I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which ones have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle been verified further? Thanks in advance, Gen Zhang
Gen Zhang wrote: > > I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. > There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general > relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was > wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on > the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which > ones have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle > been verified further? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle#Tests_of_the_weak_equivalence_principle> The Equivalence Principle is verified for all independent compositions of matter, http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#b1 spinning masses (gyroscopes), Phys. Rev. D 66 022002 (2002) quantum spins (magnets), <http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/publications/pdf/prl97-021603.pdf> <http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/publications/publication.html> and relativistic binary pulsars http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609417 <http://www.oakland.edu/physics/mog29/mog29.pdf> All possible observable Equivalence Principle violations based on symmetry-derived fundamental obserables have been tested, http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#b5 except one: spacetime geometry versus test mass geometry. Do local left and right shoes vacuum free fall along *divergent* minimum action trajectories? Mass distribution parity is not a Noetherian symmetry for being absolutely discontinuous and discrete. General Relativity (GR) models continuous spacetime, going beyond conformal symmetry (scale independence) to symmetry under all smooth coordinate transformations - general covariance (the stress-energy tensor embodying local energy and momentum) - resisting quantization. GR is invariant under transformations of the diffeomorphism group. Covariance with respect to reflection in space and time is not required by the PoincarĂ© group of Special Relativity or the Einstein group of General Relativity. Do chemically identical opposite parity mass distributions reproducibly violate the EP? Affine, teleparallel, and noncommtuative gravitation theories allow a chiral vacuum background while wholly containing GR as a restricted case, EP=true. Given left footed vacuum, local left and right shoes will fit with unequal energies and free fall along divergent trajectories. Socks will not care. Opposite parity mass distributions of rigidly bound, densely packed atomic nuclei near-perfectly arrayed in space and summed to macroscopic dimensions form spontaneously. Quality single crystals of anything crystallizing in opposite parity space groups P3(1)21 and P3(2)1 are calculated satisfactory. Opposed sets of hydrothermally cultured P3(1)21 and P3(2)1 alpha-quartz solid single crystal spheres allow a parity Eotvos experiment. A faster, cheaper, and more sensitive EP parity calorimetric test is proposed, http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 Somebody should look. A chiral non-rotating body translating through an interactive medium will experience a consistent torque. This is *not* relevant to EP parity tests. HK Moffat, "Six lectures on general fluid dynamics and two on hydromagnetic dynamo theory," pp. 175ff in R Balian & J-L Peube (eds), "Fluid Dynamics" (Gordon and Breach, 1977) http://www.igf.fuw.edu.pl/KB/HKM/PDF/HKM_027_s.pdf 3.5 megabytes pdf pp. 25-27, calculation of the chiral case. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Gen Zhang wrote: > I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. > There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general > relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was > wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on > the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which > ones have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle > been verified further? > > Thanks in advance, > > Gen Zhang You may find some information in http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/ Andreas.
On Jul 30, 9:06 am, Gen Zhang <genn...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. > There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general > relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was > wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on > the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which > ones have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle > been verified further? > > Thanks in advance, > > Gen Zhang You might try searching on "Clifford Will". I think he specializes in this subject area. Rob
Try http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/ "The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment" by Clifford M. Will. (Focus is on verification of GR rather than distinguishing it from alternatives). Ralph. On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:06:35 +0000, Gen Zhang wrote: > I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. > There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general > relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was > wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on > the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which ones > have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle been > verified further? > > Thanks in advance, > > Gen Zhang
On Jul 31, 8:33 pm, Ralph Loader <n...@i.geek.nz> wrote: > Try > > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/ > > "The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment" > > by Clifford M. Will. (Focus is on verification of GR rather than > distinguishing it from alternatives). > > Ralph. Actually, I was more interested in distinguishing it from alternatives. One of the more "fun" bits in MTW was the chapter on parametric post-Newtonian (PPN) approximations. I liked the elegance, strangely enough. I was wondering if a post-PPN model had been created, such that we could distinguish between, say, GR, teleparallel gravity, and gauge-theory-gravity (the Geometric Algebra approach by the Cambridge people)? Gen
Gen Zhang wrote: > I've been looking through Gravitation by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler. > There are a few chapters on experimental verification of general > relativity, and other theories of gravity (chapters 38-40). I was > wondering if anyone knew a review or otherwise collection of papers on > the subject, post-MTW? What new theories have been proposed? Which > ones have been ruled out by experiment? Has the equivalence principle > been verified further? Others have already suggested Clifford M Will's article http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/ which is an excellent review article on the general subject of experimental tests of general relativity, including an extensive bibliography. Will is also the author of a superb technical book on this subject, "Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics" (Cambridge U.P., 1st edition 1992, I think there is also a newer edition out), which goes into more detail than his Living Reviews paper. He has also written a non-technical book on this topic @book { author = "Clifford M. Will", title = "Was Einstein Right?: Putting General Relativity to the Test", Edition = "2nd", Publisher = "Perseus/Basic Books", isbn = "0-465-09086-9 (paperback)", year = "1993 (2nd edition may be newer??)", } ciao, -- -- Jonathan Thornburg (remove -animal to reply) <J.Thornburg@soton.ac-zebra.uk> School of Mathematics, U of Southampton, England "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam