## will Gravity Probe B speak to the "speed of gravity" issue?

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no,location=no, scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>.... either indirectly (by supporting/refuting GR) or by direct measure of some sort?\n\njust curious.\n\nr b-j\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">&nbsp;&nbsp;View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>.... either indirectly (by supporting/refuting GR) or by direct measure of some sort?

just curious.

$$r b-j$$

 PhysOrg.com physics news on PhysOrg.com >> Study provides better understanding of water's freezing behavior at nanoscale>> Soft matter offers new ways to study how ordered materials arrange themselves>> Making quantum encryption practical


thanks to T. Bunn and J. Baez for setting me straight on the "particles of opposite mass" question. i just didn't account for all of the minus signs (namely the one on the inertial mass). so now i get it. (i'm saying this here because there is no other way for me to post a "thank you" and "i get it now" without posting something substantive about physics. back to this: In article 4cbb922e.0404210824.4dc1ed41@posting.google.com, robert bristow-johnson at rbj@surfglobal.net wrote on $04/21/2004 16:25:$ > ... either indirectly (by supporting/refuting GR) or by direct measure of some > sort? i guess more specifically, *if* the "speed of gravity" is significantly different than the speed of E&M, will the 40 milliarcseconds/year deflection of $GP-B's$ gyroscope become a different value than 40 milliarcseconds/year? regarding my own study of GR, i'm still chomping on http://pancake.uchicago.edu/~carroll.../grtinypdf.pdf which appears to me to be the best free primer on GR that i can get on the web. but i'm not there, yet. $$r b-j$$

 On the same topic, I was wondering whether the speed of gravity could be measured by observing the change in gravitational lensing when viewing objects beyond a supernova... As the star's mass gets converted to energy, the lensing effect it has on more distant but near-colinear stars (or other objects) should diminish. By observing how far off-line those objects are, and how fast the gravitational lensing characteristics change, could we not determine the speed at which the gravity waves were traveling?

## will Gravity Probe B speak to the "speed of gravity" issue?

 Quote by CuriousGreg On the same topic, I was wondering whether the speed of gravity could be measured by observing the change in gravitational lensing when viewing objects beyond a supernova... As the star's mass gets converted to energy, the lensing effect it has on more distant but near-colinear stars (or other objects) should diminish. By observing how far off-line those objects are, and how fast the gravitational lensing characteristics change, could we not determine the speed at which the gravity waves were traveling?
This kind of experiment has been done in 2002 when Jupiter passed by a quasar. It has proved that the speed of gravity, at least in the near zone of the Solar system, is the same as the speed of light. Details are in http://www.nrao.edu/pr/2003/gravity/ and math in
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/21/13/010