SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 237:
Line 237: + + + + +
Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 16:47, September 27, 2014
, 16:47, September 27, 2014Here we go again.
#:
#:
#:In any case, this is about quantum mechanics, not relativity.
#:In any case, this is about quantum mechanics, not relativity.
#''The recent findings of gravitational waves are actually just dust.''
#:This is about the observations by the "BICEP2" telescope early in 2014. The claim was that analysis of the polarization of the [[Cosmic microwave background]] (CMB) would show that the CMB had been influenced by gravitational waves in the first fraction of a second after the big bang. That is, if noise from interstellar dust grains didn't confound the measurements. It is now believed that the dust grain noise is too high to make this a reliable measurement.
#:Please read the cited article. It indicates that, based on observations by the Planck satellite, it should be possible to make a cleaner observation. The balloon-borne "Spider" telescope is slated to be launced later this year, and it might be successful.
#:Taking the failure of the BICEP2 observations as a counterexample to relativity is like saying "I thought of a new and clever proof of the existence of God last week, but unfortunately there was a flaw in my logic, so therefore God doesn't exist."
#:In any case, another indirect observation of gravitational waves has already been made, in the Hulse-Taylor observations of binary pulsar [[PSR B1913 16]] in the 1990's.
Unless someone can come up with a sensible example, we will not be posting further rebuttals. The recent ones have been hideously pointless, and not worth replying to. Many of them have cited articles that have ''nothing to do with relativity''. Tides, and earthquakes, do not disprove relativity. It's possible that, because of the rather famous nature of the "counterexamples" page (it is cited around the world, and has nearly 2 million web views), people are simply putting in parody, or trolling, or humor, or whatever, in an attempt to see their work on a world-famous page.
Unless someone can come up with a sensible example, we will not be posting further rebuttals. The recent ones have been hideously pointless, and not worth replying to. Many of them have cited articles that have ''nothing to do with relativity''. Tides, and earthquakes, do not disprove relativity. It's possible that, because of the rather famous nature of the "counterexamples" page (it is cited around the world, and has nearly 2 million web views), people are simply putting in parody, or trolling, or humor, or whatever, in an attempt to see their work on a world-famous page.