sci.astro
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Gravity Probe B

Subject: Re: Gravity Probe B
From: Jan Panteltje
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 19:48:25 GMT
Newsgroups: sci.astro
On a sunny day (Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:31:39 +0000 (UTC)) it happened
carlip-nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote in <e09b2b$kmv$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>For a nice summary of the current status, see Bob Kahn's short article in
>the fall 2005 issue of Matters of Gravity, http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/ .

Facinating, they are doing a blind test and will only get CfA data after the
analysis.
Sound like real true scientists to me. :-)
Nothing like proving yourself wrong again and again... hehe.
Makes one humble (well...).

>(Incidentally, the experimentalists I know would like nothing better than
>to find a result that clearly disagrees with GR. 

Sure, of course.

> Experimentalists live to
>prove theorists wrong.  A confirmation of GR leads to a reaction, "Ho hum, 
>nice experiment, but no surprise."  A disconfirmation is where the real
>prestige would lie.)

On that subject, how do you think about that just published ESA experiment,
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603033
and their conclusions about the vacuum energy and Higgs and cosmological 
constant:
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603032

Official announcement:
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEM0L6OVGJE_index_0.html

I have now read both papers, and in a way, these guys really DID test for 3 
years,
I am sort of excited, but would like to hear your opinion as you know lots and 
lost
more of that stuff then I do?
And this is directly related to this subject too.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>