Gravitational wave disagrees with Einstein relativity.

Home page
Einstein is wrong

Gravitational wave is unreal, too weak to detect (= change of only one thousandth of a tiny proton is said to be caused by gravitational wave, which is impossible to detect )

(Fig.1)  The (fictional) gravitational wave could change the LIGO 4km-arm by only 1/1000 of a tiny proton's radius ?  ← This change is too tiny to measure. so No evidence of gravitational wave, which is useless.

Black holes are illusion due to stopping time.

Gravitational wave is said to be generated from black holes' collision, which is impossible, because the time stopping prevents black holes from colliding and forming.

Gravitational wave allegedly emitted by collision of black holes is unreal, because the time stop around the black holes prevents black holes from colliding and forming, as seen by distant observers on the earth ( this or this-4~5th-paragraphs,  this-2nd-paragraph ).

Gravitational wave is useless, illusion, too weak to measure.

Gravitational wave is said to change LIGO's 4km arm by only 1/1000 of a tiny proton (< 10^-18 meter ), which is impossible to detect, so gravitational wave is unreal.

The gravitational wave, which is too weak to measure, is said to change the LIGO 4km arm by only 1/1000 of a proton radius (= unrealistically-small, only 10^-18 m change compared to the tiny proton's radius of 10^-15 m,   this or this-p.23-p.24,  this-7th-paragraph ).

This or this-5th-paragraph says  -- Too small gravitational wave
"To spot gravitational waves directly for the first time, scientists had to measure a distance change 1,000 times smaller than the width of a proton using interferometers, basically mirrors placed 4 kilometers apart."

↑ The wavelength of light (= about 10^-6m or 1 μm ) used for detecting this (illusory) tiny gravitational wave by interference is much, much longer than the proton radius ( this-8th-paragraph,  this p.3-4th-paragraph,  this p.12-last-paragraph ), which cannot detect such a tiny gravitational wave's change by light interference.

These too weak useless (illusory) gravitational waves are said to change the length between the earth and Sun by only one hydrogen atomic radius ( this 5th-paragraph,  this-p.1-4th-paragraph ), which is impossible to measure except in the hyped news.

LIGO admits background masks gravitational wave.

This LIGO-gravitational wave paper ↓

p.4-left-1st-paragraph says
"The interferometer is illuminated with a 1064-nm wavelength Nd:YAG laser"  ← Detection light wavelength is far longer than the too small gravitational wave's change of 1/1000 of a proton.

p.5-right-4th-paragraph says  -- Background = unreal gravitational wave
"Estimating this background is challenging for two reasons: the detector noise is nonstationary and non-Gaussian, so its properties must be empirically determined"  ← So gravitational wave must be artificially determined by empirically removing background, which is Not prediction of gravitational wave.

Contrary to the media-hype, gravitational wave expressed as fake pseudo-tensor contradicts Einstein relativity, so gravitational wave is contradictory and unreal.

(Fig.2)  Gravitational wave disappearing as seen by some observers is unreal.

General relativity cannot conserve energy.

Einstein general relativity is wrong, cannot conserve energy nor generate real gravitational wave.

Einstein general relativity has fatal flaws, it cannot conserve energy or carry wave ( this p.5-last,  this p.5-last-paragraph,  this p.2-(2) ).

This or this-p.16-3rd-paragraph says  -- Wrong general relativity
"in GR (= general relativity ) energy-momentum is No longer conserved in general"

This or this-p.13-8th-paragraph says  -- Relativity Not conserving energy
"The bottom line is that conservation of energy and momentum in general relativity is a very slippery concept... global energy conservation does not exist in general relativity"

Gravitational wave contradicts Einstein relativity.

Gravitational wave is illusion expressed as fake pseudo-tensor, which is Not real tensor of Einstein relativity.

General relativity unable to conserve energy is why physicists had to artificially introduce unphysical concepts called "pseudo-tensor (= Not real tensor of Einstein relativity, this 4-6th paragraphs,  this or this-p.1-right-middle )" as doubtful gravitational wave which contradicts Einstein theory ( this p.13-14, this or this-p.1,  this p.1-middle-3rd~5th-paragraphs ).

Gravitational wave is unreal, vanishing seen by some observers.

Gravitational wave is illusion expressed as pseudo-tensor that unrealistically disappears as seen by some observers.

Gravitational wave (= pseudo-tensors ) is illusion, unrealistically vanishing as seen from different coordinates or observers ! (= this p.19-last-paragraph,  this-intro-1st-3rd-paragraphs )" contradicting Einstein original relativistic tensors.

This-p.2-1st-paragraph says  -- Gravitational wave vanish
"gravitational waves, pseudotensors globally vanish in some coordinates (= gravitational wave vanishes as seen by different observers,  this-3rd-paragraph )."

This or this-p.1-3rd-paragraph says  -- Pseudo-tensor vanish
"Unlike a tensor, a pseudotensor (= gravitational wave ) can vanish at a point in one coordinate system (= seen by some observers )"

This-p.2-3rd-last-paragraph says  -- Unreal gravitational wave
"Unlike electromagnetic waves, gravitational waves do not possess their own energy-stress tensor... Poynting’s vector is constructed from a pseudo-gravitational tensor, which, however, can be made to vanish simply through a coordinate transformation (= seen by some observers ). Poynting’s vector is therefore not a true vector, and there can be neither a localization of energy in the gravitational field, nor a direction given to the flux of energy"

↑ Because when some observers may detect gravitational wave (= fictitious pseudo-tensor ) at the detector on the earth, other observers moving differently can Not observe the same gravitational wave (= pseudo-tensor ) even by using the same detector, due to gravitational wave unrealistically vanishing seen by some observers, which is fatal relativistic paradox.

Gravitational wave cannot predict anything.

Physicists can artificially choose many different gravitational pseudo-tensors and coordinates, which cannot predict anything nor validate Einstein relativity.

Physicists can artificially create and choose many different forms of gravitational wave's unphysical pseudo-tensors ( this p.2-lower ), which means the artificially-created gravitational wave (= unphysical pseudo-tensor), which contradicts Einstein relativity, cannot be used to test Einstein relativistic prediction.

This or this-p.5-3rd-paragraph says  -- Artificial choice, No prediction
"Because there are many possible stress-energy tensors and pseudotensors (= No unique equations nor prediction of gravitational wave ), I am not sure whether a general relationship holds between them all"

This or this-lower Limitations and challenges say  -- No relativistic prediction
"because you can get different answers for the same physical situation. In different coordinate systems, the pseudotensor will produce different values for the energy and momentum of a gravitational field. Another challenge is the lack of a unique definition. Different physicists have proposed different forms of the pseudotensor (= gravitational wave ), each with its own strengths and weaknesses. This can lead to some confusion when comparing results or trying to build a consistent picture of the physics. Furthermore, due to the pseudotensor not being a true tensor,.."

Illusory distant pulsars allegedly emitting (unreal) gravitational wave and light cannot prove Einstein relativistic prediction due to many free parameters.

(Fig.3)  (Illusory) Binary pulsar B1913+16 emitted (imaginary) gravitational wave, which slightly changed the light or radio pulse ?

Pulsars full of irrelevant noise cannot prove the existence of gravitational wave.

The (illusory) neutron stars or binary pulsars called PSR B1913+16 are said to gradually lose energy by emitting (imaginary) gravitational wave, which can be detected by the light or radio wave pulse emitted from these pulsars ?

But light wave pulses allegedly emitted from extremely-distant pulsars are always modified by interstellar medium and filled with too many irrelevant noises ( this p.6 ).

So estimating the (illusory) pulsars' orbital motion and their emission of gravitational wave from these very noisy light pulses is impossible, even after artificially trying to eliminate the (unknown) noise ( this p.37,  this 2.1-ovserview ) or de-disperse.

Pulsars rely on artificial models with many free parameters, which cannot predict gravitational wave.

Astronomers created various pulsar timing models ( this p.6 ) with various unknown noise parameters ( this p.8-4. ) to artificially estimate the (illusory) distant pulsars emitting (illusory) gravitational wave ( this p.6-right-last ).

↑ Artificial choice and fitting many free parameters of pulsars means Einstein relativity's prediction of pulsars emitting gravitational wave is impossible ( this or this p.21-lower, p.24, p.32-last ).

The theoretical models always disagree with the observations due to unknown noise.

This or this-p.36-2.3.2 says  -- Free parameters, No prediction
"In order to improve our timing residuals, to minimize the difference between observed and theoretical TOAs (= time of arrivals ), we should recalculate the parameters of the pulsar applying a least squares fitting of the timing model to pulsar timing data"  ← The theoretical values always do Not agree with the observed values due to unknown noise.

Estimation of pulsars PSR 1913+16 relied on free parameters, which cannot prove gravitational wave nor Einstein relativity.

This or this research paper about allegedly estimating gravitational wave emitted from the (illusory) distant binary pulsars PSR 1913+16 ↓

This or this-p.436-right-3rd-paragraph says  -- Artificial model parameters
"Differences between predicted and observed values can then be used to determine corrections to various assumed model parameters."  ← Each time the predicted values were wrong, the artificial model parameters were changed, which is Not a prediction of Einstein relativity.

This or this-p.441--left-2nd-paragraph & Table 5 says  -- Free parameters
"as well as the number of instrumental free parameters"  ← All artificial models predicting pulsars emitting gravitational wave include freely-adjustable parameters, so Not a prediction of Einstein relativity.

This research paper about the same pulsars ↓

p.3-3. Analysis of TOA says  -- Free parameters, No prediction
"a number of nuisance parameters must also be measured to account for unmodeled long-term timing irregularities. These extra fitted terms have No clear physical interpretation ( this p.3 )"

p.4-last-paragraph says  -- Ad-hoc unreal parameters
"The remaining timing parameters—higher-order derivatives f¨, f¨, and (in some fits) another small frequency discontinuity in mid-1992—were introduced to the timing solution in an ad hoc manner,... Although we offer No clear or unique physical interpretation for these parameters"

As a result, there is No evidence of gravitational wave, which just contradicts Einstein relativity.

Gravitational wave is unreal, too weak to measure, and irrelevant to Einstein relativistic prediction.

This or this-recent overhyped fake news on Einstein relativity ↓

2nd-paragraph says  -- Illusory black holes.
"The signal, called GW250114, came from the merger of two black holes — each about 30 times the mass of the sun — about 1.3 billion light-years from Earth. The event caused ripples through space-time, called gravitational waves, which washed over Earth.. and were detected by.. Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO)."  ← wrong.

9th-paragraph says  -- Fake Einstein prediction
"In GW250114, researchers detected the two primary tones predicted for such a merger. Each tone yielded an independent measurement of the black hole's mass and spin — and both matched, effectively verifying general relativity, the team reported in the study."  ← false.

Time stop disproves black hole's spin and merger.

↑ First of all, the time stops on the surface (= event horizon ) of black holes seen from the earth, so it is impossible to measure any black hole's motions such as spin and merger from the earth through the (illusory) gravitational wave that is unreal, too weak (= 1/1000 of a proton = this or this-1st~4th-paragraphs ) to measure.

This-research paper ↓

p.4-Fig.3 says  -- Artificial models, No Einstein prediction
"Filtering out two QNMs in the post-merger data.... finds strong support for the 220+221 model over the singlemode 220 model. The 220+221+222 model is weakly preferred over the 220+221 model"

↑ Gravitational wave depends on artificial model and many fitting parameters of unseen wave forms and black holes (= this-p.28-p.29,  this-p.12-left-1st-paragraph, p.14-left ) irrelevant to Einstein relativistic prediction.

This-p.2-right-2nd-paragraph says  -- Gravitational wave = free parameters.
"The amplitudes An and phases φn (= of unseen gravitational wave )... so we treat them as free parameters in our fit."

This paper on gravitational wave ↓

p.6-left-1st-paragraph says  -- Free parameters
"In that way, the set of free parameters becomes"

p.21-left-1st-paragraph says  -- Free choice of parameters
"an arbitrary choice must be made in the injection in order for the amplitudes and phases (or unseen gravitational wave )"

p.22-left-last says  -- Noise free parameters
"the signal and noise instantiation including nuisance parameters.. (= noise fitting free parameters ) "

↑ As a result, forms of the unreal gravitational waves (= amplitude, phase, frequency.. ) and unseen black holes (= spin, mass, motion.. ) depend on many freely-fitting parameters irrelevant to Einstein relativistic prediction, contrary to a lot of fake news.

Feel free to link to this site.