Gravity Lab.

[barkis]

Probably  bad Title, but. "Astronomers have discovered a unique triple star system, which could possibly reveal the true nature of Gravity.

They have found a Pulsar, with two White Dwarfs, packed into a space smaller that the Earth Sun orbital distance.

The trio's unusually close orbits, allow precise measurements, and could resolve difficulties with Einsteins Theories.

The results appear in Natures Journal, and will be presented at the 223rd American Astronomical Society Meeting.".

This was extracted from a Science News item I read on Teletext.

Ron.

[jabeoo1]

Very interesting stuff. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25598051

Think this may be the BBC link for the item you mention barkis 

[floppygoose]

Thanks for the heads up Ron, it will be interesting to see how this develops. The AAS meeting runs from 5th -9th January in Washington.

Phil

[barkis]

Very interesting stuff. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25598051

Think this may be the BBC link for the item you mention barkis 

Yes, thank you, it is the same article, and most interesting indeed.

[barkis]

Thanks for the heads up Ron, it will be interesting to see how this develops. The AAS meeting runs from 5th -9th January in Washington.

Phil

Sure thing Phil.  There is still so much to piece together in the giant Jigsaw of the Universe.

I'm sure any forthcoming revelations won't put any big dents in Einsteins works.

The great man is still unique.

[Ronnie67]

A really great and interesting read, I would love to know how this turns out,. Einstein is and will always be a great man, but it goes to show things are not what they appear, but for Einstein to predict in those days was sheer genius as they did not have the technology that we do. Nevertheless I would like to know the outcome of the find

[Paul M]

You'd think by now that people would just accept that Einstein was right....period!

All this trying to "break" relativity theory to make way for quantum theory is getting tedious!  

Every gravitational experiment carried out has proved relativity to be absolutely correct yet all this new fangled multidimensional, stringy quantum stuff is propped up purely by esoteric mathematics.

Sure, something's gonna give....

[Crebles]

Thanks Ron - great find. But you saw this on Teletext? Blimey. Clear proof of time travel everyone: Ron is in 1986.

[barkis]

Thanks Ron - great find. But you saw this on Teletext? Blimey. Clear proof of time travel everyone: Ron is in 1986.

Time Traveller?  I wish .  BBC still provide  News Text, although Teletext and Ceefax are now history.

[ollypenrice]

Excellent read and thanks for the links.

A couple of oddities, surely, in the BBC one. Firstly yet anther repetition of the Gallileo/tower of Pisa story, which almost certainly never happened according to astronomy historians. And secondly the quote from Prof Ransom in which she says that the results might lead physicists to a 'correct theory of gravity.' That's not very scientific of you, Professor! Here we have an attempt to test GR in the same kind of extreme circumstances as those in which Newtonian gravity broke down. If so, GR will undergo a further generalization such as happened to Newton's theory. But a correct theory? How would we know?

Like Paul M, I'm inclined to put my money on GR over arcane mathematics. However, science is a culture of doubt and attempts must always be made to break GR. It is often pointed out that it took 250 years to break Newtonian Mechanics. However, just counting the years (coming on towards a hundred of them since GR was published) gives a false impression of the durability of GR. In the nearly 100 years of its life it has been subjected to a bombardment of sophisticated attacks which are orders of magnitude more intense than those to which Newtonian mechanics was subjected. And not only that; Newton himself was aware of faults in his therory. He found it physically unacceptable since it seemed to rely on instantaneous action at a distance which he was not able to accept. Also his contemporiaries saw philosophical faults in it as well, so in a sense its end was predicted from the beginning. As far as I know (which isn't much!) no such fundamental objections bear down on GR. OK, it doesn't work at sub atomic levels but what I don't understand is why people feel it should have to. Why can't the sub atomic world simply be different? If you are wearing size nines you can walk across a cattle grid and it genuinely does behave like a plane surface. If you are a sheep it doesn't and you fall through it. Not a very good analogy, maybe. 

Olly

[Paul M]

The beauty of GR is that it was a theory that predicted things that weren't yet considered.

The precession of Mercury's orbit is a case in point. Proved stunningly correct by observation. 

GR was ahead of the game at every stage. Newton struggled to explain that which could already be seen.

If/When they (whoever they might be!) cobble together a quantum theory of gravity I won't be surprised to find that it's always behind the curve. Always being re-jigged to stand up to observation and experimentation.

Perhaps it's just me. I'm a mathematical dunce (other than having had a tenuous grasp of Maxwell's Equations in my younger days) and I don't claim to understand Relativity on a mathematical level. It can be followed on a conceptual level though. It's effects can be visualised.

I'm not comfortable with anything that I can't visualise 

[barkis]

Well, I like to link to these subjects when I find them. They are always relevant. I find them interesting to read,

and the thread has progressed to include members posts

who seem  versed in the subject matter. Unfortunately I personally am not very  

well read in Physics, but I try to absorb  information as best I can, and hopefully get to  understand some of it.

Astronomy is a construction built on  so many areas of Science, it's a goldmine of subject matter.

Ron.

[jabeoo1]

My knowledge in physics and maths is pretty poor.  However I am educated in other areas (mainly biology....the easy science! ).   I really like to try and imagine the visible sequence of events that led to this system.   Genetics and evolution has been a subject I am fascinated by,  and in learning about how this invisible miniature world controls the big visible living things is just incredible.  As a species to then have the knowledge that stellar evolution forges the more complex ingredients and allows the species to evolve is something that re awakens the physics and chemistry more and more.  The sciences seem inseparable in this way.  Just as ollypenrice implied in the above post, one system breaking down to allow another to dominate seems perfectly acceptable.  Multiple laws existing as a stacked system and dominating at various levels seems pretty amusing to me, extending to whether scenarios exist where one completely stops to allow another to carry on, or one fades to blur into another like a cross-mixer.  Imagine if for a second that we are very very small but our ability to think, see, smell & communicate remains.  We are so small that we are being buffeted around in a quantum medium that makes perfect sense to us because we live there normally and base our knowledge on that environment.  The idea of how to see and investigate the big stuff that exists around our familiar comfortable small world is discovered.  I wonder at this point whether our knowledge of the small stuff is that transferable to the bigger stuff, or would we be in the same situation as we are here where the rules seem to break down to allow a more suitable separate system to prevail ?  I find it very difficult to believe in a universal law or even a deity. 

[Paul M]

My knowledge in physics and maths is pretty poor.  However I am educated in other areas (mainly biology....the easy science! ).   I really like to try and imagine the visible sequence of events that led to this system.   Genetics and evolution has been a subject I am fascinated by,  and in learning about how this invisible miniature world controls the big visible living things is just incredible.  As a species to then have the knowledge that stellar evolution forges the more complex ingredients and allows the species to evolve is something that re awakens the physics and chemistry more and more.  The sciences seem inseparable in this way.  Just as ollypenrice implied in the above post, one system breaking down to allow another to dominate seems perfectly acceptable.  Multiple laws existing as a stacked system and dominating at various levels seems pretty amusing to me, extending to whether scenarios exist where one completely stops to allow another to carry on, or one fades to blur into another like a cross-mixer.  Imagine if for a second that we are very very small but our ability to think, see, smell & communicate remains.  We are so small that we are being buffeted around in a quantum medium that makes perfect sense to us because we live there normally and base our knowledge on that environment.  The idea of how to see and investigate the big stuff that exists around our familiar comfortable small world is discovered.  I wonder at this point whether our knowledge of the small stuff is that transferable to the bigger stuff, or would we be in the same situation as we are here where the rules seem to break down to allow a more suitable separate system to prevail ?  I find it very difficult to believe in a universal law or even a deity. 

Nicely put. I can follow that.

I can't answer it but I can follow it!

[jabeoo1]

Nicely put. I can follow that.

I can't answer it but I can follow it!

I was really hoping for a clean cut answer so it could all be sorted out quickly and we could all move on.  Paul M you disappoint me

[Physicist13]

The triple system gives an opportunity to test the Stong Eqivalence Principle to high precisionl. Its this that is new, as there are very few examples of this test and with poor precision so far. Its by measuring to the most accurate that we can that new Physics is often revealed. It may be that GR is needed to be modified, but it may not. We measure and see.