Posted on 02/20/2014 3:47:32 PM PST by Kevmo
http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-First-Test-That-Proves-General-Theory-of-Relativity-Wrong-20259.shtml
According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, a moving mass should create another field, called gravitomagnetic field, besides its static gravitational field. This field has now been measured for the first time and to the scientists' astonishment, it proved to be no less than one hundred million trillion times larger than Einstein's General Relativity predicts.
According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, a moving mass should create another field, called gravitomagnetic field, besides its static gravitational field. This field has now been measured for the first time and to the scientists' astonishment, it proved to be no less than one hundred million trillion times larger than Einstein's General Relativity predicts.
This gravitomagnetic field is similar to the magnetic field produced by a moving electric charge (hence the name "gravitomagnetic" analogous to "electromagnetic"). For example, the electric charges moving in a coil produce a magnetic field - such a coil behaves like a magnet. Similarly, the gravitomagnetic field can be produced to be a mass moving in a circle. What the electric charge is for electromagnetism, mass is for gravitation theory (the general theory of relativity).
A spinning top weights more than the same top standing still. However, according to Einstein's theory, the difference is negligible. It should be so small that we shouldn't even be capable of measuring it. But now scientists from the European Space Agancy, Martin Tajmar, Clovis de Matos and their colleagues, have actually measured it. At first they couldn't believe the result.
"We ran more than 250 experiments, improved the facility over 3 years and discussed the validity of the results for 8 months before making this announcement. Now we are confident about the measurement," says Tajmar. They hope other physicists will now conduct their own versions of the experiment so they could be absolutely certain that they have really measured the gravitomagnetic field and not something else. This may be the first empiric clue for how to merge together quantum mechanics and general theory of relativity in a single unified theory.
"If confirmed, this would be a major breakthrough," says Tajmar, "it opens up a new means of investigating general relativity and its consequences in the quantum world."
The experiment involved a ring of superconducting material rotating up to 6 500 times a minute. According to quantum theory, spinning superconductors should produce a weak magnetic field. The problem was that Tajmar and de Matos experiments with spinning superconductors didn't seem to fit the theory - although in all other aspects the quantum theory gives incredibly accurate predictions. Tajmar and de Matos then had the idea that maybe the quantum theory wasn't wrong after all but that there was some additional effect overlapping over their experiments, some effect they neglected.
What could this other effect be? They thought maybe it's the gravitomagnetic field - the fact that the spinning top exerts a higher gravitational force. So, they placed around the spinning superconductor a series of very sensible acceleration sensors for measuring whether this effect really existed. They obtained more than they bargained for!
Although the acceleration produced by the spinning superconductor was 100 millionths of the acceleration due to the Earth's gravitational field, it is a surprising one hundred million trillion times larger than Einstein's General Relativity predicts. Thus, the spinning top generated a much more powerful gravitomagnetic field than expected.
Now, it remains the need for a proper theory. Scientists can also now check whether candidate theories, such as the string theory, can describe this experiment correctly. Moreover, this experiment shows that gravitational waves should be much more easily to detect than previously thought.
I’ll be spending yet another day in Drs’ waiting rooms — sans internet...
Oh no! I pray for you God’s blessings of health and comfort!
I’m fine. (You have FReepMail...)
Today the term atheist denotes commitment to a concept of the universe (nature) that is open to anything but the God of the Bible. Modern atheists are naturalists. Therefore, whatever oddities nature brings before us, i.e., meaning, laws, demons, voices speaking into minds, mind itself, it must always be nature alone that has somehow produced them.
Only the natural dimension is allowed, thus evolutionary materialist Dr. Scott Todd wrote in the science journal 'Nature:'
"Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic." (Naturalism in the Light of Reality, Robert Gurney, creation.com, June 14, 2012)
Early conservative intellectual Richard Weaver foresaw this eventuality. In his book, "Ideas Have Consequences," (1945) Weaver writes that 14th century Western man had made an "evil decision" to abandon his belief in the transcendent God and universals and thus the position that "there is a source of truth higher than, and independent of, man..." The consequences of the rejection of "higher things" were catastrophic:
"The denial of everything transcending experience means inevitably...the denial of truth. With the denial of objective truth there is no escape from the relativism of 'man is the measure of all things." (The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America, George H. Nash, pp. 32-33)
The brilliant visionary, Robert Hugh Benson (1871-1914), an English Catholic priest saw through the scientific pretenses of one-dimensional natural science and its' primary doctrine, evolutionary theory. Benson predicted that naturalism and evolutionary thinking would prepare Westerners and Americans not only to embrace but to worship and adore Antichrist, for this human-god (Mr. Felsenburgh) is the first perfected product of nature and evolutionary forces. Mr. Felsenburgh has arisen and he is,
"....the first perfect product of that new cosmopolitan creation to which the world has labored throughout its history..." (p 85)
He transfixes men, and they excitedly declare they have seen,
"...the Son of Man,' the 'Savior of the world,' we knew Him in our hearts as soon as we saw Him, as soon as He stood there. It was like a glory around his head (and now we) understand it all... It was He for whom we have waited so long; and He has come, bringing Peace and Goodwill in His hands." (pp. 85, 89)
Christianity failed, it divided people. It made men feel guilty. But now Jehovah is gone. He never existed at all except as a hideous nightmare. Now at long last man's natural Savior has arisen:
"The reign of God has really begun (and) we are all partakers of God" because God is in everything, including all men...."Jehovah has fallen. He is in His grave." In His place is the evolved Son of Man, a god indeed and a man as well..."a god because human and a man because so divine." (ibid, pp. 93, 95)
Sorry but Boyd Bushman is a kook. In the youtube video, he has what is essential a TV degaussing coil over an aluminum plate and when he plugs it into A/C, it levitates an inch or two. The coil induces eddy currents in the aluminum, it would also work with copper. He also mentions how a magnet dropped down a copper tube slows down as if it is some unexplained effect and again, it is well known, the magnet induces eddy currents in the copper tube which slow the magnet.
There’s even a youtube where someone tries to recreate Boyd’s experiment and it’s obvious that one ball is dropped earlier than the other yet they claim it proves Boyd’s theory.
Yes, I create anti-gravity and what do I do, why I get witnesses to sign affidavits, yeah that makes sense.
It just seems to me, dearest sister in Christ, that you can't cram an X-dimensional universe into a 4D description.
Thank you for your kind words of support!
Here Robert Gurney is echoing statements made by Richard Lewontin, an American evolutionary biologist, geneticist, formerly Professor of Biology and Alexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology at Harvard:
We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.That is, such "scientists" make themselves the measure of the Reality they investigate. Talk about the tail wagging the dog! Talk about the relentless solipsistic circularity of their reasoning.
It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
… When faced with questions that they really don’t know how to answer — like “How does a single cell turn into a mouse?” or “How did the structure and activity of Beethoven’s brain result in Opus 131?” — the only thing that natural scientists know how to do is turn them into other questions that they do know how to answer. That is, scientists do what they already know how to do.
Evidently science is no longer regarded as the pursuit of the truth of Reality, by these people at least. But if it is not, then why should we listen to what they have to say? Their minds are closed to truth. Evidently, they consider it "optional," and they have opted out.
Thank you, dear spirited, for your illuminating essay/post!
Oh so true, dearest sister in Christ! Dear Kevmo, please note.
I’m an ethernet expert. People have been sending messages over ethernet for decades, trillions of them, and all of them are probabilistic. In 100Mbit ethernet, the defined bit error rate is 10^-9, and the retransmission protocol calls for 16 times before the transmitter node gives up. There has been plenty of communication, plenty of information sent over copper wires, a 300 page specification agreed to, and $billions made without anyone having to redefine the word “information”. There would be no point to it.
Thanks. I gather it makes sense that Shannon’s model hasn’t made it into the colloquial because people were successfully sending information over electrical wires for a hundred years before he came along. The term had meaning long before he decided its meaning should be more precise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegraph
Cooke and Wheatstone had their first commercial success with a telegraph installed on the Great Western Railway over the 13 miles (21 km) from Paddington station to West Drayton in 1838. Indeed, this was the first commercial telegraph in the world.
Spirited: Such 'scientists' exemplify the epidemic of will-to-power and magical reasoning that passes for much of our Constitutional law, politics, news reporting, higher education, and so on. The sickness is not confined to science but spread over and within our culture.
Indeed, dear spirited. In recent times, the "culture war" has become the culture Armageddon....
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear spirited irish!
People dealt with gravity and motion long before Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica and Einstein's Relativity - and people were communicating long before Shannon's Mathematical Theory of Communications.
When we use terms such as gravity and motion the terms retain the meanings assigned by Newton and Einstein's seminal theories. Likewise, I assert that the term information should retain the meaning from Shannon's seminal theory which gave rise to "Information Theory" as a branch of Mathematics.
By the way, Shannon's definition much more closely aligns to the original late 14th century meaning of the word which was the "act of informing." Modern common usage reduces it to the message itself rather than the successful communication of the message.
Indeed. Thank God for you, dear brother in Christ!
Irrelevant.
***Relevant. dearest sister in Christ!
People dealt with gravity and motion and information long before those theorists came along, just as you acknowledge.
Maybe the terms “retain the meanings assigned” by those AFTERWARDS and maybe they don’t. To IMPOSE such definitions afterwards upon colloquial expressionism is a battle more for the grammarian rather than the classic linguist. I take a linguistic approach rather than a a grammarian approach.
There is no doubt that Newton’s observations generated such a fantastic reconsideration of terms such as gravity and acceleration that history was changed. But Shannon did not change the history associated with sending “information” over a point-to-point communication network, such as ethernet or the telegraph.
Whales are larger than elephants but water density may help mitigate against gravitational issues. Some early dinosaurs may have been exclusively water creatures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.