About Breakthrough Starshot, CME Events, And the Einstein Lens Used To Sense the Surfaces of Earth like Worlds; and A Possible Way To See The Lights of Distant Cities on The Surface of Earthlike Worlds With Advanced CiviIzations, if They Exist....


Here I want to restate what I was saying about the way of finding the CMEs and more for you about how and why this might be most optimal for us..Here I'll also discuss  two new types of telescopes, a gravity lens telescope being considered, and a telescope perhaps light-years in size by my own possible improvements on the Breakthrough Starshot methods also being devised....


CMEs are giant plasmas from the Sun and they may damage the power grid and the internet for years at a time and experts say we're overdue for more CME events. They now know this based on probabilities based on more evidence based on more history than was before!

 Engineers  built the power grid before they knew about CMEs from the historic record so when the power plants were built they didn't know that they should have built them with backup generators like diesel engines. And so CME plasmas are considered a risk because they may cause multiple nuclear meltdowns and slow the power grid or bring it down for years at a time and reduce hospital life support machines, or shut down gas stations so trucks can't send food or goods, and the internet and sattelites may be out for years and other types of infrastructure damage and harm may be caused by the CME.

 On my other video in the my comments area I was talking about how I consider a relatively cheap and most optimal clean up solution (since when I was selling soap on soap operas a month and wow the exercise lady cleaned right up) we could send simple sensors in an array around the Sun; they're made of quanta entangled with quanta we already have here and the EPR faster than light connection Einstein was spooked about may be a  good sensor connection.

 This is related to methods like the Breakthrough Starshot using small starchips, the smallest satellite in the world, Starchips would weigh an ounce or lighter. These super small payloads boosted by lasers like the Starshot method being considered may be a cheap fast way to send sensors  anywhere in the solar system. And  this would help us stop the power grid shutdown without losing billions of dollars and without the cost of false alarms, so we won't have it almost like we had  when a large CME passed by the Earth in 2012.

   About these plasmas I think we could send just a simple EPR sensor which might cost literally $0.10.  It wouldn't really cost much for the fuel to boost it because it's a light weight payload.

As with the Breakthrough Starshot method I believe that these light payloads could simply be sent by focused lasers much sooner than having to wait a half a year to reach the Sun with boosters and at much reduced cost.

And as I say on my other video about the Breakthrough Starshot I think the EPR Einstein, Poldosky, Rosen could be used in combination with the asymmetrical collapse of the wave function in series as a highly efficient and lightweight way to decelerate the sensors so they don't just speed right on, past the sun or Proxima B, and our image isn't as high resolution otherwise (Proxoma B is the Earthlike world recently found orbiting Alpha Centauri, the nearest star).

This use of the collapse of the wave function is being considered by some as a super efficient battery, storing energy with mass energy level efficiency, sort of like the matter antimatter conversion levels, these are far higher than fission levels which only convert 5 percent of mass to energy.

 Unlike antimatter, storing and transporting uncollapsed quanta would be much easier even if the output wouldn't be as extreme.

 We could send the chips more slowly with conventional boosters and put the sensors into orbit around the sun if, as some believe the lasers may not be optimal for this use.

 While it may cost billions to shut down the power grid for a while, this would usually be cheaper than false alarms that might cost billions more with more expensive or more unreliable sensors since experts say the power would need to be shut down each time a CME may be headed our way. Shutting down the power lines is considered to be our best option by reduced resonation with the plasma just without each false alarm so the risk of CME harm is reduced at the lowest cost and shutting down the power when we know a CME is headed our way is also viable.

 Other hardware like transformers that are being built are much more expensive and would be more time consuming than this EPR sensor laser boost method.

 When you compete with a machine like a chess computer, if there's any move that can lose the match the chess machine will use most of its time and resources (if not more and more!) stopping the one event. We haven't learned much from how the chess computers beat human players as was believed so humans would learn more savvy methods of play when they were being devised. Even so if we could lose so much with CMEs,  I would say that at least we could learn some valuable general maxims from the machines about life. And this might be true, if we can lose all the prize, then it's wise to spend a lot of time considering our defense, against CME's or other issues if so.

Finally I want to discuss the recent plan to send a fleet of sensors to a focal point of Einstein's gravity lense of the sun. Simple geometry shows this will give us real images of the surface of Earthlike worlds, not a one pixel world seen by our machines here in 2019. While insight is good, sight may enlighten us more...

 I believe the use of the Starshot methods as above, starchips, lasers, plus EPR connection and braking by the wave function, may make it cheap enough that we could send a swarm of the starchip sensors in a 360 swarm all the way around the sphere of the sun with lots of focal points of many Earthlike worlds and the universe and a lot of cheaper images. And in just a few hours at Starshot speeds we could begin our research plus real time control and not have to wait more than 10 years while sending larger old fashioned satellites to just one zone as in the method being considered...

It's been calculated that a telescope a million times the size of Hubble would be enough to see the lights of the cities of an advanced civilization on the surface of distant worlds if they exist. This was how I originally concieved it,  a telescope perhaps light years across more outside the solar system used by  starchips by these methods and unifying the signal of all these sensors so even more resolution would be seen than the Einstein lens method above. This telescope would be more a giant sphere than a gravity focus lens but it also might be any concievable size, even light years. Even so for the time being the gravity lens method might be of worth while we consider building these more giant machines.

Thanks for Reading my site, read more as much as you like..Thanks.

A Way to Send Cheap Payloads to Mars in Hours By Using, LIGHTER yet More Payloads On a Common Basis; Setting Up A Link to Mars and Widening our Connection "Based on Breakthrough Starshot" And More!

I was reading in Discover magazine about how it rains diamonds on Uranus and Neptune and also Jupiter and Saturn by another process. The method of high pressure at the right level and the cleansing out of the hydrogen any impurities is considered perfect for making diamonds.

Click Here or see link below for a Wash. Post site about this.

I had thought of methods of extracting samples from the surfaces of distant worlds related to the methods being used of blasting asteroids and catching the stardust or stone blast and then bringing it back our way.

 My earlier idea was to set a small lever on the tip of the starcraft sent to a realm like Mars or Venus. The probe goes down to the surface at the right speed (this can be slow enough if the machine "goes with" the orbit of the massive planet in front of its motion so it lands at anywhere from almost 0 to higher speed).

 When the probe impacts the surface the lever bounces up the scooped out sample from the surface to be sensed, up to the orbiting collector (where's no space junk collection!). Or it could be blasted all the way to us by the lever since most of the cost of sending payloads like to mars or the moon is in fuel (no fuel needed other than one way) and inertia does the rest.

This method would be simple and cheaper and the sample might be less tainted by the blast of the explosion of the other method

or it would have advantages of its own.

At any rate thinking of how to extract return samples from distant lands and waves may be useful.

 I began thinking about how it might be possible even to extract the diamonds from Uranus or other planets.

 First we need a cheap way to get payloads to those distant lands of investment, platinum VISA, and cash above...

It seems lasers might be of worth if we used lots of small payloads like in the Breakthrough Starshot method, with some important changes.

 I think using a laser as in the Starshot be a cheap method to send materials to the future Mars soap opera stars, they say they might pay for it with a soap opera or a raffle, how much is my Bitcoin pizza worth 50,000 worth!

 The exact method would be to make the laser more self focusing by putting a magnetic field around it and using a special torus instead of the starchip sails of the Starshot method.

 The torus has a light payload perhaps just a few grams but since no huge fuel costs weigh it down its cost per payload unit is cheap enough to send even a constant stream of precious materials like rocket fuel or food or 3d printers and ink to or from a distant world.

 The torus has a magnetic shield to give it either traction returning or cheaper high speed propulsion outward bound. The magnetic field mostly induced in the torus also would shield the payload from cosmic rays. And from entry if we might want to visit and so send supplies to Mars in more than just a few areas.

 And about the diamonds? First I considered the possible use if tractor beams but as I will relate here below, drones to drill or etc may be more feasible with current technology.

 Even so I consider the use of tractor beams which because of this I consider here mostly for completeness..

This involves what might be the second part of this plan extracting the sample from the "surface" of a distant world by using something like magnetic laser tweezers as NASA is researching about "tractor beams" and I mention several types of tractor beams on my other post -there are more!

 Already there are underwater tractor beams that work well and I think lasers combined with magnetic fields might be of value to modulate the wavelength of the resonance. One of my ideas about tractor beams was to use a magnet on the distant mass we want to move with a magnet nearer used to cause the adhesion.

 Another idea is to resonate a standing electron wave to oscillate and zero in on the Van de Wals force on the outside of the mass to move as of value and more for general use for mass without a magnet and then multiply the resonance like the wave tractor beam by choosing the right wave resonance. And this would work for more than just the masses with the magnet.



 To extract even the distant diamonds I believe a matter wave beam from many convergent sources (of the machine or machines) may be of value like the Gamma Knife used in brain surgery with more than 200 converging lasers (of lower to higher energy when they meet). The lasers of the Gamma Knife are so low in energy they don't even trim the haircut of the patient and the patient walks out of the ER in a few hours after brain surgery.

Except for a tractor wave that would operate even to remove matter like the diamonds, the lasers would be replaced with matter waves, well known from Quantum Electrodynamics one of the (second) most high resolution methods in physics. We know the mass and charge of the electron to more than 50 decimals and its evidence about the matter waves.

 My idea is that since the matter waves mostly go in the spaces between the quanta we could send them to converge and do useful things where they meet. E.g. it might make a good sensor while in real time and much the same space it could sense every atom in the body while changing enough of the electrons by ionization where the sensors sense and meet the cancer DNA electrons to someday be a complete and rapid cure.

 Here it seems possible though more conjectural about the diamonds or other uses that the matter wave beam could be combined with a magnetic beam which also isn't so quantized to be a form of tractor beam that might also be used to retrieve the diamonds or for other use like to prospect for minerals or heat in geology..

 So this is possible; we send the payload on the laser. It has enough mass to self assemble above the  area from where we might want to retrieve the diamonds. It self assembles into a small 3d printer.  More"ink" is sent cheaply to build a larger printer; more ink yet and we have something like a "matter wave tractor beam" as above.

 While this part about the tractor beam of this type is the most conjectural here it seems possible.

 If so it would allow entrepreneurs to someday send the machine to Neptune in a few hours at near the speed of light as in the Starshot method, and it would only take a few hours not years to reach the Kuiper belt and the Oort cloud. Then the machine is built by the printing methods as above. And in a while the diamonds are being sent to us at an extreme profit for a days labor!

Using the tractor beams wouldn't be as  probable with today's technology so I consider to use the laser and small payloads as above and use a drone to drill down. A laser is printed out with the drone that mines the diamonds or etc. to return the sample either directly to us or up to the orbiting station already printed out. Another option would be building a chemical booster to return the sample to orbit. These methods might allow unlimited cheap high speed sample returns from any moderately close distance! This might even allow sample returns from the sun.

Samples are returned by printing out a large enough laser at the distant zone to return the payloads to us or by printing out more conventional rockets to return people or etc. The main limit is about the size of the payload and the cost per pound. Even so far cheaper than by other methods.

The amount of ink we could send by cost would be a limit on some machines we build but this might be made more economical as we improve the method.

One problem is about the need for real real good aim and this might need to be solved "only once" since the printer could print out larger nets like e.g. a magnetic bubble plus a laser to steer the incoming ink or other outbound stuff from here. It could be printed out near Mars or other area where we might want to use these methods.

 One advantage of the best of this is about colonizing Mars. Its been said there is no known way to return the Martians to Earth from events as in Mars One that are considered here but the ability to send an unlimited stream of materials to Mars on demand would be a valuable life link. For getting started we might send a small self assembling machine that assembles into a small 3d printer then ink is sent to build a larger printer and so on. Now the machine is on the surface where it prints out the rocket tanks and to build the return rocket all the while ink and then rocket fuel is being sent by the laser torus method drop by drop and much cheaper than any other method yet known. All this could be done before the astronauts are sent to Mars and their return is more assured.

 If an emergency arises or to speed up the colonization events the number of laser supply lines might easily be multiplied up manyfold when needed. Provided some method of retrieval of the payloads e.g. an inflatable or magnetic net was viable there would be something we could do and save the Mars event if there was an emergency and much boost our colonization and R and D efforts in general.

I imagine that 3d printers could build habitats, and bulldozers printed from the ink would then cover over these boxes with an airtight radiationproof shield of mars soil. And in addition supplies of many sorts, food, air, water and many conveniences would be in reach and a large Mars cities could be built complete with return transportation arranged a lower cost than Uber! This would be before the settlers are sent to Mars.

The plan to live off the land of Robert Zubrin using known materials on Mars, while much tougher than this to do is not mutually exclusive. A combination of both plans might be optimal for more savings.

As I say on my video link below I think we would first want to terraform Mars cheap by spearing a magnetic bubble to one of the satellites of Jupiter and use Jupiter's magnetic field to send it at high speed to Mars crashing it in for air and water and materials etc and even to speed up the spin of Mars a bit so no "jet lag" by crashing the moon into the edge of Mars to speed it up just a bit. (The rover mission technicians found with each Mars 24 hour day with a few minutes more taking a major toll.)

 I believe we may also be able to use another large mass like an asteroid with a magnetic bubble added on to shield Mars more from the cosmic rays. NASA is considering using an inflatable magnetic shield for this at the Martian L5 but I consider it more flimsy than a more stable foundation like this and built to last. If we want a real colonization we want our results to endure more for the ages.

Even if we colonize Mars cheaper in years not centuries by this method, other materials cheap by the light payload/laser method above would also be of general value a cheap supply line to Mars in just 4 hours not months.

Here's the Link to the Washington Post Story about Raining Diamonds on Neptune


Here's my video link (the best
Link I can Find) about "A Cheap Way to Colonize Mars in Years Not Centuries" or you can do the search; https://www.google.com/search?q=a+much+cheaper+way+to+colonize&oq=a+much+cheaper+way+to+colinize&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33.36978j0j4&client=ms-android-sprint-us&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

Couldn't quite find the link, hope this may help..

ABOUT The SLOWING of STARS and The SPEED Of GRAVITY


I say in my physics synopsis, see the link upper left of my web version, yes the Mandlebrot set is real! I believe gravity isn't relativistic. The Earth is more at rest than the moon and the sun is more yet at rest. So the more priveliged mass is more influential and different masses fall at different rates if you apply the same force to two masses they go upward to different heights and fall down at different rates. And in the gravity elevator no frame of motion will transform away the separation with time of two masses dropped unlike in Einstein's inertial elevator. At t1 and t2 etc. the masses move apart in the gravity elevator, and all observers agree on this yet because both masses are in uniform motion in the inertial elevator some observers can get a uniform motion result.

 So I agree with Van Flandern that if the measured displacement of the Earth's gravity is extremely limited this gives a lower limit of at least 20 billion times the speed of light. Or perhaps by my use of Maxwell's method of the lighter the weight the faster the speed, the method he used to predict the speed of light exactly, this gives a speed of 10x10 to the 37th times the speed of light, you lighten up to travel fast.

Since Einstein like Mach believed gravity and inertia are essentially the same, I believe what LIGO has found is only the speed of inertia.

  So too if gravity is essentially non relativistic the supposed proofs of general relativity if different masses are supposed to fall at the same rate are actually evidence that masses fall at different rates like the Earth around the Moon, well with global warming at any rate!

 The displacement of the perihelion of Mercury the bending of starlight and yes even the rate at which pulsars might slow down all are evidence of the changing rate of fall of light, Mercury and other masses even while Einstein holds that different masses fall at the same rate in his theoretical foundation of general relativity so that inertia and gravity are the same. As I say I believe here Einstein is assuming what he's trying to prove by f equals ma which is the more general formula when you apply the same Force to two different masses they move at different rates. I believe that if the relativity of gravity is true the Earth would indeed fall around the Moon at the same rate as the moon around the Earth and if the universe rotated once each day in relative motion there would be hugely faster than light motion for the cosmos and hugely different angles of the motion as we might imagine.

So if LIGO has found something to do with gravity I believe what it's actually found is only the speed of inertia not near zero displacement of gravity as we measure it towards the sun.

And what about the speeding pulsars rate of slowing down, right!

 I would believe since gravity radiates in as with LIGO result where it seems the gravity radiates out what's really being measured is only the outward radiance of the inertial particles which would only move at the speed of light because they're particles like Einstein believed for the speed of light in special relativity where the quanta of light in special relativity is uninfluenced in its path and completely constant.

 So if LIGO is actually measuring inertia we might expect it to be at the speed of light. As I say though if gravity might be much faster than light as Van Flandern believed, LIGO and the speed of the pulsars may both be measures only of the speed of inertia and the prize of events like much faster communications by way of gravity may await other machines  we may build as I say elsewhere.

As I say about the pulsars they may be radiating inertia and we're not measuring gravity as they change the rate of spin.

 About Van Flandern's "observation of the observation" that the  displacement of gravity is almost zero between the sun and Earth, if the speed of the gravity between the pulsars was only at the speed of light there will be a different value of the displacement with changes in the location of the source of gravity. If we look
at triple pulsars I think this might help us find the speed of gravity not just the speed of inertial radiation which Einstein holds would be only at the speed of light. Because we measure a change in the motion of the center of mass of the two pulsars in the center the change not of mere radiation yet of the speed of which the information between the central changes and the external resulting motion of the outside pulsar will give us the speed of gravity more definitely even than LIGO or other methods.

 We want the line of gravitational connection of the pulsars to be in the orbit at the nearest the right angle to our line of sight when the influence of the events the inner pulsars would be seen.(The right angle is so the distance to our sensor is the same for both events so the distance if more to see the events doesn't influence the result by the slower speed of light used to measure the influence between the stars. If one pulsar was more distant in its orbit by a few light years in our sight this could throw off the underlying connection of GWD. The cause of the event might be an explosion from incoming matter that might be fused or superfused, superfusion is the possible cause of the Jets of cosmic realms that fusion is without cause. The superfusion would spin at Faster Than Light to withstand the gravity of massive sources so energy conservation is saved and it's possible there may be super fusion of events of pulsars, or at any rate fusion of this ingoing matter. Common fusion of asteroid showers are what I attribute the otherwise anamalous events of Tabby's star, some even attribute to the possible influence of other advanced civilizations at that realm of the events).

If the speed of gravity is much faster and the speed of the inertia measured by LIGO is only at the speed of light we might expect to see first the influence of the gravity and then if the pulsars are separated by 8 light minutes only then would we see the influence of Einstein.

 This idea might also be applied to large masses over more cosmic distance.

Gravity Isn't an Infinite Force, It's Offset And It Is Indeed a Force

Here I consider the argument Van Flandern used to predict what the speed of gravity is.

On this site (click here or see link below) author Akash Peshin notes that using the 0 measured displacement of gravity measured of the Earth and sun, Tom Van Flandern calculated that the speed of gravity is 20 billion times the speed of light.

 Akash then goes on to say that this would involve a problem in  Newton's method of any finite speed of gravity. If gravity is a force like Newton believed, any finite speed gives a displacement, and since the displacement is out of phase with the centrifugal force, this results in a loss of energy and the planets and solar system is/are in..out of line with the cosmos!

 So Akash says the solution is a displacement of the force ahead of the Earth's path. So the speed is indeed finite, and the force or nonforce is once more working well for Einstein's belief in the speed of light speed for gravity.


I agree that gravity has a finite speed, if the exertion it uses is finite, it must also be finite. But the force is hugely hugely lighter than light, so I tend to believe the speed is 10 x10 to the 37 times the speed of light since gravity is that much lighter than electromagnetism as Maxwell may have believed by his method for predicting the speed of light. As I say elsewhere I believe what LIGO may have found is the speed of inertia because Einsten like Mach believed inertia and gravity were the same thing.

About the displacement as of the archers seen in the diagram on the link how can they be both off center as in the diagrams yet the displacement is 0? The author or others may have decided that if LIGO seems to fit Relativity, and the offset is of value, just invent an event that would be so if Relativity also fits gravity, even if the evidence shows the event doesn't exist as claimed in the diagram. This is what the displacement would be if Relativity and LIGO were the answer, yet the evidence is the same. The evidence about LIGO contradicts the displacement of gravity.

Akash then goes on to say no information can move faster than the speed of light because contrary to Einstein himself, here he says the archers are using a wave train of arrows, and while the arrows might seem to move much faster than light, only the information of the wave train can't move faster than the speed of light.

Einstein held that light is a particle in relativity uninfluenced from source to sensor, so the speed of light is constant. Einstein thus would have perhaps said using a wave train to explain anything about gravity in terms of the speed of light if it was by geometry alone would be insufficient.


One reason I accept the displacement of gravity as it is is about the idea that if gravity is at the same speed of light, there indeed is no force on the Earth, couldn't we just as well say the Earth would long since have destabilized and sailed away! No force is just so, right ...

Use of the offcenter method seems necessary and any finite force would use it. This isn't the absolute realm of Relativity.

I believe the Equivalence Principle is without value if an ultracentrifuge is without millions of gs and it radiates out not in.

If LIGO radiates out like a centrifuge it may be inertia, and while a major find, it may not allow the possibility of the huge speed e.g. for communications gravity might allow. And Akash ignores the EPR experiments as well as the quantum computers that have been heroic as the gravity wave events and elaborate enough to prove that Einstein's ultimate claim wasn't so much about information, but rather that no known signal yet seen was faster than light in his time.

Einstein never even actually defined information or a signal. If a signal is a way to reliably change one event by another and gravity causes change of masses over distance, this was one arguement used to justify  the building of gravity wave machines, but the speed may be faster so we have a sound foundation.

Note that if don't ignore the evidence and the speed of gravity is about the displacement it has not inertia, this may be
reversed to see if different speeds of gravity (since it's about acceleration) might give evidence about how offset cosmic masses at high speed might be.

Here's the site link I mentioned above, with the arrow displacement
events discussed.

ABOUT THE LIGO EVENTS

What has LIGO found exactly? If gravity waves radiate out how does gravity radiate in?

 This would seem improbable and here I want to look at another possible cause.

Gravity may radiate out as waves and this may induce quanta found by the evidence to be the Low Energy Higgs' or LEH. In my view called Modified La Sage Gravity or MLSG quanta are needed to cause gravity because of gravity's loose connection with inertia as Einstein believed. Quanta have sides and exert inward force with change of motion while waves would continue on the outside still sending the changes in connection out to conserve momentum.

 Even so the planets move through the waves with no change in force seen, so the particles are at a near outside radius of the heavy quanta
atawhat I dub the Radius of Action ROA. At this radius the LEH become massive enough to exert a much stronger force, the large force of the sideways force on the light and the force of inertia or gravity. So light moves at the speed Maxwell predicted exactly based on the snapback and momentum and energy conservation are saved even while the waves have reduced friction.

As I say the particles are valuable even if only at the ROA because they would cause the force felt of both gravity and inertia. And the particles radiate out for centrifugal force because they are indeed particles and they have sides to passively radiate out like a gas.

We usually can't find the waves either of gravity which would radiate out or the in waves inertia uses because they are lower energy and because they're both at much higher speed. They give the much higher speed continium Einstein hoped to find.

 The LIGO has measured outward motion of two radii of the "gravity wave" events. As above the particles are all we can see the effects of so if they radiate out it seems reasonable to me that these are the inertia events and not gravity.

In MLSG the particles are important to gravity and they cause the push from the outside of the mass, even so there are problems about La Sage gravity mostly about friction and this makes waves needy to save La Sage gravity be which is the only mechanical cause of gravity ever even considered by scientists like Maxwell or Newton.

The waves would attract masses from the inside causing the stretch that particles wouldn't have, they wouldn't speed up on their own because inertia no more causes gravity than uniform motion causes acceleration.

 The particles would be energised by the waves to exert the push from the outside radius of each heavy quanta and this would be one of gravity's modalities with inertia. This would be how gravity radiates from the outside to in with the particles if the real gravity events are
ever found.


  The outward gravity waves being much lighter than light would be much faster and also overlap with both wavelength and speed not only wavelength as in Special Relativity SR because gravity and SR are like opposites. Gravity radiates down with a change in wave speed; inerta has changes in wavelength only with radiance outward via disconnection with no change in speed.

In MLSG the changes in both wavelength and speed allow the gravity waves to wrap around the heavy quanta and on the outer radius the waves become dense enough to cause the push of push gravity as La Sage named his method.

If particles would cause inertia and centrifugal force by disconnection and gravity is much like it -somewhat! Gravity would have the quanta of the LEH. Even so inertia can't reradiate in so more continuous waves would also be needed. But if the waves were the same as inertia they would be hugely stronger or inertia would be hugely weaker.

 So what we might expect to see with LIGO if it were caused by gravity is force from particles, most on the outside radius from the distant event moving from the outside and inward. While the particles would seem to move slow as the slow 32 feet force of gravity around us like a boat in the river and the atoms of the water the waves at much higher speed could allow what might seem an almost instant connection event. By causality you don't have the events around the outside of a pond with the waves splashing around to then converge on the event of a stone on the pond even if much faster than light for the waves out, so the signal connecting the inward motion of the particles would still be no higher speed than this possible more cosmic speed limit than by relativity.

I believe that particles that would radiate out by LIGO wouldn't be gravity, and since particles and the stronger force they cause would be mostly what we can find and measure, only real gravity would have the force from the outside in.

If gravity radiates out at the speed of light as claimed by LIGO, another signal needs to move inward at another speed or it wouldn't connect because gravity is a unifying force. All radiance out would mean no inward motion without this connection so it seems if we finally measure gravity by quanta I believe it may disprove relativity.