<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>You referred to a Wikipedia article about
gravitational waves that mentioned a frequency of 10^-16 Hertz. That was
my point. That frequency is the same as one wave in aboutt 400,000,000
years.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Whether or not such a frequency exists regarding
gravitational waves, the point is thast we humans do not know how to detect or
analyze such incredibly slow processes. The best we know how to do
is to try to very, very carefully apply a Fourier Analysis, where we can detect
some of the complexities of variations of the Earth's orbit's eccentricity
(which today is 0.0167011611 ) Laskar used Fourier (and more) to derive
the changes in the Eccentricity over the past million years and coming
million years (as he presented in a grsph I reproduced in my web-page at <A
href="http://mb-soft.com/public3/equatime.html">http://mb-soft.com/public3/equatime.html</A>
) But there is just not sufficient experimental data available regarding
any gravitational waves to be able to do such analysis. Scientists who try
to do so invariably make various ASSUMPTIONS, often with virtually no logical
basis, to then try to find "indirect evidence". IF their assumptions have
decent logical basis, fine. On modern astrophysics, often that is not the
case, in many fields.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>In order for science to advnce, it is important to
be very careful regarding all the assumptions that are made. Many of the
modern ideas presented seem excitinng to uneducated people (like super strings)
but the physicists who should know better know that no one is in any position to
challenge outrageous assumptions. In that case, the smallest things we
have any chance of detecting are about 10^-23 meter in size, which is about the
size of some atomic nuclei, where light can pass across in the briefest
experiments we know how to do. So when somebody claims to know about
super-strings, which they say are about 10^-46 meters in size, they KNOW that no
one can possibly ever prove that they are wrong. Modern Physics is chock
full of such extreme speculations. Unfortunately, gravitational waves
appear to be in that category, where no experiment we are ever likely to be able
to do could ever prove or deny the existence of gravitational waves.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Carl Johnson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>