Quote:
Originally Posted by edwardsdj
From these statements and those in another thread lately, I feel you would benefit greatly from the study of any first-year physics textbook before generating misinformation and confusion.
Experiments have been done to confirm the prediction of General Relativity that gravity propagates at the speed of light. The experiment involved the study of a distant quasar being gravitationally lensed by Jupiter. The speed of gravity was found to be 1.06 times the speed of light (as I recall) which confirmed General Relativity to within the experimental error.
|
Excuse me....you have no idea what I know or don't know, so before you go casting aspersions upon me (or anyone else for that matter), think carefully about what you say. You might find yourself neck deep in the proverbial.
I'm fully aware of what SR and GR say, and the postulates of both theories. For a start, if I didn't understand them, I wouldn't be doing a masters degree in science (Astronomy and Astrophysics) and averaging 93% in my assessed work. If you read what I have said, instead of going on about the veracity of Einstein, you'd have seen that I prefaced my statements with "if such and such)". There are other interpretations of the observations in the physics journals and whilst they don't always agree completely with the orthodox interpretation, they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
If you actually read what I have written before you go interpreting what I have said, you'll see (in this case) that I said "if" something or rather, knowing that experimental evidence needs to be found before something can be declared proven or not. I never said that it was proven that gravity moves faster than light, just that "if" it does, then this or that would happen. But don't think that some scientist haven't questioned Einstein more critically than most would otherwise. Just because experimental evidence appears to confirm his assertions so far, doesn't mean that sometime in the future he will not be proven incorrect. The problem with myopically believing in something is you miss things which may show you that reality could very well be otherwise. Or if you do see them, you just dismiss them out of hand. It happens all too much in science.
In so far as that "other thread" is concerned, I am quite correct in my assertions. Any theory which predicts infinities in its equations is in serious trouble....when it approaches those limits where the infinities appear. That's why renormalisation exists...especially for quantum theories. Infinities are inelegant and theoretical physicists hate inelegant theories. Anything which negates the embarrassment of having infinite values appearing within their equations is seen as a blessing. Infinities generate problems which are extremely hard, if not almost impossible, to deal with.
In so far as your quoted experiment, I find it rather disconcerting that a value of 1.06c was seen as being within experimental error, considering that a 6% error is seen as acceptable when nearly all other experiments in SR/GR have been verified to within 1 part in 10^20 or better as far as error is concerned. I would question their methods and experimental assumptions.