Replies

I'm going to agree with Aruanan on this one. Kopeikin has released a press release on something that hasn't cleared peer review yet. It's extremely frustrating when someone tries to cheat the peer review process. At least have the good sense to wait until your paper has been accepted for publication!

space.com notes that the article is still in the peer review process because of problems from the reviewer.

On the other hand, if it is shot down, it is a vindication of the peer review process, something that Aruanan claimed was part of the corrupt scientific establishment just the other day.

On the other hand, if it is shot down, it is a vindication of the peer review process, something that Aruanan claimed was part of the corrupt scientific establishment just the other day.

Your characterization of what I said "just the other day" is an over-generalization. The funny thing about the reception of Kopeikin's interpretation of the results of his experiment is that it ignores previously published data* already subject to peer review on a very controversial subject that present quite a different outcome.

*T. Van Flandern and J.P. Vigier (2002), “Experimental Repeal of the Speed Limit for Gravitational, Electrodynamic, and Quantum Field Interactions”, Found.Phys. 32, 1031-1068.

T. Van Flandern (1998) , “The speed of gravity – What the experiments say”, Phys.Lett.A ,/em>250, 1-11.