What would it take to prove Albert Einstein Wrong?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Quantum Quack, Jul 23, 2019.

  1. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    What would it take to prove Albert Einstein theories wrong?
    I would think that providing an alternative would not be necessary.
    Any one?
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2019
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,492
    Wrong about what?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Pretty sure if you said "no" to the constancy of the speed of light it would put Einstein in a bad mood.
     
    River Ape and wegs like this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Sorry about that.. see edit..OP
     
  8. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,492
    That would depend on what you meant when you said "the speed of light". In a medium or in vacuo? Phase, group or signal velocity?

    (Just trying to anticipate the sort of damn-fool replies we tend to get here from time to time

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
     
  9. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    But he would still have his Noble Prize for the photoelectric effect thang.
     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Well what would have to be observed etc?
    Would dark flow phenomena be a candidate? ( for example)
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2019
  11. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,492
    Could be almost anything. SR and GR are so pervasive that the question you are asking is too open-ended to be answerable.

    Re "dark flow" I'm afraid you will have to explain why you think it might call relativity into question.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2019
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Theories such as Einstein's GR need not be shown to be wrong, rather just that that they have limitations in their applicability.
    We use Newtonian for most everything Earth based, as well as most space endeavours. If GR had truly shown Newtonian to be wrong, we wouldn't be using it.
    You mean obviously Dark Energy? GR has no probs with DE, in fact Einstein was using it to try and disable what GR was telling him about a dynamic universe, when the thoughts of the day, were that the universe was static. As he later exclaimed, that was his greatest blunder.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.
  13. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Can you think of any gravitational anomalies that may cause doubt?
     
  14. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    No I mean Dark Flow.
    Dark Energy and Dark Matter/Mass are another issue...
    I read somewhere when Dark Flow was first discovered, that a re-known scientist claimed that the phenomena must be due to physics of another universe....as in current understanding made the phenomena impossible to explain.
    For me it was all to do with researching the "Great Attractor" and later the research into the Shapely Supercluster and then onto the Dark Flow phenomena and it's history. ( claim -counter-claim etc)

    Does the massive gravitational anomaly at the center of this universe pose a problem for GR?

    Is one of the main questions haunting me...

     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Not anything that is not already explained with DE and DM. But I could be wrong.
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Other then the center of the observable universe centered on any object/thing anywhere, the universe has no center.
    I don't no much about dark flow.
     
  17. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow
    expansion ... ?
    some type of field between DE, DM & Expansion that somehow alters space-time.

    a handful of magnets(rock/carbon/alloy)
    traveling in various opposing directions
    all containing their own charge
    all giving off a field?
    all creating a micro field ?
    while interacting with a larger field ?

    i see lines within lines within lines...

    can any potential created field change the perceptual field of relative law ?
    doesnt seem so, it just kinda seems like an alteration to an existing algorithm.
    however, throwing a black hole into the mix ... how do you detect that which is undetectable ?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  18. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    hmm.. It might be of interest for you to look em up...
    Also another major apparent anomaly would be the Eridanus super void... (CMB cold spot) although perhaps not directly related to Einstein but possibly more to the physics that has been generated because of GR.

    So much of Physics today is a follow on from GR if I am not mistaken...
     
  19. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,871
    That would be impossible. That's the only infinity that I believe in. There is no end to the damn-fool replies that may be coming shortly.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
  21. Seattle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,871
    Show that the maximum speed of light isn't an absolute. Show that something can travel faster than the speed of light.
     
  22. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,523
    The First(and most important) step would be to get properly educated in Albert Einstein's theories. Learned to the point of fully understanding and fully comprehending those theories to the "nth degree"!

    Once you have achieved the level of adeptness or proficiency to even hope to be capable of proving Albert Einstein's theories wrong, you would know exactly what it would take to do so...you would NOT have to ask.
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    And of course as we all know Einstein's GR is constantly being tested every day by professionals, using state of the art scientific equipment, with the goal of trying to falsify GR, and so far its passing all tests with flying colours. That is science and what it does...testing, retesting and retesting again.
     
    Quantum Quack likes this.

Share This Page