Gravity Waves for Communication

[Jonfliesgoats]

Gravity waves are just now being observed.  This said, detection and sensing of these things will improve over the years.  

Can an oscillating, massive body generate enough gravity wave signal to overcome background, gravitational noise?

Are there high frequency gravity waves or are there noisy and quiet gravitational frequencies, now that we can detect these things?  Since most waves are generated by orbiting bodies, I can't imagine much being detected at frequencies higher than .1 hz.

Could gravity wave communication effectively ignore line of sight restriction and transmit to facilities underground or under water?

I would imagine this offers no advantage over quantum communications, but I still wonder about the possibilities.

[kerbiloid]

How, do you think, works intergalaxynet?

Pulsars are carrier wave generators, that's why their rotation frequency is nearly constant. They are quartz of the Universe.
Galactic devices (stars, etc) modulate signals over this carrier wave,

13 bln year range is just a depth limit, set by sysops in NAT settings.
Also, that's why physical constants have their values.
Superlight speed is possible, just requires admin privileges to override the system constraints.

Edited December 31, 2016 by kerbiloid

[KSK]

I don't think it's a frequency problem so much as an amplitude problem. The gravity waves that we can only just detect arise from some seriously violent cosmological events involving enormous masses. Black holes merging, that sort of thing. I'm sure our gravity wave detection technology will improve further but even so I really can't envisage a technological means for generating a detectable gravity wave. 

[YNM]

> needs massive transmitter

> needs massive receiver

> not upgradeable

That'd be a technological no-no.

[Jonfliesgoats]

Hrmm.  So something like an oscillating ton of lead would not be detectable a few kilometers away for now.  Oh well.  

[KSK]

1 hour ago, Jonfliesgoats said:

Hrmm.  So something like an oscillating ton of lead would not be detectable a few kilometers away for now.  Oh well.  

Not as far as I know. Which is a pity because all the advantages you pointed out should apply (again - as far as I know), so gravity wave communication would be cool if we could do it.

[YNM]

Well, a dead leaf that fell on the ground above current ground detectors do create a pulse on the detector... So you have two options :

- Large transmitter, small detector (like current ones)

- Large detector, small transmitter (ex. LISA)

Yes I know you'd say "what about those in between" but I suppose noise is going to be the biggest problem.

Also, the waves are omnidirectional and still moves at speed of light.

[Jonfliesgoats]

Hmm.  I was thinking about sending data without worrying about material between the transmitter and receiver.  Quantum communications would offer more bandwidth and be much smaller, I imagine.

[MaxL_1023]

The issue is that annoying Gravitational Constant G - ~6.67*10^-11. This is about 20 orders of magnitude smaller than the Electromagnetic constant K, not to mention the fact that the elementary unit of charge is a few orders of magnitude closer to the units the constant is measured in. One electron is 12 orders of magnitude closer to a Coulomb of charge compared to a Kilogram of mass, so you are up over 30 orders of magnitude. This is the difference between you and the Sun, more or less. 

[Nuke]

i think filtering might be a bigger issue, with em communications its easy to filter out the noise. but how do you filter a gravity wave? you are going to have a lot of gravitational noise to deal with as well. i presume the amplitude will be a function of mass, but what governs frequency? modulation? amplitude modulation is out (unless mach effects), but maybe you can do frequency modulation? your ability to do gravitational communications is probibly related to your ability to move around black holes at will. being able to manipulate gravity may entail some kind of gravity cloak to cancel out waves, essentially an anti-gravity device, and that means a device that breaks conservation of momentum. i do not think the universe would allow something like that to exist.

[WinkAllKerb'']

this how i moslty see this:

human referential scale p=mg
earth referential scale  p=mg
milkyway scale p=mg
... etc.
universe scale p=mg[& insert another additionnal constant/t variable or disturbance in the force somewhere] (due to distance and celerity this small little complement might have an interest at this scale)

sorry for pidgin writing 2034 2034 lisa pathfinder

edit: and eventually open some new research fields from this potential fresh new basis wich is also non neglectable imho

Edited January 3, 2017 by WinkAllKerb''

[Jonfliesgoats]

Filtering: 

I would imagine there are quieter frequencies out there.  Celestial, gravitational noise would be all relatively low frequency, right?  We make the same choices with radio applications.

Signal dissipation:

 As far as I can tell it would take lots of energy just to transmit information over a short distance.  Still, it would be interesting to see what information can be sent using gravity devices.

[NSEP]

But how fast are gravity waves?

[kerbiloid]

Lightspeed

[WinkAllKerb'']

newton, mircosocope, cell molecule dna, atom etc., new stuff could happen who know it's always a matter of field of view within a referential, assuming the referential is correct and not an approximation, but we often use approximate referential per commodities(or neglectable at this scale) or lack of knowledge (or tech limited a time = t)

Edited January 4, 2017 by WinkAllKerb''

[PB666]

On 12/30/2016 at 11:34 PM, Jonfliesgoats said:

Gravity waves are just now being observed.  This said, detection and sensing of these things will improve over the years.  

Can an oscillating, massive body generate enough gravity wave signal to overcome background, gravitational noise?

Are there high frequency gravity waves or are there noisy and quiet gravitational frequencies, now that we can detect these things?  Since most waves are generated by orbiting bodies, I can't imagine much being detected at frequencies higher than .1 hz.

Could gravity wave communication effectively ignore line of sight restriction and transmit to facilities underground or under water?

I would imagine this offers no advantage over quantum communications, but I still wonder about the possibilities.

Digitizing supernova and black hole convergence? For example detonating atomic bombs on asteroids. Releasing a gas cloud in dead space and then hitting with a huge electric charge. Infrared lasers.

[WinkAllKerb'']

this is where science and research is exactly like fishing:

- your top of water
- you throw your line and wait
- you can't see what's lambda feet under
- at some point, it may happen you have to struggle
- could be a reef, a tire, or a fish, in addition with the water flow
- aside what's your arms feel you have no infos, you just can feel the resistance of what you're attempting to bring up
- at some point the line may broke and you have to restart and wait again
- if lucky enough, you may bring a nice fish and make a meal to refill you'r battery

Edited January 4, 2017 by WinkAllKerb''

[Jonfliesgoats]

I wonder if you can use gravity waves for imaging?  Does something massive between an emitter (say orbiting black holes) and a receiver affect signal properties?

Can we "listen" to gravity and learn where and how big dark, massive things or regions may be?

[WinkAllKerb'']

ntmf ntmf and eventually distorsion triangulation, but that's what lisa is about no ?

after all that's just "pre" gps principle at bigger scale, it's like colomb map and nowdays mapping, now if the question is does cristophe colomb and nowdays map are different, well no idea ^^

Edited January 5, 2017 by WinkAllKerb''

[tater]

“Do not answer! Do not answer! Do not answer!”

 

[Jonfliesgoats]

Yeah, but Lisa was cancelled.

[WinkAllKerb'']

UTF-8#q=lisa%20pathfinder%20canceled /slap jonfliesgoats ^^ anyway safe travel Lisa ^^ 

http://sci.esa.int/lisa-pathfinder/58633-lisa-pathfinder-s-pioneering-mission-continues/

(see also 7 june result graphs , interesting interesting ^^)

Edited January 5, 2017 by WinkAllKerb''

[Jonfliesgoats]

@WinkAllKerb''

Ack!  I'm an idiot!  Thanks, Winkallkerb!

[WinkAllKerb'']

same ; ) but being an idiot is nice time to time

[PakledHostage]

This seems somewhat relevant: