Can Relativity Be Confirmed Again with a Star and a Black Hole?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the recent confirmation of General Relativity (GR) through observations involving a star and a black hole. Participants explore the implications of this confirmation for the development of theories of everything, the differences from previous experiments like the Pound-Rebka experiment, and the technological advancements that enabled these observations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that each confirmation of GR makes it increasingly challenging to formulate a theory of everything, suggesting that modifications to GR are being ruled out.
  • Others question how the recent observations differ from the Pound-Rebka experiment, with some attributing differences to advancements in observational technology and the extreme conditions surrounding black holes.
  • A participant suggests that while GR is confirmed, future quantum gravity theories may not be constrained by these observations, as their predictions align with GR under current conditions.
  • Some argue that certain classical theories of gravity have been discarded due to failing to predict experimental results, while others emphasize that the search for a theory of everything continues to be a broader endeavor.
  • There is a discussion about the relative extremity of the conditions observed, with some participants arguing that the conditions are not as extreme as they might seem.
  • A participant expresses a desire for a definitive list of experiments that have confirmed GR and SR, indicating interest in the historical context of these confirmations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the implications of the recent observations for theories of everything and the nature of the experimental conditions. There is no clear consensus on how these observations impact the development of alternative theories to GR.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions touch on the limitations of current theories and the dependence on specific experimental conditions, but these remain unresolved within the conversation.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring the implications of General Relativity, the development of theories of everything, and the historical context of experimental confirmations in physics.

Astronomy news on Phys.org
Always great news to see GR working at such extreme conditions. Each confirmation makes it tougher to come up with a theory of everything but maybe it will instead direct our energies toward one theme as ideas which modify GR are dropped from the mix of possible theories.
 
Why (or how) is this different than the Pound-Rebka experiment? (done 59 years ago)
 
jedishrfu said:
Each confirmation makes it tougher to come up with a theory of everything

I don't see why?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
Why (or how) is this different than the Pound-Rebka experiment? (done 59 years ago)

I imagine the achievement here is mostly in the success of improvements to telescopes, AO, spectrographs and such which were necessary to raise SNR sufficiently so that valid data can be obtained in this particular difficult case. Galactic core is heavily obstructed by dust and gas.
 
My guess is primarily because it was done at larger scales and more extreme conditions around a black hole whereas Pound Rebka was done in an Earth laboratory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound–Rebka_experiment

Each new proof of GR necessarily puts a hard experimental limit on the kinds of theories that can replace it. This means that some theories that don't predict the value of the GR experiment will have to be discarded or reworked.
 
jedishrfu said:
Each new proof of GR necessarily puts a hard experimental limit on the kinds of theories that can replace it.

But future quantum gravity theories are expected to differ from GR at field strengths (or curvatures, if you will) _much_ higher than even those at BH event horizons.

IOW: their predictions for events like one on this case are exactly the same as from GR. Therefore this observation does not further constrain the set of possible quantum gravity theories.
 
I think we are in agreement here. Some of the current theories have to be or have been discarded because they failed to predict what has been measured.

This paper talks about binary pulsars (circa 2008) and how experimental results have confirmed GR and limited other alternatives to GR:

https://books.google.com/books?id=s... experiment limits alternate theories&f=false

It's not hard to imagine then that these latest GR results will do the same.
 
jedishrfu said:
I think we are in agreement here. Some of the current theories have to be or have been discarded because they failed to predict what has been measured.

This paper talks about binary pulsars (circa 2008) and how experimental results have confirmed GR and limited other alternatives to GR:

https://books.google.com/books?id=sT_ICgAAQBAJ&pg=PA225&lpg=PA225&dq=GR+experiment+limits+alternate+theories&source=bl&ots=fFcBpAKvnS&sig=7XeNlFIe-Q-SQCkS7ppedB-ALc4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjTg7WisL_cAhWI7IMKHbZqAO0Q6AEwBnoECAUQAQ#v=onepage&q=GR experiment limits alternate theories&f=false

The disproved theories in question are not "theories of everything" you mentioned earlier, i.e. quantum mechanical unifications of SM forces with gravity.
They are _classical_ theories of gravity.
 
  • #10
I feel you are taking things way too seriously here. I am not a physicist and my feeling is that every theory we develop leads to a theory of everything. As we are searching for this ultimate theory of everything, our experiments help to focus our results in the right direction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #11
jedishrfu said:
My guess is primarily because it was done at larger scales and more extreme conditions around a black hole whereas Pound Rebka was done in an Earth laboratory.

But it's not all that extreme. The acceleration due to gravity on S2 is about the same as on the surface of the moon. If you want to argue that what matters is potential, not force, you can do ~50x better with the white dwarf data.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
  • #12
That’s a good point, I don’t have any better reason except to celebrate that we can see deeper into the center of our galaxy than before to observe GR in action.
 
  • #13
Fascinating news!

Every so often another confirmation of Einstein's theories makes headline news. To wit, LIGO's observation of gravitational waves.

But I was wondering, is there a definitive list of experiments that have confirmed GR (and SR?)...?

Thanks,

Cerenkov.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K