April 13, 2013 at 16:59 (Edit)
Well what if the are no GW. Does that mean that GR needs to be modified?
Can GR be changed with “new geometry” are still match currents results??
Nonobservation of GW is not a reason to modify GR. It is rather opposite, because GR (Einstein’s equations) does not have a wave solution, and non-existence (GW were not observed) of such a phenomenon in nature is confirmed by many experiments during the last half of century. Continue reading
It began a few days ago, when an amateur astronomer Jonny Lapkins was photographing Jupiter from his backyard observatory. Continue reading
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 3,000 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 5 years to get that many views.
Click here to see the complete report.
Sorry for a long delay with our reply to Andrei’s comments (teaching duties…).
On September 30, Andrei wrote:
“Yet again a remarkable piece of truly historical research. However, a paper in APS journal does not imply, that becomes APS view.”
Perhaps you are right about too general conclusion (“APS view”), and it would be better to say that this is only an opinion of Review of Modern Physics.
Posted in Public
A few days ago we received the book “Einstein wrote back” by John Moffat (published in 2010 by Thomas Allen Publishers, Canada), which is a collection of his personal memories of 20th century scientists: Einstein, Dirac, Pauli, Bohr, Schrodinger, Salam, Oppenheimer and many others. (We are not writing a book review but, after reading this book, we would definitely recommend it.) Continue reading
Posted in Public