First real challenge to General Relativity?, (and not from Gravity Probe-B) |
First real challenge to General Relativity?, (and not from Gravity Probe-B) |
Guest_BruceMoomaw_* |
Mar 23 2006, 09:50 PM
Post
#1
|
Guests |
...in the form of what may be an accidentally discovered artificial gravity generator, with possible practical applications!:
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html If this effect is real, it's fully 1/10,000 G -- which is not to be sneezed at, and might conceivably lead us to Bigger Things. |
|
|
Guest_Richard Trigaux_* |
Mar 26 2006, 08:28 PM
Post
#2
|
Guests |
Sorry ugordan, but seemingly I am not alone to be cautious about this strange result. Of course it is too soon to decide weither or not the effect is true (replication is still missing) but there was already some false alarms... The worse of all is that, if one day some fringe theory proves valuable, it will be all the more difficult for scientists to accept it, and even to notice it. We have a proverb in France, about a guy who always shout "fire fire" for nothing. Until one day his own house is on fire, but nobody believes him...
About the result itself, admitting it is true, I don't think it makes a hole in General Relativity. Why? a field is generated, that relativity knows. It arises into conditions which are not predicted by relativity, because they arise from quantum phenomena. But after, this force still behaves how relativity predicts. We have discovered the gravitationnal equivalent of a magnet, fine. What is strange however (I say strange, not suspicious) is that this field appears when Cooper pairs* are rotating. Why Cooper pairs? To be exact, any rotating mass generates a magnetogravitationnal field, and any particule do it, the intensity of the field depending only on the rotating mass. So 1kg of electrons and 1kg of protons give the same result. But Cooper pairs would give a 10 power 30 more intense field. What is special with Cooper pairs? Have they an unusual spin, giving them some special properties, for instance being Böse-Einstein*** in place of the Fermi-Dirac** electron? Are they Böse-Einstein with a mass, unlike the photons? (they would be the only particules like that). Or are they just much bigger in geometric size? Or what else? *Cooper pairs are two coupled electrons which allow for superconductivity. ** Böse Einstein particules can be piled the ones on the other, like photons the particules of light that we can "go through" without touching them. Beams of light can cross each other without disturbing each other. *** Fermi Dirac particules cannot be together on the same place, like the atoms, protons, etc. So the result is that they form "solid" bodies which occupy a minimum volume, we can touch them and we cannot go through. |
|
|
Mar 26 2006, 09:04 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
Sorry ugordan, but seemingly I am not alone to be cautious about this strange result. Cautious is fine, but let's not dismiss this immediately on the grounds it's unconventional. And let's not also accept it as a given, either. More experiments clearly are needed to veryify/dismiss this effect. We have a proverb in France, about a guy who always shout "fire fire" for nothing. Until one day his own house is on fire, but nobody believes him... Or as the English speaking folks would say: "the boy who cried wolf". But Cooper pairs would give a 10 power 30 more intense field. What is special with Cooper pairs? Have they an unusual spin, giving them some special properties, for instance being Böse-Einstein*** in place of the Fermi-Dirac** electron? Are they Böse-Einstein with a mass, unlike the photons? (they would be the only particules like that). Or are they just much bigger in geometric size? Or what else? The article seems to suggest that the effect arises because of a non-zero graviton mass in the superconductor. I'm in no position to judge the validity/plausibility of that claim, though, but it does look like a quantum effect manifesting itself gravitationally, which might be the first experiment ever to do so (?!). And there, I think, might lie the significance. -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th June 2024 - 08:40 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |