Changes

#:The objection has been raised that a recent news report from the BBC ("now we are 100% sure that the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos") is also contradictory, since neutrinos have mass and are therefore forbidden by relativity to travel at exactly the speed of light.  Since the neutrino energies were 17GeV, and the current estimate for the neutrino mass is about 0.25eV, the deviation from the speed of light would be about 1 part in 10²².  This means that the neutrinos would arrive at the detector about .26x10^-24 seconds (.26 yoctoseconds) later than the speed of light itself.  This is one quarter of a billionth of a femtosecond, or about .26x10^-15 of a nanosecond.  The accuracy of the GPS units and cesium clocks used in the measurement is greater than a nanosecond, so the discrepancy cannot possibly be detected.  It is unfortunate that the claim "the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos" was taken so literally.

#:The objection has been raised that a recent news report from the BBC ("now we are 100% sure that the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos") is also contradictory, since neutrinos have mass and are therefore forbidden by relativity to travel at exactly the speed of light.  Since the neutrino energies were 17GeV, and the current estimate for the neutrino mass is about 0.25eV, the deviation from the speed of light would be about 1 part in 10²².  This means that the neutrinos would arrive at the detector about .26x10^-24 seconds (.26 yoctoseconds) later than the speed of light itself.  This is one quarter of a billionth of a femtosecond, or about .26x10^-15 of a nanosecond.  The accuracy of the GPS units and cesium clocks used in the measurement is greater than a nanosecond, so the discrepancy cannot possibly be detected.  It is unfortunate that the claim "the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos" was taken so literally.

#''Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth ("flybys").''

#''Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth ("flybys").''

#:This may be another case of the Pioneer anomaly, or it may be something else.  However, it is very unlikely that it shows that relativity is wrong and Newtonian mechanics is correct.

#:This may be another case of the Pioneer anomaly, or it may be something else.  However, it is very unlikely that it shows that relativity is wrong and Newtonian mechanics is correct. Saying that, every time someone finds some phenomenon that is puzzling, that shows that relativity is wrong, is not a convincing way to do science.  The cited paper is about unexpected behavior of some spacecraft as they use "gravity assists" in near-Earth flybys.  The hypothesized causes involve errors in the mathematical models to calculate such effects as relativistic effects (the detailed calculation of them, not the question of whether they exist), tidal effects, Earth radiation pressure, or atmospheric drag.  The paper suggests that most of those can be ruled out, though there could be round-off and integration errors, or errors in the spherical harmonic representation of Earth's gravity field.

#''Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen "dark matter" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.''

#''Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen "dark matter" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.''

#:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it due to the acceleration of various parts of galaxies that accelerated funny that led to dark matter (based on simple Newtonian dynamics)?  

#:Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it due to the acceleration of various parts of galaxies that accelerated funny that led to dark matter (based on simple Newtonian dynamics)?  

#:

#:

#:The cited article is about the many things affecting the gross behavior of tides.  Keep in mind that the factors affecting the tides involve a lot of hard-to-precisely-quantify things such as wind and ocean currents, and the melting of glaciers.  As an example of how imprecise things are, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans differ in mean height by about 8 inches at the Panama Canal, and the tides are about 20 feet on the Pacific side and 1 foot on the Atlantic side.  As another example, tides in the Bay of Fundy are as high as 53 feet.  Tides are not a simple calculation from Newtonian or Einsteinian mechanics.  The difference between Newtonian gravitation and Einsteinian gravitation is utterly insignificant in comparison to these gross effects.

#:The cited article is about the many things affecting the gross behavior of tides.  Keep in mind that the factors affecting the tides involve a lot of hard-to-precisely-quantify things such as wind and ocean currents, and the melting of glaciers.  As an example of how imprecise things are, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans differ in mean height by about 8 inches at the Panama Canal, and the tides are about 20 feet on the Pacific side and 1 foot on the Atlantic side.  As another example, tides in the Bay of Fundy are as high as 53 feet.  Tides are not a simple calculation from Newtonian or Einsteinian mechanics.  The difference between Newtonian gravitation and Einsteinian gravitation is utterly insignificant in comparison to these gross effects.

#''The supermassive black hole within the Andromeda galaxy puzzled researchers by increasing in brightness by a factor of 100 in 2006.''

#''The supermassive black hole within the Andromeda galaxy puzzled researchers by increasing in brightness by a factor of 100 in 2006.''

#:This item is about unexpected behavior of the supermassive black holes at the centers of many galaxies.  Black holes are a prediction of relativity.  The fact that people are still learning new things about them is hardly surprising.

#:This item is about unexpected behavior of the supermassive black holes at the centers of many galaxies.  Black holes are a prediction of relativity.  The fact that people are still learning new things about them is hardly surprising.