Replies

It was Flambaum, along with John Webb and colleagues, who first seriously challenged alpha's status as a constant in 1998. Then, after exhaustively analysing how the light from distant quasars was absorbed by intervening gas clouds, they claimed in 2001 that alpha had increased by a few parts in 105 in the past 12 billion years. ...

Detecting or constraining the possible time variations of fundamental physical constants is an important step toward a complete understanding of basic physics and hence the world in which we live. A step in which astrophysics proves most useful.

Previous astronomical measurements of the fine structure constant - the dimensionless number that determines the strength of interactions between charged particles and electromagnetic fields - suggested that this particular constant is increasing very slightly with time. If confirmed, this would have very profound implications for our understanding of fundamental physics.

New studies, conducted using the UVES spectrograph on Kueyen, one of the 8.2-m telescopes of ESO's Very Large Telescope array at Paranal (Chile), secured new data with unprecedented quality. These data, combined with a very careful analysis, have provided the strongest astronomical constraints to date on the possible variation of the fine structure constant. They show that, contrary to previous claims, no evidence exist for assuming a time variation of this fundamental constant.

-- New Quasar Studies Keep Fundamental Physical Constant Constant

Berkeley Lab Physicist Challenges Speed Of Gravity Claim

Albert Einstein may have been right that gravity travels at the same speed as light but, contrary to a claim made earlier this year, the theory has not yet been proven. A scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) says the announcement by two scientists, widely reported this past January, about the speed of gravity was wrong.

Stuart Samuel, a participating scientist with the Theory Group of Berkeley Lab's Physics Division, in a paper published in Physical Review Letters, has demonstrated that an "ill-advised" assumption made in the earlier claim led to an unwarranted conclusion.

"Einstein may be correct about the speed of light but the experiment in question neither confirms nor refutes this," says Samuel. "In effect, the experiment was measuring effects associated with the propagation of light, not the speed of gravity."

According to Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, light and gravity travel at the same speed, about 186,000 miles (300,000 kilometers) per second. Most scientists believe this is true but the assumption was that it could only be proven through the detection of gravity waves. Sergei Kopeikin, a University of Missouri physicist and Edward Fomalont, an astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), believed there was an alternative.

On September 8, 2002, the planet Jupiter passed almost directly in front of the radiowaves coming from a quasar, a star-like object in the center of a galaxy billions of light-years away. When this happened, Jupiter's gravity bent the quasar's radiowaves, causing a slight delay in their arrival on Earth. Kopeikin believed the length of time that the radiowaves would be delayed would depend upon the speed at which gravity propagates from Jupiter.

To measure the delay, Fomalont set up an interferometry system using the NRAO's Very Long Baseline Array, a group of ten 25-meter radio telescopes distributed across the continental United States, Hawaii, and the Virgin Islands, plus the 100-meter Effelsberg radio telescope in Germany. Kopeikin then took the data and calculated velocity-dependent effects. His calculations appeared to show that the speed at which gravity was being propagated from Jupiter matched the speed of light to within 20-percent. The scientists announced their findings in January at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society.

Samuel argues that Kopeikin erred when he based his calculations on Jupiter's position at the time the quasar's radiowaves reached Earth rather than the position of Jupiter when the radiowaves passed by that planet.

"The original idea behind the experiment was to use the effects of Jupiter's motion on quasar-signal time-delays to measure the propagation of gravity," he says. "If gravity acts instantly, then the gravitational force would be determined by the position of Jupiter at the time when the quasar's signal passed by the planet. If, on the other hand, the speed of gravity were finite, then the strength of gravity would be determined by the position of Jupiter at a slightly earlier time so as to allow for the propagation of gravitational effects."

Samuel was able to simplify the calculations of the velocity-dependent effects by shifting from a reference frame in which Jupiter is moving, as was used by Kopeikin, to a reference frame in which Jupiter is stationary and Earth is moving. When he did this, Samuel found a formula that differed from the one used by Kopeikin to analyze the data. Under this new formula, the velocity-dependent effects were considerably smaller. Even though Fomalont was able to measure a time delay of about 5 trillionths of a second this was not nearly sensitive enough to measure the actual gravitational influence of Jupiter.

"With the correct formula, the effects of the motion of Jupiter on the quasar-signal time-delay are at least 100 times and perhaps even a thousand times smaller than could have been measured by the array of radio telescopes that Fomalont used," Samuel says. "There's a reasonable chance that such measurements might one day be used to define the speed of gravity but they just aren't doable with our current technology."

"... (HOWEVER) Even though these new results represent a significant improvement in our knowledge of the possible (non-) variation of one of the fundamental physical constants, the present set of data would in principle still allow variations that are comparatively large compared to those resulting from the measurements from the Oklo natural reactor.

Nevertheless, further progress in this field is expected with the new very-high-accuracy radial velocity spectrometer HARPS on ESO's 3.6-m telescope at the La Silla Observatory (Chile). This spectrograph works at the limit of modern technology and is mostly used to detect new planets around stars other than the Sun - it may provide an order of magnitude improvement on the determination of the variation of alpha..."

Hum, it doesn't seem that this is lock-on solid proof that c is a constant. Not at all.