Derek Joe Tennant
My Weblog
Joe's weblog
   
Apr 19, 2007
Mike....did you hear?
Early results from a Nasa mission designed to test two key predictions of Albert Einstein show the great man was right about at least one of them.

It will take another eight months to determine whether he got the other correct say scientists analysing data from Nasa's Gravity Probe B satellite.

 

Gravity Probe B uses four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure two effects of Einstein's general relativity theory.

A scientist starts with a bulldozer, follows with a shovel, and then finally uses dental picks and toothbrushes to clear the dust away from the treasure. We are passing out the toothbrushes now
William Bencze,
Stanford University

One of these effects is called the geodetic effect, the other is called frame dragging. A common analogy is that of placing a heavy bowling ball on to a rubber sheet.

The bowling ball will sit in a dip, distorting the rubber sheet around itself in much the way a massive object such as the Earth distorts space and time around itself.

The data from Gravity Probe B's gyroscopes clearly confirm Einstein's geodetic effect to a precision of better than 1%.

The scientists from Stanford are still trying to extract its signature of frame-dragging from the data.

They plan to announce the final results of the experiment in December 2007, following eight more months of data analysis.

 

link 

Comments:

mike (Mike Macgirvin)
April 19, 2007 22:30
[*TOP MEMBER*] mike
It's nice to see some results after 40 some-odd years of putting this together. However, the geodetic effect - although interesting, isn't the end game. Measuring frame drag is what it's all about. And I do suspect we'll see a number for frame drag in the next few months. Everybody is holding their breath over the big question - is it the predicted number? And if not, then why? Which of course will lead to yet another experiment that probably won't be concluded within our lifetimes. 

Comments? | More Actions Open/Close menu
Back
There's certainly precedent for that already too. (Not claiming it's
*good* precedent, mind you. :-)
-- Larry Wall in <199709021744.KAA12428@wall.org>