This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The next three sections on this talk page contain links to information that should have been put into the article. Instead the poster simply posted the links and assumed that someone else would do the editing and insert the information. Of these sections two were initiated by me, both asked someone in the know to update the article. I do not read Japanese, and am not at all the correct person to edit this article.
Please is there someone on the KAGRA team, some graduate student, anyone, willing to edit this article into a proper Wikipedia article. Look at the these two Wikipedia articles Virgo interferometer and LIGO for examples of what this article should be.
According to publicly disclosed figures, the English version of English averages about 255 million page-views a day. Wikipedia overall is the eighth most visited website. I am surprised that no one on the KAGRA team cares to reach this vast audience. The English Wikipedia gets over 250,000 visits per month from more than 50 nations! e.g. in October 2021, this list included Nambia (417k), Nigeria (312k), UAE (424k), India (1,200k), China (673k), Pakistan (500k), Philippines (480k) .
I am astounded that the Japanese science community does not see the need to create a proper Wikepedia article about one of their greatest accomplishments. This instrument is only the fourth in the world, and Japan is one of only two nations to build such an instrument on their own. Nick Beeson ( talk) 03:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
104.153.72.218 ( talk) 05:37, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Almost the entire article reads as though it was written four years ago. It currently states, "is now likely to enter operation in 2018.…planned cryogenic operation…in 2019." Every reference without exception is, at this writing, more than 2 years old. Did it begin operation this year? It is nearly the end of 2018, they only have 27 days as of this writing to make that goal. Really, there must be some information on its status more recent than January 2017. Nick Beeson ( talk) 12:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Almost the entire article reads as though it was written five years ago. It currently states, "is now likely to enter operation in 2018.…planned cryogenic operation…in late 2019." Almost very reference, with two exceptions, are at this writing, more than 3 years old. The two newer references say it will begin operation this month (December 2019). Will it begin operation this year? It is nearly the end of 2019, they only have 29 days as of this writing to make that goal. Really, there must be some information on its status more recent than January 2019.
My previous note, from a year ago, was inadequately answered by an anonymous editor. They cited useless test runs from years ago, which are not the same thing as testing equipment designed and built to make actual detections. Nick Beeson ( talk) 12:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
81.6.34.246 ( talk) 20:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
I removed all of the old text, which was entered in real time, and discussed the current struggles to get KAGRA up and running. It is now historical data and should be in a section titled "Development history" or simply "History". I do not know the history so I am unable to write that section. It is not relevant now that KAGRA is taking data, and has published results. Nick Beeson ( talk) 01:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
It's all very murky on the internet, with very little info released, but it seems that KAGRA is not working properly. By 2020 KAGRA was supposed to be operating at around the sensitivity of VIRGO, but it is now only expected to be at around 1% of that by the end of 04 - which is end of 2023! [1]. This issue really should be noted in this page. (To be honest it's very strange IMO that almost no one on journalism seems interested that a $160m observatory, that took a decade to build, doesn't work) Fig ( talk) 15:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
According to this article [1] KAGRA's not "broken," it's just delayed due to COVID. Apparently it was left in a "simple configuration" when everyone went to remote work and they still are planning to upgrade it after they can return from remote work. [1] https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/japans-kagra-searches-the-sky-for-gravitational-waves 199.111.226.110 ( talk) 17:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
First off - I've never done one of these comments before (I have made a few edits to pages here and there) so apologies if I do this wrong...
I was browsing through this KAGRA page and saw this comment in the intro section: "It is expected to have an operational sensitivity equal to, or greater than, LIGO and Virgo." - with that comment evidenced via a link to < https://www.businessinsider.com/earth-gravitational-wave-detector-ligo-virgo-upgrade-einstein-2019-10?r=US&IR=T>.
But I don't see anything in that article (which is a story in a non-technical publication) saying that KAGRA will ever end up being more sensitive than LIGO. It does say that the addition of KAGRA to the GW detector network will improve accuracy - which it will, once it is sensitive enough - because it will improve triangulation. But it doesn't say it will be able to make more distant detections than LIGO. And, from my reading of LIGO (including technical papers, and the excellent twice-yearly semi-technical newsletters), I've never got the feeling that KAGRA would ever end up more sensitive than LIGO. It has some extra benefits (underground), but it is smaller.
I've not got a definitive "KAGRA will never be as sensitive as LIGO" reference though. However, as one example, this webpage - which is a 2019 report from the "KAGRA Collaboration, LIGO Scientific Collaboration, and Virgo Collaboration" teams, shows, in 'Table 1' on p.4, that the projected sensitivities for LIGO in Observing period "O5" (the next one, O4, is expected to start in March 2023, currently), are, for Black Hole / Black Hole mergers ('BBH'), 2500 megaparsecs for LIGO and 'only' 1200 Mpc for KAGRA. Now 1200 Mpc is a blooming long way (~4 billion light years!)... but it is only half the projected sensitivity of LIGO. These are only projections of course - but they are on a more solid footing for LIGO than KAGRA because of the former's proven track record and experience.
So, I think the above sentence is incorrect. I don't think it will have been from any malice or bad intent; just a misinterpretation.
Should I remove the sentence? I've only added, tweaked, and corrected before. Removing information is a bit more impacting. Should someone review my thinking?
Or - perhaps it would be better to change the sentence, perhaps to "It is expected to eventually have an operational sensitivity approaching that of LIGO and Virgo.", and replace the current 'Business Insider' link with a link to the 2019 Collaborations report I mention above - ?
Thanks, Gordon Gordon Panther ( talk) 13:37, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The next three sections on this talk page contain links to information that should have been put into the article. Instead the poster simply posted the links and assumed that someone else would do the editing and insert the information. Of these sections two were initiated by me, both asked someone in the know to update the article. I do not read Japanese, and am not at all the correct person to edit this article.
Please is there someone on the KAGRA team, some graduate student, anyone, willing to edit this article into a proper Wikipedia article. Look at the these two Wikipedia articles Virgo interferometer and LIGO for examples of what this article should be.
According to publicly disclosed figures, the English version of English averages about 255 million page-views a day. Wikipedia overall is the eighth most visited website. I am surprised that no one on the KAGRA team cares to reach this vast audience. The English Wikipedia gets over 250,000 visits per month from more than 50 nations! e.g. in October 2021, this list included Nambia (417k), Nigeria (312k), UAE (424k), India (1,200k), China (673k), Pakistan (500k), Philippines (480k) .
I am astounded that the Japanese science community does not see the need to create a proper Wikepedia article about one of their greatest accomplishments. This instrument is only the fourth in the world, and Japan is one of only two nations to build such an instrument on their own. Nick Beeson ( talk) 03:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
104.153.72.218 ( talk) 05:37, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Almost the entire article reads as though it was written four years ago. It currently states, "is now likely to enter operation in 2018.…planned cryogenic operation…in 2019." Every reference without exception is, at this writing, more than 2 years old. Did it begin operation this year? It is nearly the end of 2018, they only have 27 days as of this writing to make that goal. Really, there must be some information on its status more recent than January 2017. Nick Beeson ( talk) 12:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Almost the entire article reads as though it was written five years ago. It currently states, "is now likely to enter operation in 2018.…planned cryogenic operation…in late 2019." Almost very reference, with two exceptions, are at this writing, more than 3 years old. The two newer references say it will begin operation this month (December 2019). Will it begin operation this year? It is nearly the end of 2019, they only have 29 days as of this writing to make that goal. Really, there must be some information on its status more recent than January 2019.
My previous note, from a year ago, was inadequately answered by an anonymous editor. They cited useless test runs from years ago, which are not the same thing as testing equipment designed and built to make actual detections. Nick Beeson ( talk) 12:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
81.6.34.246 ( talk) 20:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
I removed all of the old text, which was entered in real time, and discussed the current struggles to get KAGRA up and running. It is now historical data and should be in a section titled "Development history" or simply "History". I do not know the history so I am unable to write that section. It is not relevant now that KAGRA is taking data, and has published results. Nick Beeson ( talk) 01:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
It's all very murky on the internet, with very little info released, but it seems that KAGRA is not working properly. By 2020 KAGRA was supposed to be operating at around the sensitivity of VIRGO, but it is now only expected to be at around 1% of that by the end of 04 - which is end of 2023! [1]. This issue really should be noted in this page. (To be honest it's very strange IMO that almost no one on journalism seems interested that a $160m observatory, that took a decade to build, doesn't work) Fig ( talk) 15:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
According to this article [1] KAGRA's not "broken," it's just delayed due to COVID. Apparently it was left in a "simple configuration" when everyone went to remote work and they still are planning to upgrade it after they can return from remote work. [1] https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/japans-kagra-searches-the-sky-for-gravitational-waves 199.111.226.110 ( talk) 17:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi,
First off - I've never done one of these comments before (I have made a few edits to pages here and there) so apologies if I do this wrong...
I was browsing through this KAGRA page and saw this comment in the intro section: "It is expected to have an operational sensitivity equal to, or greater than, LIGO and Virgo." - with that comment evidenced via a link to < https://www.businessinsider.com/earth-gravitational-wave-detector-ligo-virgo-upgrade-einstein-2019-10?r=US&IR=T>.
But I don't see anything in that article (which is a story in a non-technical publication) saying that KAGRA will ever end up being more sensitive than LIGO. It does say that the addition of KAGRA to the GW detector network will improve accuracy - which it will, once it is sensitive enough - because it will improve triangulation. But it doesn't say it will be able to make more distant detections than LIGO. And, from my reading of LIGO (including technical papers, and the excellent twice-yearly semi-technical newsletters), I've never got the feeling that KAGRA would ever end up more sensitive than LIGO. It has some extra benefits (underground), but it is smaller.
I've not got a definitive "KAGRA will never be as sensitive as LIGO" reference though. However, as one example, this webpage - which is a 2019 report from the "KAGRA Collaboration, LIGO Scientific Collaboration, and Virgo Collaboration" teams, shows, in 'Table 1' on p.4, that the projected sensitivities for LIGO in Observing period "O5" (the next one, O4, is expected to start in March 2023, currently), are, for Black Hole / Black Hole mergers ('BBH'), 2500 megaparsecs for LIGO and 'only' 1200 Mpc for KAGRA. Now 1200 Mpc is a blooming long way (~4 billion light years!)... but it is only half the projected sensitivity of LIGO. These are only projections of course - but they are on a more solid footing for LIGO than KAGRA because of the former's proven track record and experience.
So, I think the above sentence is incorrect. I don't think it will have been from any malice or bad intent; just a misinterpretation.
Should I remove the sentence? I've only added, tweaked, and corrected before. Removing information is a bit more impacting. Should someone review my thinking?
Or - perhaps it would be better to change the sentence, perhaps to "It is expected to eventually have an operational sensitivity approaching that of LIGO and Virgo.", and replace the current 'Business Insider' link with a link to the 2019 Collaborations report I mention above - ?
Thanks, Gordon Gordon Panther ( talk) 13:37, 24 October 2022 (UTC)