Talk:Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

message: Laser Interferometer Space Antenna is the proper name, with LISA as an abbreviation. --Ng.j (talk) 15:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming 

message: I looked back at the ESA data, which states "The two assemblies on one spacecraft point towards an identical assembly on the other two. In this way, the three spacecraft form two independent Michelson interferometers, providing redundancy.".  The wiki article however, states "This forms three complete (but not independent) interferometers, with each arm being part of two interferometers".
Not sure if this is a misunderstanding on the part of the original author, or what.  I'm changing the article text to reflect the the ESA fact sheet for now.
--Astrobit (talk) 03:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your comments about the Michelson interferometer apply only to inertial (constant velocity) frames.  In non-inertial frames and under the effects of gravitation, the speed of light may be measured to change. It is generally considered that the sped of light is constant and the lengths of physical objects are distorted by gravity waves. Martin Hogbin (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I can only reply that, according to general relativity, which is the theory that predicts the existence of gravitational waves, LISA would be expected to produce an output in the presence of such waves. Martin Hogbin (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interferometers 

message: Any mention of POLARBEAR?
http://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/newsrel/science/03-07Telescope.asp  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.78.13 (talk) 03:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Ground based Detectors

message: Is this possible in Wikipedia? It would immediately make this article come alive.Serbian Defense Forces (talk) 07:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Countdown clock

message: Apparently terminated, as NASA+ESA; similar to continue, just ESA? 94.30.84.71 (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We (user Tlamatini and I) went ahead and modified the article to reflect the apparent termination of NASA's participation, as expressed in this NASA news release: http://lisa.gsfc.nasa.gov/cosmic_vision_changes.html. We hope the edit holds up to Wikipedia's style and guidelines, and that it is written in proper english. Meithan (talk) 03:50, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminated? 

message: Had to rewrite most of the article, as information was severely outdated. Basically the sections up to the "science" section are new, although I tried to keep as much of the old text and references as was possible.
The rest of the sections will follow shortly.
Re Naming:
I am aware that LISA went to eLISA. At this time information about eLISA got put here also, but a new article on eLISA is in the pipeline, and the information will we separated. JRiegerMM (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  revamp of article 

message: The graphic in paragraph "science" is wrong. Nevertheless, the reference is good a points to the good graphic (which is different eLISA and LISA do not work at the same frequency).  
The reference points to this : "http://rhcole.com/apps/GWplotter/#redirect"
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.167.33.242 (talk) 09:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong graphic 

message: The article says: Practically, LISA measures a relative phase shift between one local laser and one distant laser by light interference. Comparison between the observed laser beam frequency (in return beam) and the local laser beam frequency (sent beam) encodes the wave parameters. I am unable to interpret this. Superficially it seems it says that a difference in phase is measured by measuring a difference in frequency. which seems paradoxical. Do we really need the expression wave parameters here? --Ettrig (talk) 12:30, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phase or frequency difference? 

message: What is eLISA? How is it different than just LISA? It's mentioned a few times in the article but never explained. --Yarnalgo talk 01:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a name used in the past. When LISA was first proposed to ESA's Cosmic Vision L1 mission, it was called 'LISA', with three spacecrafts and three arms (the laser between each spacecraft). Then, funding issues forced the proposal team to simplify the proposal; while retaining the three spacecraft configuration, the number of arms was reduced to two. LISA was renamed as the New Gravitational wave Observatory, or 'NGO'. NGO wasn't selected by ESA (they selected a Jupiter probe), and the design reverted to using three spacecraft and three arms. This 'eLISA' proposal competed for the Cosmic Vision L2/3 mission. By the time this proposal was chosen by ESA, however, it was simply called LISA again. Kind regards, Hms1103 (talk) 06:16, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  eLISA? 

message: Some of the historical wrangling over the project between ESA and NASA is quite outdated. It's relevant to the history section, but putting it in the opening paragraph obfuscates the current status of the project. I think it should be removed, and merged into the history section.  LazyAstronomer (talk) 11:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up the opening section