Speed of Gravity Results 'Incorrect,' Physicist Says

Space.Com ^ | 16 January 2003 | Robert Roy Britt

[NukeMan]

Ping - first criticisms

[Support Free Republic]

Just 17 cents per day

Click The Logo To Donate

[Teacher317]

Speed of Gravity Results 'Incorrect,' Physicist Says

Out there stirrin' up trouble again, eh?

[The_Victor]

What's really cool to me about this is two people who are good friends can debate about the truth, disagree, knowing that one or both of them must be wrong, but still be friends. They must not be democRATs (or at least not deeply involved with the party).

[yendu bwam]

This is an interesting question - because it is not exactly clear theoretically (at least per my understanding) that gravity waves must travel at the speed of light.

[reagan_fanatic]

Speed of Gravity Results 'Incorrect,' Physicist Says

Faulty radar gun cited as cause...

[Vic3O3]

ping

[strela]

GEEK FIGHT! GEEK FIGHT!

[Oldeconomybuyer]

[Phil V.]

This whole thing is a ploy by the creationist Freepers to make the evolutionist Freepers look bad.

(somebody needs to be banned today)

[Noslrac]

We're all gonna die!</sarcasm>

[Mr. Mojo]

Professional jealousy, nothing more. The careers of a lot of these scientists are completely wrapped up in one scientific dogma or another, and any discovery that challenges their specific one is understandably met with jealously, rage, etc. The "gravity is instantaneous" crowd is the suffering party in this instance. Forgive me if I shed no tears for them.

[Moonman62]

The careers of a lot of these scientists are completely wrapped up in one scientific dogma or another, and any discovery that challenges their specific one is understandably met with jealously, rage, etc.

I agree, but I'd call it scientific assumptions rather than dogma. All the scientists involved in this issue seem to be of the non-kook variety, and they know that eventually their assumptions will either be confirmed or overturned by increasingly improved observations of nature.

[Mr. Mojo]

I'd call it scientific assumptions rather than dogma.

Point taken.

All the scientists involved in this issue seem to be of the non-kook variety

Most, but not all. There's always Tom Van Flandren and his entourage of groupies.

[Physicist]

The "gravity is instantaneous" crowd is the suffering party in this instance.

You could hardly put Peter van Nieuwenhuisen ("Mr. Supergravity" we called him, when I was at Stony Brook) in that category.

I'm a little perplexed at the controversy, as this experimental methodology has been "on the table" for some time. You'd think these objections would have been raised from serious quarters sooner.

[unspun]

Well said. Things aren't so different now, from the times of Gallileo, etc.; it's just that different folks are "on top" from one time to another.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

If it were true, a big door would open to wild theories of how the universe might work on the grandest scales, including its possible interaction with other universes or other dimensions. Even a slight difference in the speeds of light and gravity would give theorists nifty wiggle room to craft bizarre ideas about the mechanics of the unseen universe.

So why not just assume away and come up with all these other wonderful possibilities then check them for validty (even though based on possibly a false asumption)? Aren't many mathematical principles (theorems and such) assumptions which lead to seemingly valid conclusions?

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Could you offer a précis of the observations, and how they are used to measure the speed of gravity, and the arguments against this interpertation?

[DensaMensa]

}Professional jealousy, nothing more. The careers of a lot of these scientists are completely wrapped up in one scientific dogma or another, and any discovery that challenges their specific one is understandably met with jealously, rage, etc.

Well put. And a change in fact or underlying assumption no more changes their "theology" and passion for it than is the case with historians, religionists or others who have staked their career on a position. It is a myth that scientists and mathematicians are more "dispassionate" and "objective" than mere mortals.