🚀 go-pugleaf

Pentcho Valev wrote on Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:35:54 -0700:

Relativity is inmortal because is a scientific theory and scientific 
knowledge is *accumulative*.

This is why Newtonian theory is also inmortal.

> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/08/25/gravity-wave-
hunters-find-nothing%E2%80%94and-make-a-big-discovery/
> "Physicists in Washington State and Louisiana recently spent two years
> hunting for the mysterious gravitational waves first predicted by
> Einstein, but detected nothing: zilch, zero, nada, nary a ripple. But
> that "null result" is itself of great value, researchers say, because it
> tells them where to look for the waves next."
> 
> So "physicists in Washington State and Louisiana" are going to waste
> some more money but in the end Sir Martin Rees, capo di tutti capi in
> Einsteiniana, will put an end to their campaign:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/
connected/2004/04/28/ecfgravb28.xml
> "Did Einstein get all his sums right?.....Last week, an American probe
> began an 18-month mission to put Einstein's prediction to the test, 90
> years after he unveiled his ideas in Berlin. Gravity Probe B was blasted
> into space from the Vandenberg Air Force Base in California on a Boeing
> Delta 2 rocket and will orbit the Earth for more than a year. The $700
> million joint mission between Nasa and Stanford University, conceived in
> 1958, uses four of the most perfect spheres ever created inside the
> world's largest Thermos flask to detect minute distortions in the fabric
> of the universe.....Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, said: "The
> project's a technical triumph, and a triumph of the persistence and
> lobbying power of Stanford University. But its gestation has been
> grotesquely prolonged, and the cost overruns have been equally gross. I
> recall hearing a talk about the project from Francis Everitt (principal
> investigator) when I was still a student – and it was already well
> advanced. "Back in the 1960s the evidence for Einstein's theory was
> meagre – just two tests, with 10 per cent precision. But relativity is
> now confirmed by several tests, with precision of one part in 10,000.
> It's still, in principle, good to have new and different tests. But the
> level of confidence in Einstein's theory is now so high that an
> announcement of the expected result will 'fork no lightening'.
> "Moreover, if there's an unexpected result, I suspect most people will
> suspect an error in this very challenging experiment rather than
> immediately abandon Einstein: There's now so much evidence corroborating
> Einstein, that a high burden of proof is required before he'll be
> usurped by any rival theory. "So the most exciting – if un-alluring –
> outcome of Gravity Probe B would be a request by Stanford University for
> another huge sum of money to repeat it."
> 
> Of course, waste of money and destruction of human rationality never
> stop in Einsteiniana; some old forgotten "challenge" will be revitalized
> once the gravity wave campaign is over, for instance:
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090105150837.htm
> "Physicists at Indiana University have developed a promising new way to
> identify a possible abnormality in a fundamental building block of
> Einstein's theory of relativity known as "Lorentz invariance." If
> confirmed, the abnormality would disprove the basic tenet that the laws
> of physics remain the same for any two objects traveling at a constant
> speed or rotated relative to one another."
> 
> Pentcho Valev
> pvalev@yahoo.com





-- 
http://www.canonicalscience.org/