1,792
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21:
Line 21: − ==Evidence Against Relativity== − While most physicists today accept basic principles of the theory of relativity, "physicists are convinced they are incomplete, and are determined to discover precisely where they fail."<ref>"Weighing the Universe," The Economist (Jan. 25, 2007).</ref> In January 2007, a group of scientists assembled at the University of Arizona in Tucson, Arizona, for a conference entitled “Rethinking Gravity.” − − Evidence against the theory of relativity includes the following: − − *it is incompatible with quantum mechanics, which has been more thoroughly verified{{fact}} − *space has no overall curvature to it {{fact}} − *neither "gravity waves" nor gravitons have ever been discovered despite diligent searches − *some experiments have suggested variations in the speed of light{{fact}} − − There is little doubt that a greater force is required to accelerate masses as their velocity approaches the speed of light. But there are other theories other than relativity that can account for that basic phenomenon.{{fact}}
→Evidence Against Relativity: section needs a rewrite
No particle accelerator built since the 1950s would work unless the mass increase predicted by special relativity not only occurred, but occurred to the precise degree predicted by the theory.{{fact}} In 1972, scientists flew extremely accurate clocks around the world in both directions on commercial airlines, and were directly able to observe the relativistic "twin paradox" the eastbound clock gained 273 ns and the westbound clock lost 59 ns, matching the predictions of general relativity to within experimental accuracy.<ref>as described in [http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?], a personal web page, which cites Haefele and Keating (1972), ''Science'' Vol. 177 pp 166-170 as its source</ref><ref>Sullivan, Walter (1972), "Relativity Theory Awaits Affirmation", September 23, 1972, p. 61. Note: Article refers to a different experiment, which Sullivan discusses, saying that if successful it would be "the second time within a year" that relativity had been confirmed, then proceeds to discuss Hafele[sic] and Keating's experiment as the first.</ref>
No particle accelerator built since the 1950s would work unless the mass increase predicted by special relativity not only occurred, but occurred to the precise degree predicted by the theory.{{fact}} In 1972, scientists flew extremely accurate clocks around the world in both directions on commercial airlines, and were directly able to observe the relativistic "twin paradox" the eastbound clock gained 273 ns and the westbound clock lost 59 ns, matching the predictions of general relativity to within experimental accuracy.<ref>as described in [http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?], a personal web page, which cites Haefele and Keating (1972), ''Science'' Vol. 177 pp 166-170 as its source</ref><ref>Sullivan, Walter (1972), "Relativity Theory Awaits Affirmation", September 23, 1972, p. 61. Note: Article refers to a different experiment, which Sullivan discusses, saying that if successful it would be "the second time within a year" that relativity had been confirmed, then proceeds to discuss Hafele[sic] and Keating's experiment as the first.</ref>
==Pending Research==
==Pending Research==