization accurate to a constant coefficient. As a result, the wave found theoretically converges with the wave found through the integral (for this particular mass).
The distance between the interferometers was used for filtering by phase shift (and not, as I thought, for filtering by the difference of the internal product).
Perturbation theory was used to discard similar signals. Extrapolations can be approximated by Taylor to any accuracy and thus discard all candidates who somehow sin (and for this, rational results are enough, that is, you can feed the data to the computer and he himself will find a sufficient approximation).
If anyone can correct - I will be glad!

What I didn't understand:
By what principle does the phase shift in long-playing emitters help, how does it generally work? (probably used as a phase shift of a particular solution of the partial differential ura, but - xs).

Bottom line: almost all questions have disappeared. The interferometer itself imagined differently, but their solution is akin to "cutting out a map from cardboard of uniform density, suspension and get the integral" - as always - delivers and delights at the same time.