Search This Blog

20221013

Comment on and foreground analysis for [Do et al. 2019] Unprecedented Near-Infrared Brightness and Variability of Sgr A*

[under construction]

https://twitter.com/search?q=fulguritics%20SgrA&src=typed_query

https://twitter.com/search?q=fulguritics%20keck&src=typed_query

Reported May 13, 2019 brightening of Sgr A* declined at flare emission time, as strong coherence between IMF and geomagnetic indices also declined, and has further correlations with phases and waveforms:
[Do et al. 2019] Unprecedented Near-Infrared Brightness and Variability of Sgr A*
https://twitter.com/Fulguritics/status/1162542486876647429
[Hayes et al. 2017] Pulsations in the Earth's Lower Ionosphere Synchronized with Solar Flare Emission
This must be explained. Do et al. 2019 Keck observations coincide w/#LIGO-virgo. ALL of such observations precede the NIR brightening stage for Sgr A*. Stars and Sgr A* in Keck images have doubled, round "halos" that resemble IR hotspots or aliasing.
https://kolarivision.com/the-science-of-infrared-hotspots/
http://thesybersite.com/minolta/sensor-reflection/
Image
#LIGO-Virgo #S190513bm trigger, 20:54:28 UTC; #Keck #SgrA* N-IR obs. interval (10:20-14:30 UTC); 2019-0513 Honolulu (HON) magnetometer ||N||, ||E||, ||Z||, ||F||
Position lock attained w/out sufficient floor sample time; extinctive flux/gas interference associated var. with galaxy-scale/interplanetary/local foreground affects entire FOV for duration of event. The interval is quasiperiodic, self-affine, and coherent from ~8:30-14:30 UT:


More woes for systematic error for Keck, perched upon seismically active Mauna Kea; Keck contributed to uncontrolled #SgrA "brightening"
science.sciencemag.org/content/368/64 Seismic events magnetically coupled - phase locked - to lower ionosphere contribute to ordered disturbances. Period-doubled scintillation/quasi-nematicity for refractive foreground can be deceptive: #Keck #SgrA* arxiv.org/pdf/1908.01777





The extent of influence of #MagneticFields dynamically-bound and stabilized by extremal surface states of Sgr A* may be trans-galactic, like its gravitational potential, affecting heliospheric gradients/heliopause oscillation https://phys.org/news/2020-06-magnetic-fields-perspective-milky-black.html
These influences may be rigid and even weakly coherent, affecting the eventual many body post-#Keplerian perturbations of orbits of #PlanetarySystems (themselves collectively-modulating feedback that drives sun-like coronas).
The median joint phase of the three fastest stars (S2, S55, and S62) nearest supermassive black hole #SgrA* is virtually identical to the ~11.3 year Schwabe #SolarCycle and its moments are fractionally-equivalent. I found that similar characteristic constants of proportionality emerge:

Rampino et al 2021 does not require dark matter

 [Under construction]

Tabulations of plane wave propagation between Earth and Sgr A* at characteristic velocity limits for published empirical estimations and the author's hyper-Planckian model distances; models for the measurement of the distance of Earth to Sgr A* are vindicated, with multiple boundaries estimated accurately through the scaling bootstrap as expressed in yellow. The escape velocity of the sun, 618 km/s, and the solar wind limits 1618 km/s and 2618 km/s show uncanny fits for plane wave shock velocities, showing rule of 1000 and rule of 618. Upper limit (2-1.61803...)*10000 satisfies longest Rampino cycles. Why this numerical determinism exists is not immediately apparent. Is the Earth at a favorable position in the galaxy for the maintenance of a kind of golden stability demanding integer powers of 10 from kernel 10? Is this table displaying a kind of sounding into the symplex structure of a supermassive black hole's stably coupled magnetic loop geometry?



[under construction]

The Saturn orbit-asynchronous great storm of 2010-11 [Sánchez-Lavega et al. 2016] is a strong peak in the RMS signal of the mutual orbits of [Me, Ve, Ea, Ma, Ju, Sa, Ur, Ne], at terminus, and SNR[Me, Ea, Ju]  double peaked modulation conterminous with the RMS spike. This correspondence, with respect to nonlinear and self-gravitating body-specific variations with regard to infinitesimal changes in solar distance around barycenter, perhaps shows clustering of orbital field couplings that function hierarchically, with larger planetary ensemble relationships controlling stability of subsystem orbits, critical points in their emergent limit cycles, and their energetic budgets resulting from positive feedbacks.  Various solar wind parameters during the discrete onset and collapse of the storm were calculated to show correlation with an extremely long (the longest hitherto) apparent GRB, which exactly mapped to the saturn-solar feedback phase and other planetary-solar wind-high energy signals. I will expand this section to show these data and calculated solutions of very high accuracy.  

20221009

Analysis of error phase correlations found in ~22 minute electromagnetic dead time (cf. " Observations of discrete harmonics emerging from equatorial noise" [Balikhin et al. 2015])


These notes are motivated by my own frustration at how weak and permissive our demands for rigor have become, to have enabled a culture at LIGO-Virgo of pervasive social-epistemological dishonesty. It is clear that an experimental-practical crisis of unscientific selectivity is a consequence of the attenuation of talent over goal-seeking specialists who are generally inexperienced with the high international standards for interdisciplinary collaboration, where we expect stark, honest communication of doubts and concerns - an effort to find physical explanations for any eventuality affecting experimental processes, no matter how disappointing and damning they may be. By now (October, 2024), the novelty of LVC has worn off, and little has been done to publicize systematic error sources outside of their probabilities in an idealized framework - one that has not been demonstrated to be possible, for better or for worse. LIGO detectors serve many functions, have detected interesting events, and are certainly not a mistake in themselves as such, but the arbitrary de-correlation and relegation of error/noise into the meaningless category of 'glitches' shows that, when applied to initial estimation of signal source confidence, all methods to estimate false alarm rates by LVC are unempirical, and even worse: circular, without updated confidence estimation based on accumulation of INITIAL PLAUSIBILITY of triggers and their data that eventually are deemed false alarms. It is too late now to revise this attitude of overconfidence without further reducing the frequency of candidate event signals at all, and to commit type II errors, rather than Type I errors that seem to vanish from their meta-experimental view in favor of a bubble of probability that grows increasingly dependent on fewer events, themselves modeled with more assumptions as their analysis is refined. As waveform identity between templates and any number of chirp-like signal sources (abundant in nature in EM foreground, without gravitational wave physics involved in their emission) should lead to investigation of coincident noise sources within conventional data that capture solar system and terrestrial physical activity. So, models that cannot be generated in all cases from the same theoretical principles are promulgated through overfitting and brute force whenever it is demanded that a trigger CANNOT be merely noise. Even a single admission that a strong signal that is well-fit using Numerical Relativity is wrong would subject the entire LIGO catalogue to scrutiny by a wider audience. 

I'll interpret the feeling of indifference that has become the norm toward LIGO-Virgo claims to be a sign that credulity is cooling. 


The paper Observations of discrete harmonics emerging from equatorial noise (Balikhin et al. 2015) shows self-organizing or emergent-modulated behavior in ionospheric dynamics that have an event length window that appears in the internal reports on observatory operation noise and statistics of coincident non-GW events around LIGO-Virgo triggers. 

I examine this statistical relationship here:
https://fulguritics.blogspot.com/2022/10/tr2.html




Ordered quasi-stationary noise spectrum at frequency range at which LIGO-Virgo event spectral power dominates, persisting at known correlated strain noise duration https://nature.com/articles/ncomms8703…


Propagated WIND solar wind/IMF indices for July 6, 2013 with ~22-min window indicated by blue solid lines (second line superimposes dashed line indicating proper hour):

Power spectral ordered structures within ~22 minute noise that corresponds to trigger times of LVC events given their noise windows. All LVC signal are surrounded by phase-correlated noise, which also corresponds to maximal saturation periods of onsite magnetometers, which functionally simulate a stable noise floor, allowing the emergence of a cohesive peak signal that is interpreted as an event that is independent of observation method. For 2013 structured noise event, we find upchirps in spectrographic representation that are likely degenerate mixtures of nonstationary signals, whose parameters are highly dependent on the location and sampling rate/range of detectors. Lower sampling rates with or without different frequency response range can produce entirely different information about the same event, or synthesize events from aligned noise, or locate ordered components in a net disordered, but ergodic, interval, much of said order from systematics, or field responses to their own modulation by energetic events elsewhere, such as particle injections, magnetic reconnection, critical magnetic electroacoustic charge density perturbations (e.g. collapsing/coalescing fixed vortex/null pair structures [permittivity vortices]) in the interplanetary magnetic field, or collisionless shocks.

July 6, 2013 CLUSTER observation environment, sample of upchirped spectral structures above, and the same for the period of September 14, 2015 LIGO trigger, with spectral signal power showing analogous properties:





High prob. of LIGO-Virgo events during same window of #Cluster obs. of periodic-quasiperiodic behavior in equatorial noise, w/uncanny waveforms, frequency range as LVC events - #magnetosphere also almost mirror image. #GW150914 9:50:45 UTC, Cluster ~18:50 https://fulguritics.blogspot.com/2018/06/progress-on-ligo-event-analysis-here.html…
https://twitter.com/Fulguritics/status/1279043468048732161/analytics




Invariant noise windows and transients, 22 minutes, sawtooth phase, invertible automorphic reciprocity













tr2. F-region quasiperiodic ripples median periodicity ~22 min https://nature.com/articles/s41598-019-57201-4…   3. LIGO sawtooth "mystery noise" duration 21-22 min 4. #S190828j-#S190828l t0 interval ~21 min


First principles begin at the level of reference and should not be assumed to be independent of a framework for real analysis. Propagation of artifacts due to the use of downsampling, decimation, and subsequent wavelet transformation have become themselves nondegenerate components for LIGO-Virgo event parameter estimation, and as such the path of analysis has become conflated with data due to efforts to discriminate undesired ordered spectral content from "signal," which is highly nonstationary - signal always relative to the structure of noise - and as the nature of the strain signal is entirely broadband/quasiperiodic/scale-invariant, unphysically-isolated from a sea of identical tearing-transverse-converging modes through template fitting upon destruction of phase information, from where properties of the sources and signal are then estimated. If random noise never coincides with an LVC trigger, yet no attempt is made to assess the reasons for this, we know that it is at least implicit the reality of this correlated noise cannot be explained as a consequence of GW arrival, since this non-GW content is sufficiently strong to obscure any sub-threshold phase components unless we modify extended GR or are detecting GW sources of much different character than believed.



If LVC used an empirical-falsificationist approach, we would at the very least have publicized - with GW "discoveries," the ever-clearer evidence, purely from retractions (no self-incrimination implied necessarily), that solar-terrestrial coupling extends conserved scale-invariant quantum mechanical normal modes into an entangled n-th order co-rotating/inertial topological network instead of some self-aggrandizing teenage fishing phenomenology exclusively. But there cannot be any dichotomy established because the retraction population has the same properties (as a population) and foreground conditions as non-retractions, which are unique to event windows, not exceeding 2 per day (more QM-like system determinism).



LIGO may be correct if distant events control the statistics of orbits and space weather and can still reveal their parameters without conditioning by foreground, and has presented the first dimensional analytic basis for the hypothesis that the Earth-IMF-magnetosphere coupling becomes correlated to the galactic plane



event arrival order:arrival time correspondences to geometric lag intervals were from the the last 5 events with respect to UTC run day, S200224ca 2020-02-24 22:22:50 UTC the fifth latest of 79 total O3 superevents:



S200224ca 2020-02-24 22:22:50 UTC


((60/(79/24))=18.2278481013 min



Max 79 daily publicized triggers, assuming this can be idealized as an upper limit, conveniently have a regular interval that recurs in fractional form within analytical dimensional bounds


(6,378km*40, near-Earth magnetotail reconnection region during IMF-dayside reconnection=20 to 30 equatorial RE*2)/((60/(79/24))*60)=galactic rotation speed (232 km/s)



Typical reconnection in magnetotail at ~100RE https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016JA023586


((6,378*200)/((60/((84/24))*60))/5=248.033333333


Selecting a period that fits the arrival order:time relation I found convergence using all the same terms, but chose 22.66 hours, which is the optimal window preserving 79/period, but subtracting (not disregarding) the remainder of the UTC day beyond t0+optimal interval, we have


22:23+17 minutes=22.66 UTC


((60/(79/22.66))= 17.2101265823 minutes, so


(6,378km*40)/((60/(79/22.66))*60)=247.063842 km/s


https://photos.app.goo.gl/aVuReezJzBEzbaAc9


Further, since the 79 value arrived with ~1:37 remaining in the 24-hour period, I reduced the period to distribute the intervals more realistically; conversely, adding 5 events (N=(79+5= 84) filled the 24 hour period with the optimal interval: 5 again – interesting in terms of recurring-cyclical properties of the intervals I mention as evidence of long-range magnetospheric driving


Interestingly, the interval between azimuthal V and V is 16 km/s for 248-232, and 15 for 247-232. We know that 16 tends to be a recurring motif and 15 has become prominent elsewhere in LVC error/sawtooth events:


https://photos.app.goo.gl/jy1rR9DqU4onRSHa7


https://photos.app.goo.gl/WCEMU9cwEHApkoV88



The mean annual number of sawtooth events for solar cycle 23 has two count values given the length of the cycle considered, which was extended in Cai-Clauer 2013 (https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013JA018819) from their prior count (2009: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2008ja013764). Those two values, 10.5 and 11.1, produce the ratio 1.057143, which is very close to


mean[(t/2)/t(AU'|c), N=3]=1.0647


max/min, t/2; min/max=1.0633


from the LIGO-detected magnetotail-solar interval relation



and further,


solar LSR motion offset (U⊙) is ∼ 11.1 k/s


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.3079.pdf



179.6 minutes average sawtooth event period;


for 11.1 sawtooth events,


179.6/11.1=16.18018, which almost perfectly equals the golden ratio*10.


and for 179.6 minutes and 10.5 sawtooth events, 179.6/10.5=17.1047619, which is very close to the numerical value for the minimal interval/maximum cycle density of 17.14 minutes.



(6,378km*40)/((60/(84/24))*60)=248.033333 km/s


((60/(84/24))=17.1428571429 minutes


(cf. S190901ap 2019-09-01 23:31:24 UTC


60/(42/24)=34.2857142857 min, 60/(42/24)/2= 17.1428571429 min)



“It turns out that the Sun’s velocity as it whips around the galaxy is about 246 km/s, a result which is similar to that found by the Gravity Collaboration et al. team in 2019, which measured it at approximately 247 km/s. In addition to this, it was found that the distance between the Sun and the centre of the milky way is about 8.12 kiloparsecs (which translates to about 26,484 light-years).”


https://spaceaustralia.com/feature/supermassive-black-hole-ejects-hyper-velocity-star


”V⊙is constrained to be 246.1 ± 5.3 km s−1. Those constraints also do not depend significantly on whether we use spectro-photometric or photometric only distances as we slice the posterior shown on the left panel of the figure across the distance degeneracy. The V⊙measurement is competitive with and entirely independent from the 247.4 ± 1.4 km s−1 constraint from Gravity Collaboration et al. (2019).”


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.11725.pdf


“…solar Local Standard of Rest (LSR) values from Sch¨onrich et al. (2010) and assuming a total solar azimuthal velocity according to the IAU recommendations at Vg,⊙ = 232 km s−1 .”


“ I set R0 = 8.2 kpc, and the value for Vg,⊙ accordingly to 248.5 km s−1 .”


https://arxiv.org/pdf/1207.3079.pdf



S190901ap 2019-09-01 23:31:24 UTC


60/(42/24)=34.2857142857 min


60/(42/24)/2= 17.1428571429 min



S190915ak 2019-09-15 23:57:25 UTC


(60/(37/24))= 38.9189189189 min


(60/(37/24))/2=19.4594594595 min



S191110af 2019-11-10 23:10:59 UTC (retracted burst transient I had established was identical to the heliopause-magnetosphere lower hybrid resonance frequency)


60/(32/24)=45


60/(32/24)/(sqrt2+1)=18.6396103068 min


Trigger –ag (32+1) at 43.6363636364 better fit (next trigger expected at ~23:55 UTC)


(60/(33/24))/(sqrt2+1)= 18.0747736308 min



S191215w 2019-12-15 22:31:17 UTC


60/(23/24)= 62.6086956522 min


60/(23/24)/(sqrt2*(sqrt2+1))= 18.3376623953 min




I've mentioned that LIGO-Virgo are an example of systematically pseudo-entangled (ontologically-committed) feedback loop between self-perpetuating circularity and the "complicit" Earth from which it is establishing its ever-updated prior probabilities, reinforcing the conflation of terrestrial mechanisms and celestial transients (since predictions/quotas will be "fulfilled,' while congesting any account of operation with self-congratulatory phrasing and copious imposition of certain descriptors conditioned purely by desires).


http://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201707/rnoti-p693.pdf with unequal masses, an approximation from a one-body model is near exactly the two-bodied solution until the coalescence phase, where multipole information would be found in higher order moments. I honestly don't know if a scenario would be forbidden in GR, although I'm not one to argue from theoretical propriety. Sorry I can't be informative on that question.



I went further with the interval density:systematic error analysis from last night. Check this shit out:


https://photos.app.goo.gl/ytV9QWNK6CKadEgc9



Nightside reconnection lag as mapped to the interval density for LIGO triggers - related to the send-return shortest propagation distance - turned out to be related to a dual as the total time of flight for an Earth-Sun send-return period, so the ratio between the average of the three intervals and the ordinary speed of light propagation for 1 AU*2 is the same as the ratio between the upper and lower interval lengths:velocities that describe the near-determinstic magnetotail path length at near-earth reconnection stage as a rigid mode that protects bound scaling restricted to a light cone-like minimum energy surface - and these velocities are the same as solar/galactic velocities, as well as the IAU (International Astronomical Union) azimuthal velocity. Most magnetospheric mode interactions, including co-rotating interaction regions between slow/fast streams (where all ligo event trigger times may be reproduced), involve sets of recursive duals that include extremes that have reciprocal/complex values on the unit sphere/circle/column, representing almost a kind of eigen-expression of bulk-boundary correspondence moment at a long-range bifurcation with global stable points. LIGO events become instanton-like solutions to geometric disequilbrium between counterpropagating interfaces.



Typical reconnection in magnetotail at ~100RE actually preserves another 5 groupoid (scaling factor as order in a renormaliation flow as a property of global bifurcation?), which you find in the latest arrival rank of the S200224ca (5th latest) and the solution to the dimensional interval fitting for 24 hours (5 events filled the 24-hour period from ToA, preserving optimal interval from ToA and OoA relation in S200224ca). The contraction of the magnetotail from typical to near earth modes is integer-determined:


((6,378*200)/((60/((84/24))*60))/5=248.033333333


https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2016JA023586



I had a hunch that the 247, 232 km/s relation should preserve a geometric parameter that also explains the elegance of coupling/decoupling in a galaxy-scale system, beyond magnetosphere-Earth, Sun-Earth, and heliopause-sun-earth components. The discrepancy is quite interesting in terms of field components and their monodromy, and indicates that even electromagnetic interactions in the solar system produce a modulus of their eigenvalues universal with the scaled-up system. The interstellar magnetic field inertial action with long-range rest relation coupling with an extended state during local field line disarticulation would be interacting with the magnetosphere and sun-earth connective feedback velocity components of various masses (massless).