Discussion
Started 14th Mar, 2020

Gravitational Waves or Seismic Chirp Signal Detection ?

Some petroleum and geophysics companies use controlled-source seismology for Mineral Inspection and cavity detection. These methods based on impulsive source controllers such as (dynamite, air gun seismic source, etc.). More efficient techniques use a Seismic vibrator for seismic wave generator such as chirp, sine or square seismic waves.
I wonder if recents detections of Gravitational Waves coming from earth or space using optical interferometry, and how to distinguish between each of them, especially when seismic wave have a same chirp form such as Gravitational Waves?
Example of Seismic Source: http://seismicsource.com/html/index.php

Most recent answer

14th Apr, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Effectively Mikhail Kovalyov its a good idea. LIGO and VIRGO interferometers are the most accurate "Geophone" sensor (Sensibility: 10E-18 to 10E-21m). Their Dataset of useless signals may be used to survey earth seismic activities...

Popular replies (1)

26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
Go to https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/public/O3/ You will see lots of candidates, 56 to be exact. Half of them have been rejected. The rejected ones, have shape of gravitational waves but turned out to be noise from other sources, such as cleaning equipment. Many "confirmed" ones were detected only by one detector, such as GW190425 (the only confirmed detection from the 3rd run) or GW170817 ( the only one supposedly with a visual). LIGO mistook different types of noise for grav waves before so nothing can be ruled out.
3 Recommendations

All replies (23)

14th Mar, 2020
Javad Fardaei
Dear Ait Mansour El Houssain To technology is amazing and the tool they are using also is amazing, but there is no gravitation or seismic wave, but they sending some sort of wave, and as the wave reflect to different area under the ground they know what is out there, But here two article on gravity and earthquake might help to understand gravity and earthquake, yet both of them unprecedented article that no one ever attempt to write it.
2 Recommendations
15th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Thank you Javad Fardaei for useful informations
1 Recommendation
17th Mar, 2020
Michal Michalowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
That's why LIGO has two stations separated by 3000 km. When they both detect the same signal, just a few milliseconds apart, then this can't be due to seismic waves human-induced or natural, because such waves do not travel fast enough to be recorded by both stations so close in time. With the inclusion of VIRGO in Italy, it is even better. I haven't done the calculations on this myself, but I am pretty sure that somebody at the LIGO collaboration did, and the results are out there somewhere.
2 Recommendations
18th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Dear Michal Michalowski , thank you for your response. Effectively, gravitation waves propagate with c velocity more bigger than seismic (or natural) wave speed. However, it's probable to detect synchronized seismic waves (from dependant or independent sources) by two interferometers. Additionally, with ~>10^-18m sensibility, we may have sometimes chirp individual interferometer event detection....
1 Recommendation
18th Mar, 2020
Michal Michalowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
I think that if two seismic waves coming to both detectors are not from the same source, then the data would look differently for them, so they would not be classified as potential gravitational wave sources. So with two or more detectors the danger of mistaking seismic activity for GW is small.
2 Recommendations
25th Mar, 2020
Peter Hahn
Northern Alberta Institute of Technology
Ait,
That's very interesting!
Attached is a screen capture of a 'SEG-D Data example' from a seismic vibrator.
Looks very similar to a GW chirp.
2 Recommendations
25th Mar, 2020
Michal Michalowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
Peter Hahn There is one feature missing in these seismic plots - the signal measured by LIGO goes to zero after the high-amplitude, high-frequency phase:
This is not visible in the plot you sent. This drop is interpreted as the moment when black holes or neutron stars merge, so no further waves are emitted.
Second, as I said before - such seismic waves would be detected only by one of the LIGO detectors or with a delay longer than a few milliseconds, so this is not the explanation.
2 Recommendations
25th Mar, 2020
Peter Hahn
Northern Alberta Institute of Technology
Thanks Michal,
I would assume that the seismic wave would rapidly drop to zero after the equipment was turned off. Also...If the seismic wave originated somewhere in the middle of the USA such that the distance between H1 and L1 were roughly the same, couldn't they arrive at both detectors within the required 10msec timeframe?
Ait,
Help me out here. How long do they run the seismic vibrator? The chirp from GW190425 lasted approx. 25 seconds.
2 Recommendations
25th Mar, 2020
Michal Michalowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
Do you mean that the LIGO equipment is turned off a fraction of a second after the detection of the signal? This is incorrect. They are constantly recording, so such an abrupt change from the maximum amplitude to just noise need to be explained by the property of the event itself. The merger scenario gives that explanation, whereas the seismic wave scenario doesn't. I imagine that a seismic wave would be damped more slowly, but this is not my speciality, so I don't know.
Indeed an earthquake right in the middle would give the correct timing in the LIGO detectors. Somebody would need to check how often such quakes occur and if they can travel far enough to be detected 3000 km apart at a right amplitude and frequency.
Moreover, what about events recorded by LIGO and Virgo in Italy? Then this scenario doesn't hold at all.
2 Recommendations
26th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Dear Michal Michalowski and Peter Hahn , The controled source siesmic Chirp parameters such as frequency range and duration depends on investigation depth (from mHz to teens of Khz). Some kind of Vibrator (Ex: Inertial Vibration Test System TV 51165-IN) allows you to define a specific Chirp shape (Generated by Matlab for example). In practice, we use a pulsed chirp signal: We modulae chirp signal with a square wave (See figure low-pass filter case) for easy signal processing and to seperate between relected signals. In the other hand, the reflected signal is filtred (low, high, band, mixed...) with attenuation by sol + noise. The reflected chirp form depend on sol properties and composition. The transfert function between source chirp and reflected provide useful informations about sol propertie. Referer to Seismic methods for geophysiscs.
1 Recommendation
26th Mar, 2020
Johan K. Fremerey
In a parallel discussion, see references below, I proposed that alleged gravitational wave signals might be synchronized by global response to tidal force interaction within the Earth/Moon/Sun gravitational system. I further suggested that signals detected in horizontal planes as defined by LIGO/Virgo interferometer systems may result from simultaneous displacement of test mirrors along the local verticals. The latter, due to earth curvature, deviate by about one arcmin from vertical with respect to LIGO/Virgo interferometer planes.
2 Recommendations
26th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Thank you Johan K. Fremerey for additional information.
1 Recommendation
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
Go to https://gracedb.ligo.org/superevents/public/O3/ You will see lots of candidates, 56 to be exact. Half of them have been rejected. The rejected ones, have shape of gravitational waves but turned out to be noise from other sources, such as cleaning equipment. Many "confirmed" ones were detected only by one detector, such as GW190425 (the only confirmed detection from the 3rd run) or GW170817 ( the only one supposedly with a visual). LIGO mistook different types of noise for grav waves before so nothing can be ruled out.
3 Recommendations
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
I clicked on the link, but the graph is not there. Can you point out the source of the graph?
2 Recommendations
26th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Dear Mikhail Kovalyov , The graph is example of matlab simulation of filtered chirp signal. The code is available if required.
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
When I asked for a source, I meant of the seismic signal not a GW chirp
26th Mar, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Chirp (top curve) is source signal. Filtred chirp is example or reflected signal acquired using geophone sensor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geophone
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
I mean the picture of the seismic wave itself. Whee is ti from? Did you generate it yourself from data or is it available anywhere on the Internet? I mean the source signal, top curve.
1 Recommendation
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
Also, I'd like to know the source of the signal posted by Peter Hahn.
1 Recommendation
26th Mar, 2020
Peter Hahn
Northern Alberta Institute of Technology
Mikhail,
The document is: Bird Dog 3 System, Vibtest User Manual.
1 Recommendation
26th Mar, 2020
Mikhail Kovalyov
Retired
To Peter Hahn. Thanks. I checked with the people there and the signal was artificially generated. It is generated to search for mineral deposits and probe what's underground. Hypothetically speaking, there might be such research carried out somewhere between the LIGO interferometers, with the frequencies above a certain threshold cut off by LIGO, that would give us some of LIGO's signals. .
1 Recommendation
14th Apr, 2020
Ait Mansour El Houssain
SOLEIL synchrotron
Effectively Mikhail Kovalyov its a good idea. LIGO and VIRGO interferometers are the most accurate "Geophone" sensor (Sensibility: 10E-18 to 10E-21m). Their Dataset of useless signals may be used to survey earth seismic activities...

Similar questions and discussions

What is InTech Open Science? A predatory or a ligitimate publisher?
Question
530 answers
  • Stephen Jia WangStephen Jia Wang
Dear friends colleagues, have you ever received an invitation to publish your work at InTech Open Science (https://www.intechopen.com/)? I have recently been invited to edit a new book title for them. I am usually suspicious with such invitations and must check the authenticity of the publisher first. Interestingly, they claim that they have published the work for two recent Nobel Laureates. Therefore, I would appreciate your experience and opinions regarding InTech Open Science.
Kind regards,

Related Publications

Article
In the coming decade gravitational-wave astronomy is expected to develop as a new field of astronomical research and exploration of the cosmos. In this talk I summarize the outcome of a recent workshop ``Imagining the Future: Gravitational Wave Astronomy" and discuss a specific example of how gravitational-wave observations could be used in the fut...
Article
Full-text available
The era of gravitational-wave astronomy began on 14 September 2015, when the LIGO Scientific Collaboration detected the merger of two \({\sim }30~M_\odot \) black holes at a distance of \({\sim }400\) Mpc. This event has facilitated qualitatively new tests of gravitational theories, and has also produced exciting information about the astrophysical...
Article
We discuss the future of gravitational theories in the framework of gravitational wave (GW) astronomy after the recent GW detections (the events GW150914, GW151226, GW170104, GW170814, GW170817 and GW170608). In particular, a calculation of the frequency and angular dependent response function that a GW detector would see if massive modes from f(R)...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.