Did Einstein overthrow Newton?

So back to the topic at hand, this analysis is from 26.7.2024, this is regarding wide binaries in areas where Dark is not supposed to feature.

academic.oup.com

A critical review of recent Gaia wide binary gravity tests

ABSTRACT. Over the last couple of years, the appearance of the third data release from the Gaia satellite has triggered various wide binary low acceleratio
academic.oup.com academic.oup.com

I put my claim to the test.
This analysis is specifically looking gravitational affects at low accelerations between stars at KAU so 1000s of Astronomical units distant from each other, so Newton and his balls should be firmly back in the 17th Century right?

The papers reviewed go back to 1983 with Milgrom and also include the main players like Chae, Hernandez and Banik.

I did a searched for the words Einstein, General relativity, tensor and metric. For all of those words the sum total was 1

MOND - 86
NEWTON: 123

Bear in mind that MOND means Modified Newtonian Dynamics.

So this is cutting edge, current research 109 years after the publication of Einsteins General relativity and 69 after the death of the great man himself.

So that is research , the text books I have already posted, both classical mechanics and general relativity/cosmology feature Newton including gravity as a force and the inverse square law.

I rest my case.
 
Pinball1970 said:
So back to the topic at hand, this analysis is from 26.7.2024, this is regarding wide binaries in areas where Dark is not supposed to feature.

academic.oup.com

A critical review of recent Gaia wide binary gravity tests

ABSTRACT. Over the last couple of years, the appearance of the third data release from the Gaia satellite has triggered various wide binary low acceleratio
academic.oup.com academic.oup.com

I put my claim to the test.
This analysis is specifically looking gravitational affects at low accelerations between stars at KAU so 1000s of Astronomical units distant from each other, so Newton and his balls should be firmly back in the 17th Century right?

The papers reviewed go back to 1983 with Milgrom and also include the main players like Chae, Hernandez and Banik.

I did a searched for the words Einstein, General relativity, tensor and metric. For all of those words the sum total was 1

MOND - 86
NEWTON: 123

Bear in mind that MOND means Modified Newtonian Dynamics.

So this is cutting edge, current research 109 years after the publication of Einsteins General relativity and 69 after the death of the great man himself.

So that is research , the text books I have already posted, both classical mechanics and general relativity/cosmology feature Newton including gravity as a force and the inverse square law.

I rest my case.
Click to expand...
Yes I think you can consider that established. And now that axocunth has made his Grand Trampling Exit, I doubt you will be getting any further pushback.:)
 
exchemist said:
Yes I think you can consider that established. And now that axocunth has made his Grand Trampling Exit, I doubt you will be getting any further pushback.:)
Click to expand...
I'll admit he ruffled my English feathers BUT some of his posts and points had a lot of study and smarts behind them.
So I have asked him to reconsider staying for a bit.
The site traffic perked up and he stood alone with his views at times which shows some stoicism.
 
Pinball1970 said:
I'll admit he ruffled my English feathers BUT some of his posts and points had a lot of study and smarts behind them.
So I have asked him to reconsider staying for a bit.
The site traffic perked up and he stood alone with his views at times which shows some stoicism.
Click to expand...
Best of luck.
 
Wait. Axocanth ordered a huff and left in it?

: checks thread :

Ah. I see his "... pleasant and informative exchange ... has now been disrupted by the mass intrusion of the usual abusive and pig-ignorant ... resorting, as they invariably do, to puerile insults and name-calling."

Gee, that's gotta suck, don't it?
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
Wait. Axocanth ordered a huff and left in it?

: checks thread :

Ah. I see his "... pleasant and informative exchange ... has now been disrupted by the mass intrusion of the usual abusive and pig-ignorant ... resorting, as they invariably do, to puerile insults and name-calling."

Gee, that's gotta suck, don't it?
Click to expand...
Ok. I think we can draw a line.

I thought Canadians were supposed to be conciliatory and Brits a little more, belligerent? ;)
 
Pinball1970 said:
Bear in mind that MOND means Modified Newtonian Dynamics.

So this is cutting edge, current research 109 years after the publication of Einsteins General relativity and 69 after the death of the great man himself.

So that is research , the text books I have already posted, both classical mechanics and general relativity/cosmology feature Newton including gravity as a force and the inverse square law.

I rest my case.
Click to expand...

It is an interesting take, MOND in effect is an attempt to replace Dark Matter with a modified version of Newtonian gravity. Looked at from any perspective this is a pretty big undertaking. Here is a quote from Wikipedia:

“Several other studies have noted observational difficulties with MOND. For example, it has been claimed that MOND offers a poor fit to the velocity dispersion profile of globular clusters and the temperature profile of galaxy clusters, that different values of a0 are required for agreement with different galaxies' rotation curves, and that MOND is naturally unsuited to forming the basis of cosmology. Furthermore, many versions of MOND predict that the speed of light is different from the speed of gravity, but in 2017 the speed of gravitational waves was measured to be equal to the speed of light to high precision.” : Wikipedia

Here’s a question I have thought about. Why is Dark Matter’s ability to freely allow the passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation downplayed to such an extent? Surely, this transparency of Dark Matter to Electromagnetic radiation is at least as important as itsgravitational effects. Imagine, EMR transmission on earth is impeded and difficult to achieve, yet Dark Matter allows the free passage of EMR from one end of the Universe to the other, with (1) no interaction and (2) in keeping with the inverse square law. What if electricity and magnetism were in some manner connected. Here is what Einstein had to say on the subject: "I am convinced that the time will come when it will be possible to unite electromagnetism and gravitation in a single theory." Specific quote from his correspondence and letters.
 
quant said:
Here’s a question I have thought about. Why is Dark Matter’s ability to freely allow the passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation downplayed to such an extent?
Click to expand...
What makes you think it's "downplayed"? That's by far the most mysterious and scrutinized thing about it.
quant said:
Surely, this transparency of Dark Matter to Electromagnetic radiation is at least as important as itsgravitational effects
Click to expand...
Absolutely! What makes you think otherwise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top