| Line 107: |
Line 107: |
| | 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>Hafele-Keating Experiment [http://www.answers.com/topic/hafele-keating-experiment]</ref> <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> | | 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>Hafele-Keating Experiment [http://www.answers.com/topic/hafele-keating-experiment]</ref> <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> |
| | | | |
| − | Predictions of relativity have not historically been used to make the [[Global Positioning System]] ([[GPS]]) function properly, which are synchronized simply by communicating with stations on earth. <ref>Some do claim that relativity is "vital" to GPS even though GPS developed independently of theoretical preductions. See [http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR614/MR614.appb.pdf]</ref>. | + | Predictions of relativity have not historically been used to make the [[Global Positioning System]] ([[GPS]]) function properly, which are synchronized simply by communicating with stations on earth. <ref>Some do claim that relativity is "vital" to GPS even though GPS developed independently of theoretical predictions. See [http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR614/MR614.appb.pdf]</ref>. |
| | | | |
| − | A decade of observation of the [[pulsar]] pair [[PSR 1913 16|PSR B1913+16]] detected a decline in its orbital period, which was attributed to a loss in energy by the system. It is impossible to measure the masses of the pulsars, their accelerations relative to the observers, or other fundamental parameters. Professors Joseph Taylor and Russell Hulse, who discovered the binary pulsar, found that values could be assigned to the pulsars to make the observed decline in orbital period consistent with the [[Theory of General Relativity]], and for this they were awarded the 1993 [[Nobel Prize]] for Physics, which is the only award ever given by the Nobel committee for the [[Theory of Relativity]].<ref>http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1993/press.html</ref> In 2004, Professor Taylor utilized a correction to the derivative of the orbital period to fit subsequent data better to the theory. | + | A decade of observation of the [[pulsar]] pair [[PSR 1913 16|PSR B1913+16]] detected a decline in its orbital period, which was attributed to a loss in energy by the system. It is impossible to measure the masses of the pulsars, their accelerations relative to the observers, or other fundamental parameters. Professors Joseph Taylor and Russell Hulse, who discovered the binary pulsar, found that physical values could be assigned to the pulsars to make the observed decline in orbital period consistent with the [[Theory of General Relativity]], and for this they were awarded the 1993 [[Nobel Prize]] for Physics, which is the only award ever given by the Nobel committee for the [[Theory of Relativity]].<ref>http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1993/press.html</ref> In 2004, Professor Taylor utilized a correction to the derivative of the orbital period to fit subsequent data better to the theory. |
| | | | |
| − | The observed motion of the [[planet]] [[Mercury]] is inconsistent with the predictions of Newtonian mechanics, but consistent with the predictions of general relativity. The [[perihelion]] of Mercury's [[orbit]] [[precession|precesses]] at a measurable rate, but even after after accounting for gravitational perturbations caused all other planets in the [[solar system]], Newton's theory predicts a rate of precession that differs from the measured rate by approximately 43 [[arcsecond|arcseconds]] per century. General relativity predicts a rate of precession that agrees with experimental findings to high precision.<ref>http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html#SECTION032121000000000000000</ref> <ref> http://www.alberteinstein.info/gallery/pdf/CP6Doc30_English_pp146-200.pdf</ref> <ref> http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/336k/lectures/node117.html</ref>
| + | The [[perihelion]] of Mercury's [[orbit]] [[precession|precesses]] at a measurable rate, but even after after accounting for gravitational perturbations caused all other planets in the [[solar system]], Newton's theory (assuming a precise inverse-square relationship for distance) predicts a rate of precession that differs from the measured rate by approximately 43 [[arcsecond|arcseconds]] per century. General relativity predicts a rate of precession that agrees more closely with observations.<ref>http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node98.html#SECTION032121000000000000000</ref> <ref> http://www.alberteinstein.info/gallery/pdf/CP6Doc30_English_pp146-200.pdf</ref> <ref> http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/336k/lectures/node117.html</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | General relativity predicts that paths travelled light rays should bend as light passes near massive objects, a phenomenon known as [[gravitational lens|gravitational lensing]]. A large number of instances of gravitational lensing have been observed, and it is now a standard astronomical tool.<ref> http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/features/news/grav_lens.html</ref> <ref> http://astro.berkeley.edu/~jcohn/lens.html</ref> <ref> http://www.iam.ubc.ca/~newbury/lenses/glgallery.html</ref> | + | General relativity predicts twice as much bending in light as it passes near massive objects than Newton's theory predicts, a phenomenon known as [[gravitational lens|gravitational lensing]]. A large number of instances of gravitational lensing have been observed, and it is now a standard astronomical tool.<ref> http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/features/news/grav_lens.html</ref> <ref> http://astro.berkeley.edu/~jcohn/lens.html</ref> <ref> http://www.iam.ubc.ca/~newbury/lenses/glgallery.html</ref> |
| | | | |
| | == Ostensible Paradoxes == | | == Ostensible Paradoxes == |