Replies

"But the point is that the incoming radio waves would bend around Jupiter in slightly different ways if Jupiter's gravitational field "instantly" followed Jupiter around as Jupiter moved in its orbit, versus whether Jupiter's gravitational field lagged a bit behind it."

Their admitted margin for error in the experiment was .25 times the speed of light, a figure far too large to measure speeds drasticly greater than C.

You're *way* off base here. First, try rereading the portion of my post which you quoted above until you begin to understand it.

They examined the manner in which the incoming radio waves were bent by Jupiter's gravity. The manner of the bending would vary in characteristic ways if Jupiter's gravity field moved with Jupiter instantaneously, versus propagating at the speed of light (or any other velocity).

The manner of the bending was consistent with a gravity propagation speed of between 0.70-1.20 times the speed of light. QED.

And contrary to your amusing claim that a .25c margin of error is "far too large to measure speeds drasticly greater than C", you demonstrate a wildly simplistic view of how margins of error are calculated. When they say that the "actual figure was 0.95 times light speed, but with a large error margin of plus or minus 0.25", it specifically means that while there were uncertainties in the measurements (as is always the case), they were such that even taking into account the necessary amount of fuzziness in the measurements, they were still good enough to conclusively *exclude* any results less than 0.70c or greater than 1.20c. That's what margin of error *means*, son -- it means that the measurements were good enough to exclude the possibility of results outside the given range. So by definition, the possible error *was* good enough to "measure" (and subsequently rule out) "speeds drasticly greater than C".

If you have any objection to the *actual* methodology used, feel free to present it. But so far you haven't even demonstrated that you understand the nature of the actual measurements and calculations made.

My money is on Isaac Newton. The Speed of Gravity is far more likely to be substantially faster than the Speed of Light because gravity easily bends Light while Light does not appreciably bend Gravity.

What box of Cracker Jacks did you get your understanding of physics from?

Please explain how, exactly, you believe that the speed of propagation of light and/or gravity in any way relates to whether one would "bend" the other. This ought to be amusing.

If E=MC^2, and if Gravity (G) is equal to the Energy of a Mass (i.e. G=E/M), then G=C^2.

Except that it isn't, unless you can explain in good detail how you managed to pull that novel assertion out of your hind end, *and* provide sufficient evidence for it.

Thus, I'll go with Newton and speculate on a much faster speed of Gravity, along the lines of the Speed of Light squared.

We await your experimental evidence.

All that this experiment measured was the speed of radio waves as they bent around Jupiter.

No, as a matter of fact, it did not. It measured the deformation of incoming radio waves as a gravitation source (Jupiter) moved across it, and showed that the manner of the deformation is consistent only with the scenario where the gravitational field propagates outward from the source at near the speed of light. QED.

Deal with it.

You act as if you think they somehow timed the incoming radio waves with a stopwatch and mistook that speed for the "speed of gravity". That quite simply is not the case, and it only reveals your own poor understanding of what was actually done. The actual methodology in no way could mistake the speed of radio waves for the speed of the gravitational field whose effects were being examined.

1 sure fire way to tell is to blow up the sun and see if we hurl into deep space instantly, wait for a period of time under 8 1/3 minutes, or go 8 1/3 minutes or longer, to check the speed. If gravity travels, it should have mass. Light has photons, and eletricity has electrons( or holes if you took electronics in college). I always assumed gravity was a force, not a substance. Substance is limited to the speed of light, at least in the definable diminsions. Gravity can be tested in space by hurling an object at a large object, such as a star. The object may accelerate, but will never reach light speed. Ergo the force of gravity is light speed or slower. I guess you could argue it reached the speed of light when it burned up near the surface of the star, but then it would not still be the original object. A conversion would be neccesary. Once it burned up, you could no longer measure its speed, only the flash of light seen at conversion.

I'll go with the speed of light for the speed of gravity. Magnetic waves and electromagnetic waves are close enough to identical and electromagnetic waves are light speed, ie, radio waves.

"Please explain how, exactly, you believe that the speed of propagation of light and/or gravity in any way relates to whether one would "bend" the other."

It's rather easy, actually. Objects emit more Gravitons the faster they travel. Thus, at speed, Light can be bent by Gravity. Likewise, when Light is slowed down, Gravity affects it less and less.

This was experimentally verified in the lab by the recent demonstrations wherein Light was reduced in speed to under 30 miles per hour. At that speed, Gravity no longer bent it appreciably. Yet speed it up to its natural rate and once again Gravity bends it.

Heck, you can see that Gravity bends Light by simply holding your thumb between your eye and a light source and looking at the edges, however, this phenomenon doesn't happen when Light is traveling at slower speeds because so few Gravitons are being emitted.

If E=MC^2, and if Gravity (G) is equal to the Energy of a Mass (i.e. G=E/M), then G=C^2.

"Except that it isn't, unless you can explain in good detail how you managed to pull that novel assertion out of your hind end, *and* provide sufficient evidence for it." - Dan Day

There are really only two possibilities being discussed here:

1. That G = C^2
2. That G = C

I.e. either Gravity travels at the speed of light (C) or else it travels at the speed of light squared (C^2).

Now, given the two above assumptions, lets work with one equation with which neither of us will argue, that E=MC^2.

Now, this means that our two above possibilities would work out to this by substituting the two possible values for G:

Postulate 1. E=MG ---> Where G=C^2
Postulate 2. E=MCG ---> Where G=C

Fair enough. Are you with me so far?

Now, if postulate #1 is correct, then G = C^2 = E/M.

If postulate #2 is correct, then G = E/(MC) = C.