NASA Collects Gravity Data to Test Einstein's Theory

Space.com ^ | November 17th, 2005 | Patrick Barry and Tony Phillips

[RightWhale]

First, though, there are a lot of data to analyze. Stay tuned.

They need to be very sure before they announce the null result. Relativity is an illusion.

[RadioAstronomer]

I heard the lead NASA scientist is named Zefram Cochrane.

LOL! One of the physicists on this project is a personal friend of mine. I am very glad it made it up there.

[RadioAstronomer]

I have a similar type of gyro (in my "junk box") I use to show how different gyros are made and work. The sphere in mine is made of beryllium as apposed to quartz that was used on the Gravity Probe B.

[Southack]

"They need to be very sure before they announce the null result. Relativity is an illusion."

Exactly.

The scientific thought police are going to blast this experiment when it shows that Einstein was (again) wrong. Besides Hubble showing one flaw in GR, this experiment will show what we should have already perceived...that if Gravity was only a distortion in space & time, rather than a Force, that it wouldn't move objects.

[Southack]

"The sphere in mine is made of beryllium as apposed to quartz that was used on the Gravity Probe B."

What's Be selling for these days, $3,000 per gram or some such?!

[RadioAstronomer]

What's Be selling for these days, $3,000 per gram or some such?!

No. About $400 per pound.

[ml1954]

Southack: The scientific thought police are going to blast this experiment when it shows that Einstein was (again) wrong.

Southack: What's Be selling for these days, $3,000 per gram or some such?!

RadioAstronomer: About $400 per pound.

Too funny.

[Southack]

Product Line BE1107

Beryllium Foil	610 (2)
0.025 mm (thickness). Purity 99.9%. Temper as rolled. Condition vacuum tight

Catalogue item no	Weight/pc g	Dimensions	Quantity	Price in US dollars	Add to order/quote
BE110701	0.029	0.025 x 25 x 25mm	1pc	$860.00
BE110702	"	0.025 x 25 x 25mm	2pcs	$1543.00
BE110708	0.116	0.025 x 50 x 50mm	1pc	$2902.00

Hazards — very toxic. To maintain vacuum tightness store and use in a dry atmosphere below 50% relative humidity. Typical analysis ppm: BeO 130, Fe 180, Al 10, Mg 10, Si 80, C 200, Cr< 10, Co<5, Cu 10, Pb<1, Mn 30, Mo<10, Ni 50, Ca<10, Zn<50, Ag<1, Ti<10

[Physicist]

How would anyone know that there isn't a rogue force out there as yet still unidentified?

All the more reason to perform the experiment. Rigorously testing general relativity can make a physicist's career. Discovering a new force would make a physicist's name immortal. A Nobel Prize would be the least of it.

[unlearner]

When the first cracks in relativity appear, if it ever happens, it will be hard to have the new theory ready to go. That hardly makes the first scientists to address the problem less real than the later ones.

The fact that relativity is incomplete is a "crack". Einstein, for all the positive accomplishments, never completed his pursuits to his own satisfaction.

The "first scientists" in my point are one's who have the easy answer, the answer that does not require thinking outside the box. You're right. That does not mean they are not scientists. They may be very good scientists. There are scientists who are better suited to the tasks like laboratory testing, and there are scientists who are better suited to theoretical explorations.

The next generation of breakthroughs will most likely come from those scientists who have a solid foundation in epistemology and philosophy, not merely methodology. They understand the reason behind the methods.

Scientific realists may be true scientists, but breakthrough theories like Einstein's come from minds not trapped by realism.

[ml1954]

But you didn't ask "what's the price of 'Beryllium Foil 0.025 mm (thickness). Purity 99.9%. Temper as rolled. Condition vacuum tight?"

[RadioAstronomer]

But you didn't ask "what's the price of 'Beryllium Foil 0.025 mm (thickness). Purity 99.9%. Temper as rolled. Condition vacuum tight?"

ROFL! :-)

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/beryllium/100301.pdf

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

What confuses me is WHY they have not done this experiment already .

[VadeRetro]

The next generation of breakthroughs will most likely come from those scientists who have a solid foundation in epistemology and philosophy, not merely methodology.

This strikes me as exceedingly unlikely. There is no evidence such subjects develop analytic and creative talents.

[phantomworker]

All the more reason to perform the experiment. Rigorously testing general relativity can make a physicist's career. Discovering a new force would make a physicist's name immortal. A Nobel Prize would be the least of it.

Well, what are you waiting for? :) !!!
There's enough brilliant minds on FR that could keep you grounded. Wouldn't that be cool!...

[RightWingAtheist]

We were able to test general relativity in the laboratory shortly after the Mossbauer Effect was discovered.

[RightWingAtheist]

No good theory is fully complete, and all trained scientists have a solid epistemological and philosophical framework from which they work from. And that framework (like conservatism itself) is solidly realist in its foundations.

[phantomworker]

No good theory is fully complete, and all trained scientists have a solid epistemological and philosophical framework from which they work from. And that framework (like conservatism itself) is solidly realist in its foundations.

Ah! I beg to differ. I am currently writing a paper for systems architecture (engineering, arguably not a science) that relies exclusively on heuristics. Heuristics being statements of common or contextual sense that aid in concept development. This is not a solid realistic framework, but rather is based on experience and interpretation. A common heuristic is "Simplify, simplify, simplify." I wonder how much science may be based on heuristics.

[Moonman62]

By doing it this way, the scientists should be able to… stay employed for a long time.

The Gravity Probe B project is already over 40 years old.

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker