Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Satellite To Test Relatively

Posted by Hemos on from the testing-the-theories dept.

dude_from_munich writes "Einstein proposed in 1916 that space and time form a structure that can be curved by the presence of a body. Scientists are finally planning to put Einstein's theory of relativity to test after a project delay of 44 years."

33 comments

  1. Relatively speaking. by p4ul13 · · Score: 3, Funny

    First post; but only because I'm moving slower than you.

    --
    Paul Lenhart writes words!
    1. Re:Relatively speaking. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      you could have used that one to inform that this is a dupe.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  2. A quick look at TFA quickly shows.... by Jonas+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Informative

    That this is exactly the same as this story.

    --
    Everything seemed to be going so nice
    'till the end of all beings punched right through the ice
  3. I sure hope... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...that it tests relatively well!

  4. I, for one, welcome our dup stories overlords! by francium+de+neobie · · Score: 1, Redundant

    NASA Gravity Probe Set for Launch
    On April 3rd, 2004 with 245 comments

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04 /0 3/1716234&mode=thread&tid=134&tid=160

    1. Re:I, for one, welcome our dup stories overlords! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this article was posted first, it was just moving faster, so it didn't make it to the science page until after the other one.

      (Come on, the subject matter demands bad Relativity jokes.)

  5. What if it fails by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Supposed the experiment runs exactly as planned, there are no apparent flaws with any of the equipment, no problems with the theory behind the experiment... and the results contradict the theory of relativity.

    What happens then?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:What if it fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just fudge the numbers so that they support the theory of relativity.

    2. Re:What if it fails by lambent · · Score: 5, Funny

      We finally get an excuse to throw that einstein bastard out on his ear. I don't know about you, but i'm getting pretty tired of that know-it-all being right ALL the freaking time.

    3. Re:What if it fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Someone whips up a new theory to fit the facts, and we start trying to disprove that one.

      It's how science works.

    4. Re:What if it fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like with the cosmological constant. Even there, after having said it was the biggest blunder of his life, one found later that there might actually be one.

    5. Re:What if it fails by AS400+Hacker · · Score: 3, Funny

      Buildings collapse, bridges fall, the earth crashes into the sun.

      Shit like that.

    6. Re:What if it fails by utahjazz · · Score: 1

      You mean like when the Viking probe was sent to Mars with a test for life, and the result was yes, there is life on Mars? They'll simply say, "The test was broken. It must be broken becuase the result was wrong".

      Which means performing the test was meaningless.

    7. Re:What if it fails by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      The experiment is not to see if it's there, but to quantify it more precisely.

      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    8. Re:What if it fails by Alsee · · Score: 1

      What happens if the results contradict Relativity?

      First they double check and triple check and quadruple check the results.
      If those results are consistantly confirmed, then we celebrate.

      We *know* that there must be some theory beyond Relativity - a theory to explain and predict the things we cannot currently explain or predict. The "problem" is that Relativity is "too perfect". Relativity has been like a perfectly smooth glass wall - it gives absolutely no crack or crevice or clue to climb beyond it. What Relativity does tell us, it tells us with mind-boggling precision and accuracy. What it doesn't tell us, well, it gives no clue at all.

      If an experiment - any experiment - finds a valid discrepancy with Relativity then we finally have something to grab onto, something to study and analize. A clue to developing the Theory Of Everything. Moving beyond Relativity to a Theory Of Everything would be as signifigant as when we moved beyond Newton to Relativity.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    9. Re:What if it fails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you, Sir Points-Out-the-Obvious-A-Lot

  6. fuzzy math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    according to the article poster, 2004 - 1916 = 44

    Have you been taking math lessons from a politician?

    1. Re:fuzzy math? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The project to test the theory was not started the same day that the theory was proposed.

    2. Re:fuzzy math? by q-the-impaler · · Score: 2, Informative

      I suppose they meant 2004 - 1959 (since that is when the experiment was proposed)

      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
  7. Redundant experiment. by c.r.o.c.o · · Score: 2, Funny

    As /. keeps prooving several times every day, time warps happen all the time.

    This is just one example, but I'm sure many more can be found without launching the probe...

  8. Eddington's proof by jedigeek · · Score: 5, Informative

    As usual the BBC's article is scant on details. There's no mention of Arthur Eddington's (1919) proof of relativity which proved gravity caused light to bend. However,

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040 40 5091215.htm

    Is more interesting.

    1. Re:Eddington's proof by arthurs_sidekick · · Score: 1

      Well ... he saw what relativity predicted you would see. One good explanation for this result is that relativity is a correct description of what's going on in the universe. But that's only one explanation. A natural one, to be sure, and his experiment certainly counts as a nice test of the empirical consequences of relativity, but it's a defeasible inference from Eddington's results to the claim that gravity causes light to bend.

      Why yes, I am a pedant.

      --
      "Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
  9. Relatively?!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    What the hell is 'relatively'? And what does it have to do with Einstein? Is this some unknown postulate about his family?

    Or perhaps you meant RELATIVITY?

    1. Re:Relatively?!?!?! by Freexe · · Score: 1

      \Rel"a*tive*ly\, adv. In a relative manner; in relation or respect to something else; not absolutely. Consider the absolute affections of any being as it is in itself, before you consider it relatively. --I. Watts.

      --
      "In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
    2. Re:Relatively?!?!?! by falsification · · Score: 1
      Oh my God. You don't know? Unbelievable. I guess I have to tell you.

      Albert Einstein was a great scientist who lived long ago. He had two theories, the General Theory of Relatively and the Special Theory of Relatively. Later on he married his cousin.

  10. Of course GTR has been confirmed many times by aminorex · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The article as phrased suggests that GTR is hitherto unconfirmed by observational data. That is not the case: The aspects of the General Theory of Relativity which are addressed by this experiment are consistent with experimental data for the perihelion of Mercury which actually predated and motivated the General Theory, and are confirmed every day by gravitational lensing effects used very practically by astronomers, as recently reported here on slashdot.

    It's a popular Senior or Graduate physics exercise to design experiments demonstrating GTR -- and a somewhat more ambitious exercise to perform them. This one is notably primarily for being bloody expensive and having blown it's schedule by such a honking big margin.

    --
    -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    1. Re:Of course GTR has been confirmed many times by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not only has it been confirmed many times, but it's even been confirmed by satellite. Take a look here for an interesting article which explains how the GPS satellite system must correct for relativity, and how it does so (and in doing so verifies the time-dialation postulate of Einstein's theories).

      Of course, the GPS system is not anywhere near the first proof of this or many other relativistic phenomena; atomic clocks on board jetliners can test whether gravity affects the speed of a clock (it does) and other phenomena. Another example is found in cosmic rays; many short-lived particles, formed in the Earth's upper atmosphere when high-energy rays hit the atoms in air, would be unobservable if not for time dialation; "common sense" predicts that they would decay only a few meters from their starting position, but relativity tells us that since the particles are moving extremely fast, their decay rate will be slowed enormously from our frame of reference, and the particles will still be observable from the ground.

      If you know where to look, proofs of general and special relativity are all around us. All you need in most cases is an atomic clock or good cloud chamber, yours for not more than a few million dollars.

      --

      That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
    2. Re:Of course GTR has been confirmed many times by Alsee · · Score: 2, Interesting

      cloud chamber, yours for not more than a few million dollars

      How to Build a Cloud Chamber

      You can probably scavenge common felt and tape and a slide projector etc for free. You can buy pure (not 70%) isopropyl alcohol for about $7.60, and Dry Ice for probably $20 or less. I can pick up dry ice locally for $10. The issue with dry ice is that it will only last a day or so unless you get a huge block. I had a $40 block last 3 or 4 days.

      Dry Ice is a real blast for parties, but at -109.3F / -78.5C you freeze-burn yourself pretty badly, and the pure Carbon Dioxide gas can be a minor hazard. Safety page here. With gloves, ordinary ventilation, and basic common sence you should be fine.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    3. Re:Of course GTR has been confirmed many times by IndigoDarkwolf · · Score: 1
      Read the rest of the article, please. The experiment isn't intended to "confirm" GTR. If it were solely to confirm GTR, it would have to be one of the most redundant scientific experiments performed since the last time someone failed to demonstrate the Ether field. The more important observation is "frame dragging", which hasn't been directly observed before because we've never been able to observe an object large enough for it to occur from close enough to detect it. We've been making assumptions about frame dragging that seem to be true, but we can't prove it.

      In other words, we're working on faith. And science hates faith. With a passion.

      The way we've applied GTR---gravity lenses, GPS, etc---obviously work without accounting for frame dragging or by applying our assumptions about frame dragging. I wouldn't be surprised, however, if we could, say, improve the accuracy of GPS with more knowledge about frame dragging.

  11. Spaceballs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The satellite will carry four ping-pong-sized balls made from quartz and sealed in a vacuum.

    Ape #1: Dear me, what are those things coming out of her nose?
    Ape #2: [looking in binoculars] SPACEBALLS?
    Ape #1: Oh shit! There goes the planet.

  12. Re:editor incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not only is there incompetence in that it is a dupe, but also beause of the grotesque typo in the headline.