infamous Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 Check out this address http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1473_1.asp Seems Albert was right after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 Check out this address http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1473_1.asp Seems Albert was right after all. That is a good article. Here's a copy of the press release from when this pair was discovered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted March 27, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 That is a good article. Here's a copy of the press release from when this pair was discovered. Thanks C1ay; Because this binary pulsar is positioned almost perfectly on edge to our field of view "88 degree angle", I believe we can expect a wealth of new information to be forth coming. I'm all excited, how about you?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleAl Posted March 28, 2005 Report Share Posted March 28, 2005 Deeply relativistic neutron star/pulsar binaries. Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aki Posted March 29, 2005 Report Share Posted March 29, 2005 Speaking of gravitational waves, any news from LIGO and LISA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted March 31, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Deeply relativistic neutron star/pulsar binaries. Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html Thanks UncleAl for these contributions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eMTee Posted April 26, 2005 Report Share Posted April 26, 2005 What gets me is that Albert E. was the greatest scientitist of all time, and yet even he didn't believe in creation by chance, but rather creation threw inteligent design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted April 26, 2005 Report Share Posted April 26, 2005 What gets me is that Albert E. was the greatest scientitist of all time, and yet even he didn't believe in creation by chance, but rather creation threw inteligent design. This is a topic for our Philosophy of Science forum. If you want to discuss this, please start a new thread there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 Speaking of gravitational waves, any news from LIGO and LISA?What I have heard of LIGO is they are still searching. I am concerned they are magnitudes off in resolution (maybe even as far as 1000 to 1e6 times). From LISA, last I heard funding is still there and construction is under way...It is expected to be accurate enough to detect most expected events. Now if Neutronstar mergers can be frequent enough, then maybe one or both devices can detectsuch a wave. What is so much guesswork is we don't know if there are suchretardation effects on wave propagation to the fabric of space. No data to measure. maddog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eMTee Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 that was not a thread, but a truthfull statment. But I am thinking to start one...should I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 that was not a thread, but a truthfull statment. But I am thinking to start one...should I?Tormod was suggesting that you start a thread in our Philosophy of Science forum if you want to discuss that statement further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted April 27, 2005 Report Share Posted April 27, 2005 that was not a thread, but a truthfull statment. But I am thinking to start one...should I? It was a claim about Albert Einstein's religious faith, which is not the same as a fact, and completely unrelated to the topic. That's why you need to start a new thread if you want to discuss it. And of course you are very welcome to do so! ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldcreation Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 For sure, we should continue looking for gravitational waves. The pulars may have another explanation. I'll read the article then discuss it. I read something in the 1980s about binary pulsars and proof of G waves. Nothing seemed conclusive then, nor does it now. I would love for Eistein to be right about these predicted waves. He's been right on just about everything else, so I wouldn't be surized. But I'm not sure that gravitational waves actually exist. It would be like saying that curved space (not to mention time) propagates. Shouldn't energy be the one propagating? Should't mass be moving with curvature hot on its trail? I guess whether G waves exist of not depends of what gravity is. It depends on the mechanism involved in the gravitational interact. It depends on whether gravity is a force of attraction or curved spacetime. Question: If a G wave can exist in nature, what is the role of time within the wave itself? anybody??? A.M. coldcreation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 It would be like saying that curved space (not to mention time) propagates. Shouldn't energy be the one propagating? Should't mass be moving with curvature hot on its trail? We know that gravity is an attractive force which binds structures together. Why should not this force create ripples in spacetime? Who says gravity is not a form of energy? I guess whether G waves exist of not depends of what gravity is. It depends on the mechanism involved in the gravitational interact. It depends on whether gravity is a force of attraction or curved spacetime. AFAIK special relativity says that it is both. The attraction is caused by curves in spacetime. Question: If a G wave can exist in nature, what is the role of time within the wave itself? anybody??? I don't know, but I would assume it takes the same role there as anywhere else - ie, it is dependent on the relative motion of any given frame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldcreation Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 OK just chill out for a minute. Newton said gravity was an attractive force without giving a cause for its action (actually, I believe Deity was the word he used as an attribution of its origin). Einstein, in general relativity, not the special version, concludes gravity is a curved space-time phenomenon. Einstein's interpretation is more seductive. By the way, from the point of view of an Earth dweller, gravity looks very attractive, as we stick to the Earth. But from the perspective of particle in space, say situated at the inner Lagrangian Point L1, sees gravity as a repuslive forve along the line connecting the two bodies at their center. Yes, there is that third option (duality is a game of children): The Euclidean connection. He who free-falls in a gravitational field feels no force, no gravity, no acceleration. Triality? Yes indeed. Looking at gravity as solely an attractive force is to limit the discussion to 300 year old theory, to one perspective, yours... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldcreation Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 Just to finish the sentence above,Once the mechanism is found for the gravitational interaction, we will learn if it propagates or not. Not before. Observation of binary pulsars need to be properly interpreted before jumping to conclusions about the existance or not of G waves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted May 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 Do I smell aether again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.