Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A weak lensing detection of a deviation from General Relativity on cosmic scales

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-27-09 03:25 PM
Original message
A weak lensing detection of a deviation from General Relativity on cosmic scales
Rethinking relativity: Is time out of joint?
* 21 October 2009 by Rachel Courtland

<snip>

The analysis of starlight data by cosmologist Rachel Bean of Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, has generated quite a stir. Shortly after the paper was published on the pre-print physics archive, prominent physicist Sean Carroll of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena praised Bean's research. "This is serious work by a respected cosmologist," he wrote on his blog Cosmic Variance. "Either the result is wrong, and we should be working hard to find out why, or it's right, and we're on the cusp of a revolution."

"It has caused quite a furore in astronomy circles," says Richard Massey of the Royal Observatory Edinburgh in the UK. "This paper has generated a lot of interest."

<snip>

Most astronomers, including Bean, are cautious about the results. "Nobody is yet betting money that the effect is real," says cosmologist Dragan Huterer of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. Various other explanations, like a bias in the technique used to estimate the distances to galaxies, now need to be ruled out.

<snip>

Whether these surveys find the effect or not, Bean hopes that her paper will generate more interest in the idea of using weak lensing to test general relativity. "I'm not putting my flag out there and saying this is a real thing," Bean says. "We need to look at more data sets. This is really just the first stage for trying to test gravity in this way."

Massey agrees: "At the moment we're in the mode of just trying to hack into general relativity to find the chinks in its armour, to find any places where it might not be working."

<snip>


Here's the blog entry by Sean Carroll mentioned above,
which has some comments by Rachel Bean:
A New Challenge to Einstein?
by Sean

<snip>

So here is a new such test, courtesy of Rachel Bean of Cornell. She combines a suite of cosmological data, especially measurements of weak gravitational lensing from the Hubble Space Telescope, to see whether GR correctly describes the behavior of large-scale structure in the universe. And the surprising thing is — it doesn’t. At the 98% confidence level, Rachel finds that general relativity is inconsistent with the data. I’m not sure why we haven’t been reading about this in the science media or even on other blogs — it’s certainly a newsworthy result. Admittedly, the smart money is still that there is some tricky thing that hasn’t yet been noticed and Einstein will eventually come through the victor, but this is serious work by a respected cosmologist. Either the result is wrong, and we should be working hard to find out why, or it’s right, and we’re on the cusp of a revolution.

Here is the abstract:
A weak lensing detection of a deviation from General Relativity on cosmic scales
Authors: Rachel Bean

Abstract: We consider evidence for deviations from General Relativity (GR) in the growth of large scale structure, using two parameters, γ and η, to quantify the modification. We consider the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect (ISW) in the WMAP Cosmic Microwave Background data, the cross-correlation between the ISW and galaxy distributions from 2MASS and SDSS surveys, and the weak lensing shear field from the Hubble Space Telescope’s COSMOS survey along with measurements of the cosmic expansion history. We find current data, driven by the COSMOS weak lensing measurements, disfavors GR on cosmic scales, preferring η < 1 at 1 < z < 2 at the 98% significance level.


Let’s see if we can’t unpack the basic idea.

<snip>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-27-09 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Really
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-27-09 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. The reich-wingers won't accept this because, according to them, Ithaca is EVIL. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-27-09 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Lucifer Falls
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-28-09 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
4. This seems to be in sync with the 'time is slowing down' articles
that were posted on this forum several weeks ago.

I would like to hear what some of you have to add to my unscientific background.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Science Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC