A null detection of theoretically predicted gravitational waves would be great science, prompting a revision of our attempted understanding of physical laws. In marked contrast, LIGO simply doe not work as planned. Years after its commisioning, LIGO fails to reach the relatively noise free sensitivity levels required to detect the predicted gravitational waves it was built to detect.

Really? Hmm... Funny then, some of the statements made by various folks about the project(s) and their astrophysical sensitivity...

LIGO and Virgo Join Forces In Search for Gravitational Waves

http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/12948

LIGO, in the midst of a nearly two-year run functioning at its design sensitivity, is operating along with GEO600, while Virgo is making rapid progress toward its sensitivity goals.

They seemed to think they were functioning at their design sensitivity.

LIGO Sheds Light on Cosmic Event

http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/13084

A null result for gravitational waves, despite supposedly being powerful enough...

LIGO Observations Probe the Dynamics of the Crab Pulsar

http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/13154

"LIGO has evolved over many years to its present capability to produce scientific results of real significance," says Jay Marx of the California Institute of Technology, LIGO's executive director.

Gravitational waves would have been detectable even if the star were deformed by only a few meters, ...

They seem to be of the opinion that LIGO is of sufficient precision to measure within a couple meters' deformation of a neutron star's crust. Am I wrong in assuming this means they think its sensitivity is sufficient to be astrophysically interesting?

First joint search for gravitational-wave bursts in LIGO and GEO600 data

http://arxiv.org/abs/0807.2834

We present the results of the first joint search for gravitational-wave bursts by the LIGO and GEO600 detectors ... We perform a search for gravitational-wave bursts using both pipelines and find no detection candidates in the S4 data set when all four instruments were operating stably.

h, The Gravitational Voice: LIGO Bids Farewell to S5 - Now onto Enhanced LIGO!

http://www.ego-gw.it/public/hletter/doc/h_7_JANUARY2008.pdf

S5 was the first long duration data-taking run where all of the interferometers were operating with astrophysically interesting sensitivities. The main goal of S5 was to collect data in triple coincidence for one year ... The end of S5 occurred only after LIGO's three interferometers, the 4 km and 2 km interferometers at the Hanford Washington Observatory and the 4 km interferometer at the Livingston Louisiana Observatory had operated synchronously (all locked simultaneously) to acquire a total of one full year of science quality data.

Again, they seem to imply that LIGO is in fact sufficiently sensitive to detect gravitational waves and give science quality output. If they actually exist, shouldn't we have detected some in the data simply by accident by now? Especially having run in triple-coincidence for an entire year of data gathering? That there are no candidate signals yet seems not to bode well for the project(s) involved.

Advanced LIGO Project Funded by National Science Foundation

http://media.caltech.edu/press_releases/13123

Now NSF is dumping another $205 million into the project to upgrade LIGO into Advanced LIGO... If the first iteration found precisely squat, despite supposedly being sensitive enough, do they really think that tossing another $205 million into the pot will bribe the universe into copliance?

This major upgrade will increase the sensitivity of the LIGO instruments by a factor of 10, giving a one thousand-fold increase in the number of astrophysical candidates for gravitational wave signals.

Perhaps they don't see the irony of the above statement... So, there are thusfar zero candidate signals? And a thousand times more than zero is how many new candidate signals again? Okay, low blow... But you get the idea. I'll just say "I'm not optimistic..."

Since the scientists there seem to think that their machines are capable of science quality data and astrophysically interesting sensitivities, perhaps we should take the continuing string of NULL results seriously...