138
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 707:
Line 707: + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 23:06, August 20, 2011
, 23:06, August 20, 2011→Open problems in cosmology
::: I think that you are mixed up. Maric probably did help Einstein understand special relativity. But they had been divorced for a long time when the work was being published on general relativity, and she is not known to have had anything to to do with it. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:25, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
::: I think that you are mixed up. Maric probably did help Einstein understand special relativity. But they had been divorced for a long time when the work was being published on general relativity, and she is not known to have had anything to to do with it. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:25, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
:::: It is not an "open problem" in cosmology whether the universe is expanding or not. It's accepted by cosmologists that it is (Google 'Hubble's law' for instance).
:::: Einstein's motivation for the cosmological constant was indeed a mistake. He wanted a static universe and put the cosmological constant as a repellent term to explain why, if gravity is attractive, everything isn't just lumped up together. This doesn't work however, since the equilibrium created by adding the term isn't stable. Later physicists took a new interpretation of the cosmological constant as the energy density of the vacuum. It turns out Einstein's mistake wasn't adding a cosmological constant, but not putting it on the other side of his equation with the stress–energy tensor!
:::: Anyway, the cosmological constant is still used because data suggest it exists. I highly doubt cosmologists have stuck to it because of the treachery of Einstein's wife. --[[User:MatthewQ|MatthewQ]] 19:06, 20 August 2011 (EDT)