Research Discussion: Another Stake In The Heart Of Aether

Another Stake In The Heart Of Aether
Posts: 21

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)

HVAC
2010-04-17 06:45:03 EST
Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
best game in town.

Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.

The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."

"If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
are very slim."

In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
cannot be directly detected.

In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.

Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.

They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
cluster data.

"This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."

The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
dimensional theories and string theory.

A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.

To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
complete agreement between observation and theory.

"Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."

Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
estimates to galaxy clusters.

Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
gravity.

"Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."

The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.

NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.



Ed. Note: Boo Fucking Hoo

Bert
2010-04-17 09:40:41 EST
On Apr 17, 6:45 am, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
> Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
> NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
> best game in town.
>
> Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
> observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
> bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
> to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
> works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.
>
> The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
> Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."
>
> "If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
> other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
> Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
> the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
> are very slim."
>
> In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
> theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
> accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
> explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
> constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
> space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
> cannot be directly detected.
>
> In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
> form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
> modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
> matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
> opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.
>
> Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
> the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
> theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.
>
> They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
> Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
> corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
> modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
> cluster data.
>
> "This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
> General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
> results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
> scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."
>
> The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
> to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
> opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
> cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
> modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
> dimensional theories and string theory.
>
> A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
> directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
> now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
> laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
> possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.
>
> To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
> Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
> time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
> complete agreement between observation and theory.
>
> "Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
> massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
> billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
> Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
> National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
> and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
> General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."
>
> Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
> clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
> telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
> 71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
> using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
> estimates to galaxy clusters.
>
> Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
> Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
> clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
> provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
> supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
> which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
> the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
> addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
> gravity.
>
> "Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
> understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
> NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
> acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
> cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."
>
> The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
> 80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
> Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
> Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
> The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
> the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
> authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
> of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.
>
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
> Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
> The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
> and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.
>
> Ed. Note:  Boo Fucking Hoo

In 1951 my last thought to discuss with Einstein was my convex curving
of space. But just at that time a car came to pick him up,and take him
to south station.We only discussed gravity and inertia. I should have
gotten on the train with him and could discuss the mysteries of the
universe. He gave me a signed book. It was one of the greatest honors
of my life to have shaken his hand. It took place 8am at Erma Rings
house Newton Center Mass. I was building a deck in back of her house.
It was almost complete,and we talked for 15 minutes sitting on it.
TreBert

Hagar
2010-04-17 11:57:35 EST

"bert" <herbertglazier79@msn.com> wrote in message
news:53103871-e80c-4a69-be2d-d2865cd84f6a@x12g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 17, 6:45 am, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey, Beeert ... I see a Nobel in your future ... this stuff is in total
agreement with your convex/concave spatial distortive regeneration
theory ... and they said "There'll never be another Einstein" ...



Brad Guth
2010-04-17 12:21:17 EST
On Apr 17, 3:45 am, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
> Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
> NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
> best game in town.
>
> Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
> observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
> bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
> to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
> works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.
>
> The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
> Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."
>
> "If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
> other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
> Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
> the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
> are very slim."
>
> In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
> theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
> accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
> explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
> constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
> space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
> cannot be directly detected.
>
> In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
> form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
> modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
> matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
> opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.
>
> Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
> the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
> theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.
>
> They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
> Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
> corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
> modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
> cluster data.
>
> "This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
> General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
> results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
> scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."
>
> The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
> to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
> opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
> cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
> modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
> dimensional theories and string theory.
>
> A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
> directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
> now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
> laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
> possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.
>
> To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
> Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
> time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
> complete agreement between observation and theory.
>
> "Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
> massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
> billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
> Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
> National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
> and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
> General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."
>
> Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
> clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
> telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
> 71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
> using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
> estimates to galaxy clusters.
>
> Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
> Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
> clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
> provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
> supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
> which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
> the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
> addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
> gravity.
>
> "Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
> understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
> NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
> acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
> cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."
>
> The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
> 80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
> Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
> Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
> The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
> the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
> authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
> of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.
>
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
> Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
> The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
> and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.
>
> Ed. Note:  Boo Fucking Hoo

The nonzero mass of photons is affected by other mass, and/or pulled
or diverted off-course by gravity (hark matter lensing if you like).
So what's new?

For all we know, our solar system is moving along at twice the
supposed speed/velocity of light, along with everything else we can
see or detect, because it's all relative to whatever's outside of what
little we can detect.

~ BG

Brad Guth
2010-04-17 14:04:13 EST
On Apr 17, 3:45 am, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
> Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
> NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
> best game in town.
>
> Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
> observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
> bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
> to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
> works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.
>
> The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
> Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."
>
> "If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
> other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
> Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
> the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
> are very slim."
>
> In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
> theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
> accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
> explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
> constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
> space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
> cannot be directly detected.
>
> In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
> form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
> modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
> matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
> opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.
>
> Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
> the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
> theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.
>
> They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
> Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
> corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
> modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
> cluster data.
>
> "This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
> General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
> results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
> scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."
>
> The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
> to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
> opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
> cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
> modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
> dimensional theories and string theory.
>
> A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
> directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
> now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
> laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
> possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.
>
> To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
> Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
> time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
> complete agreement between observation and theory.
>
> "Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
> massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
> billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
> Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
> National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
> and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
> General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."
>
> Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
> clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
> telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
> 71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
> using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
> estimates to galaxy clusters.
>
> Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
> Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
> clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
> provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
> supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
> which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
> the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
> addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
> gravity.
>
> "Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
> understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
> NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
> acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
> cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."
>
> The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
> 80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
> Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
> Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
> The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
> the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
> authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
> of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.
>
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
> Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
> The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
> and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.
>
> Ed. Note:  Boo Fucking Hoo

The nonzero mass of photons is affected by other mass, and/or pulled
or diverted off-course by gravity (dark matter lensing if you like),
or via energy that's not understood.
So what's new?

For all we know, our solar system and home galaxy is moving along at
twice the supposed speed/velocity of light, along with everything else
we can see or detect, because it's all relative to whatever's outside
of what little our best instruments can detect.

Is it even possible for any photon to go directly through a proton or
neutron? (I don't think so)

~ BG

Double-A
2010-04-17 14:21:35 EST
On Apr 17, 6:40 am, bert <herbertglazie...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Apr 17, 6:45 am, HVAC <mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
> > Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
> > NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
> > best game in town.
>
> > Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
> > observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
> > bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
> > to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
> > works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.
>
> > The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
> > Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."
>
> > "If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
> > other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
> > Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
> > the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
> > are very slim."
>
> > In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
> > theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
> > accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
> > explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
> > constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
> > space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
> > cannot be directly detected.
>
> > In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
> > form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
> > modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
> > matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
> > opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.
>
> > Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
> > the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
> > theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> > microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.
>
> > They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
> > Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
> > corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
> > modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
> > cluster data.
>
> > "This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
> > General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
> > results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
> > scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."
>
> > The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
> > to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
> > opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
> > cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
> > modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
> > dimensional theories and string theory.
>
> > A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
> > directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
> > now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
> > laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
> > possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.
>
> > To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
> > Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
> > time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
> > complete agreement between observation and theory.
>
> > "Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
> > massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
> > billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
> > Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
> > National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
> > and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
> > General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."
>
> > Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
> > clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
> > telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
> > 71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
> > using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> > microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
> > estimates to galaxy clusters.
>
> > Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
> > Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
> > clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
> > provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
> > supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
> > which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
> > the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
> > addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
> > gravity.
>
> > "Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
> > understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
> > NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
> > acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
> > cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."
>
> > The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
> > 80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
> > Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
> > Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
> > The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
> > the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
> > authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
> > of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.
>
> > NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
> > Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
> > The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
> > and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.
>
> > Ed. Note:  Boo Fucking Hoo
>
> In 1951 my last thought to discuss with Einstein was my convex curving
> of space. But just at that time a car came to pick him up,and take him
> to south station.We only discussed gravity and inertia. I should have
> gotten on the train with him and could discuss the mysteries of the
> universe. He gave me a signed book. It was one of the greatest honors
> of my life to have shaken his hand.   It took place 8am at Erma Rings
> house Newton Center Mass. I was building a deck in back of her house.
> It was almost complete,and we talked for 15 minutes sitting on it.
> TreBert


Did he give you any tips on finishing up the deck?

Double-A


Painius
2010-04-20 07:36:36 EST
"HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eebc33f9-71f7-4771-90b3-99bdf354d2bc@h27g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> Two new and independent studies have put Einstein's General Theory of
> Relativity to the test like never before. These results, made using
> NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, show Einstein's theory is still the
> best game in town.
>
> Each team of scientists took advantage of extensive Chandra
> observations of galaxy clusters, the largest objects in the Universe
> bound together by gravity. One result undercuts a rival gravity model
> to General Relativity, while the other shows that Einstein's theory
> works over a vast range of times and distances across the cosmos.
>
> The first finding significantly weakens a competitor to General
> Relativity known as "f(R) gravity."
>
> "If General Relativity were the heavyweight boxing champion, this
> other theory was hoping to be the upstart contender," said Fabian
> Schmidt of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who led
> the study. "Our work shows that the chances of its upsetting the champ
> are very slim."
>
> In recent years, physicists have turned their attention to competing
> theories to General Relativity as a possible explanation for the
> accelerated expansion of the universe. Currently, the most popular
> explanation for the acceleration is the so-called cosmological
> constant, which can be understood as energy that exists in empty
> space. This energy is referred to as dark energy to emphasize that it
> cannot be directly detected.
>
> In the f(R) theory, the cosmic acceleration comes not from an exotic
> form of energy but from a modification of the gravitational force. The
> modified force also affects the rate at which small enhancements of
> matter can grow over the eons to become massive clusters of galaxies,
> opening up the possibility of a sensitive test of the theory.
>
> Schmidt and colleagues used mass estimates of 49 galaxy clusters in
> the local universe from Chandra observations, and compared them with
> theoretical model predictions and studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, and the large-scale distribution of galaxies.
>
> They found no evidence that gravity is different from General
> Relativity on scales larger than 130 million light years. This limit
> corresponds to a hundred-fold improvement on the bounds of the
> modified gravitational force's range that can be set without using the
> cluster data.
>
> "This is the strongest ever constraint set on an alternative to
> General Relativity on such large distance scales," said Schmidt. "Our
> results show that we can probe gravity stringently on cosmological
> scales by using observations of galaxy clusters."
>
> The reason for this dramatic improvement in constraints can be traced
> to the greatly enhanced gravitational forces acting in clusters as
> opposed to the universal background expansion of the universe. The
> cluster-growth technique also promises to be a good probe of other
> modified gravity scenarios, such as models motivated by higher-
> dimensional theories and string theory.
>
> A second, independent study also bolsters General Relativity by
> directly testing it across cosmological distances and times. Up until
> now, General Relativity had been verified only using experiments from
> laboratory to Solar System scales, leaving the door open to the
> possibility that General Relativity breaks down on much larger scales.
>
> To probe this question, a group at Stanford University compared
> Chandra observations of how rapidly galaxy clusters have grown over
> time to the predictions of General Relativity. The result is nearly
> complete agreement between observation and theory.
>
> "Einstein's theory succeeds again, this time in calculating how many
> massive clusters have formed under gravity's pull over the last five
> billion years," said David Rapetti of the Kavli Institute for Particle
> Astrophysics and Cosmology (KIPAC) at Stanford University and SLAC
> National Accelerator Laboratory, who led the new study. "Excitingly
> and reassuringly, our results are the most robust consistency test of
> General Relativity yet carried out on cosmological scales."
>
> Rapetti and his colleagues based their results on a sample of 238
> clusters detected across the whole sky by the now-defunct ROSAT X-ray
> telescope. These data were enhanced by detailed mass measurements for
> 71 distant clusters using Chandra, and 23 relatively nearby clusters
> using ROSAT, and combined with studies of supernovas, the cosmic
> microwave background, the distribution of galaxies and distance
> estimates to galaxy clusters.
>
> Galaxy clusters are important objects in the quest to understand the
> Universe as a whole. Because the observations of the masses of galaxy
> clusters are directly sensitive to the properties of gravity, they
> provide crucial information. Other techniques such as observations of
> supernovas or the distribution of galaxies measure cosmic distances,
> which depend only on the expansion rate of the universe. In contrast,
> the cluster technique used by Rapetti and his colleagues measure in
> addition the growth rate of the cosmic structure, as driven by
> gravity.
>
> "Cosmic acceleration represents a great challenge to our modern
> understanding of physics," said Rapetti's co-author Adam Mantz of
> NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "Measurements of
> acceleration have highlighted how little we know about gravity at
> cosmic scales, but we're now starting to push back our ignorance."
>
> The paper by Fabian Schmidt was published in Physics Review D, Volume
> 80 in October 2009 and is co-authored by Alexey Vikhlinin of the
> Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge,
> Massachusetts, and Wayne Hu of the University of Chicago, Illinois.
> The paper by David Rapetti was recently accepted for publication in
> the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is co-
> authored by Mantz, Steve Allen of KIPAC at Stanford and Harald Ebeling
> of the Institute for Astronomy in Hawaii.
>
> NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., manages the
> Chandra program for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington.
> The Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory controls Chandra's science
> and flight operations from Cambridge, Mass.
>
>
>
> Ed. Note: Boo Fucking Hoo

They look out over billions of years (ago) and they can
assert this stuff for NOW?

I wonder if they realize that what they SEE is the result
of what has supposedly happened over the period of
seven or eight billion years since the Universe began?
They couldn't possibly have any clue what has happened
to all those galaxies and clusters SINCE five billion years
ago, can they?

I'm not contesting the validity of the theories of relativity.
However, i think it's the height of human hubris and
arrogance to think we know something about NOW by
looking back to what happened 130 million years ago and
longer. Even here on Earth one can note a whole lot of
change in 130 million years.

I don't think they even had air-conditioning back then, did
they?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "We turn not older with years, but newer
every day."
> Emily Dickinson

P.P.S.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paine_Ellsworth



HVAC
2010-04-20 11:00:57 EST

"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote in message
news:4bcd91c5$0$4869$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
> They look out over billions of years (ago) and they can
> assert this stuff for NOW?


We have a pretty good handle of the visible
universe from 13 billion years ago to now.

We can see the increase in the universe's
expansion as well as galactic evolution over
the same time frame.




> I wonder if they realize that what they SEE is the result
> of what has supposedly happened over the period of
> seven or eight billion years since the Universe began?
> They couldn't possibly have any clue what has happened
> to all those galaxies and clusters SINCE five billion years
> ago, can they?



Not those particular galaxies, no.

But we can sample galaxies over the lifetime
of the universe and extrapolate.




> I'm not contesting the validity of the theories of relativity.
> However, i think it's the height of human hubris and
> arrogance to think we know something about NOW by
> looking back to what happened 130 million years ago and
> longer.



Well, we can determine what life forms existed on
Earth 500 million years ago and compare it to life
that existed 200 million years ago, and 100 million
years ago, etc. and extrapolate how life has evolved
on Earth. Why do you have a problem with doing
basically the same thing with the universe?

It's not hubris, it's knowledge.

If we said that we knew everything there is to know,
THAT would be hubris.

I don't see anyone claiming that.... Do you?







> Even here on Earth one can note a whole lot of
> change in 130 million years.



> I don't think they even had air-conditioning back then, did
> they?


Ug, the Maytag man, wasn't around until 50,000 years ago.





--
Faith is believing what you know ain't so" -Mark Twain



Painius
2010-04-20 13:37:57 EST
"HVAC" <mr.hvac@gmail.com> wrote in message...
news:hqkfj7$1ps$1@hvac.motzarella.org...
> "Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote in message
> news:4bcd91c5$0$4869$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>> I don't think they even had air-conditioning back then, did
>> they?
>
> Ug, the Maytag man, wasn't around until 50,000 years ago.

That explains the reliability of Maytags, at least.

I'll give you this, tho, Harley... you're not quite as big a dick
as Androcles. No, i'd say you're only about half a dick. <g>

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "We turn not older with years, but newer
every day."
> Emily Dickinson

P.P.S.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paine_Ellsworth



Androcles
2010-04-20 13:39:42 EST
Paininarse, you are such a stupid cunt, the height of human hubris
and arrogance.



Page: 1 2 3   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron