Did Einstein believe in Gravitational waves?

[poom]

In 1916 Einstein has published the first paper of gravitational wave bu linearize approximation but It contain an error of his calculation then In 1918 he published a new paper of gravitational wave that has a correction of the his last error and conclude that there are the Gravitational wave .He didn't do anything much about gravitational wave but Around 1936, Einstein wrote to his close friend Max Born telling him that, together with Nathan Rosen, he had arrived at the interesting result that gravitational waves did not exist, though they had been assumed a certainty to the first approximation. He finally had found a mistake in his 1936 paper with Rosen and believed that gravitational waves do exist. However, in 1938, Einstein again obtained the result that there could be no gravitational waves!
I don't understand his last work in year 1938 that he conclude that it didn't has the gravitational wave in nature or not?
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1602/1602.04674.pdf
http://www.hs.uni-hamburg.de/DE/GNT/events/pdf/steinicke05.pdf

 

[.Scott]

Perhaps this is the misleading statement:

In this approximation, if we consider very low accelerations then the exact equations of motion indeed take the Newtonian form and we obtain a material particle that cannot radiate. In this state of affairs, we have revived the good old assumption that there could be no gravitational waves

From how I read it, this applies only to low acceleration conditions.

 

[jerromyjon]

From how I read it, this applies only to low acceleration conditions.

I was thinking the same thing, but re-read the first sentence of that paragraph: "Einstein with his assistants, Infeld and Hoffmann, calculated the first two stages of this approximation and found that in the first stage the equations of motion take the Newtonian form"

 

[.Scott]

I was thinking the same thing, but re-read the first sentence of that paragraph: "Einstein with his assistants, Infeld and Hoffmann, calculated the first two stages of this approximation and found that in the first stage the equations of motion take the Newtonian form"

So a first order approximation yields a Newtonian result with no gravity wave. I would presume that this is in contrast to the second order approximation.

 

[poom]

This is the paper in 1938. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1968714?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

 

[Dale]

This seems more like a history question than a science question.

 

[poom]

This seems more like a history question than a science question.

It seem like history question but I want to know the 1938 idea of einstein gravitational wave.I don't understand it's meaning so I need someone to explain me what einstein real meaning

 

[jerromyjon]

I need someone to explain me what einstein real meaning

As I understand it Einstein finally concluded that gravitational waves are certainly radiated from large masses with a quadrupole moment. (sometimes referred to as a "dumbbell" configuration) It took a transformation into a cylindrical model to convince him of their existence, and tie up the problem of coordinate singularities.

 

[Dale]

It seem like history question but I want to know the 1938 idea of einstein gravitational wave

OK, since this is history and not science I have moved it to the general discussion forum.

 

[poom]

So a first order approximation yields a Newtonian result with no gravity wave. I would presume that this is in contrast to the second order approximation.

Why did it contrast with rhe second order approximation can you explain more for me.

 

[poom]

As I understand it Einstein finally concluded that gravitational waves are certainly radiated from large masses with a quadrupole moment. (sometimes referred to as a "dumbbell" configuration) It took a transformation into a cylindrical model to convince him of their existence, and tie up the problem of coordinate singularities.

He try to mean that there are no gravitational wave in weak field but there are gravitattional wave in strong field.Does I understand it right??

 

[jerromyjon]

Does I understand it right??

Yes that is correct. There has to be large masses far from equilibrium to emit (detectable) waves.

 

[.Scott]

So a first order approximation yields a Newtonian result with no gravity wave. I would presume that this is in contrast to the second order approximation.

Why did it contrast with the second order approximation can you explain more for me.

I just reread the whole article. I think the real problem is the very last statement "In this state of affairs, we have revived the good old assumption that there could be no gravitational waves.".

This is an editorial statement that the author, Galina Weinstein, is making. Galina is not attributing this observation to anyone other than herself (or himself?).

I think the placement of that kind of statement at the end of the article is bad writing style. Apparently Galina could not find a good summary statement - and thought that adding that quip would wrap up the article nicely. If you take that statement out and try to replace it with the intention of avoiding an abrupt end, I think you can see what the problem was.

 

[poom]

I just reread the whole article. I think the real problem is the very last statement "In this state of affairs, we have revived the good old assumption that there could be no gravitational waves.".

This is an editorial statement that the author, Galina Weinstein, is making. Galina is not attributing this observation to anyone other than herself (or himself?).

I think the placement of that kind of statement at the end of the article is bad writing style. Apparently Galina could not find a good summary statement - and thought that adding that quip would wrap up the article nicely. If you take that statement out and try to replace it with the intention of avoiding an abrupt end, I think you can see what the problem was.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1968714?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. This is einstein article what do you think about it

 

[.Scott]

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1968714?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. This is Einstein article what do you think about it

Without registering, I can read page 65. From that, it doesn't look like it directly addresses gravitational waves.