Star's motion around Milky Way's monster black hole proves Einstein right yet again

[Admin]

Einstein's theory of general relativity just passed a dramatic black-hole test with flying colors.

Star's motion around Milky Way's monster black hole proves Einstein right yet again : Read more

 

[Lovethrust]

Is Einstein being right yet again really surprising any more?

 

[rod]

So far, Einstein Special Relativity and General Relativity are not called, the law of Relativity or the law of General Relativity like Kepler's laws, Newton's laws of motion, law of gravity. It took nearly two hundred years or more of observation and testing, showing the math worked elsewhere outside of Earth before these became laws. Einstein showed his math in 1905 and 1916, astronomers still working on it

 

[dfjchem721]

"Einstein's theory of general relativity just passed a dramatic black-hole test with flying colors."

What an enormous surprise!

Does anyone out there have a list of all of the observations made that conform to GR or SR?

Just a few off the top:

Eddington's observation during a solar eclipse demonstrated warping of space by the sun .

Cosmic rays have shown time dilation (increase in "resting" half-life at the bench) when entering the atmosphere at high speeds.

A pair of atomic clocks were synced and one flown around while the other was stationary also showed time dilation.

Likely tons more most have never heard of.

Or how about a list that doesn't (above sub-atomic)? Even one real observation not conforming?

 

[rod]

FYI, I think this is the central point of this test reported. "Einstein's general relativity predicts that bound orbits of one object around another are not closed, as in Newtonian gravity, but precess forward in the plane of motion. This famous effect — first seen in the orbit of the planet Mercury around the sun — was the first evidence in favor of general relativity," study co-author Reinhard Genzel, director of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany, said in a statement. "One hundred years later, we have now detected the same effect in the motion of a star orbiting the compact radio source Sagittarius A* at the center of the Milky Way," Genzel added. "This observational breakthrough strengthens the evidence that Sagittarius A* must be a supermassive black hole of 4 million times the mass of the sun."

I have this Mercury test in my trusty Einstein book, Relativity, The Special and The General Theory, A Clear Explanation That Anyone Can Understand, 1961, p. 126. On page 103, "On the basis of the general theory of relativity, it is found that the ellipse of every planet round the sun must necessarily rotate in the manner indicated..."

Looks like confirmation of this prediction from GR rather than Mercury observations in the solar system without other solid measurements too. It is detecting this same effect in the motion of a star that is important. Moving in the direction of GR becoming a law of science vs. theory

 

[rod]

FYI, GR predictions for the center of a black hole is a singularity but QM contradicts this.

 

[dfjchem721]

I was not even aware of the Mercury precession issue with GR. And I am way out of touch with this story since they detected a gravitational red-shift on closest approach.

It appears they had to track S2 for quite a while to get the data. Is this data set from the same for the red-shift, only over longer periods of time? Maybe a different instrument. Cannot keep up with all this.

Think the RS data from the VLT was shown on a Nova special, and the Kecks also have shown similar results, last time I looked.

It is still amazing they can even see this stuff. Maybe I will try my C-11 with the 12mm Naglers! Looking at the center of the Milky Way, the optical density of "stuff" renders it more opaque (at least to visible) by about 25 orders of magnitude than looking away from it. High tech stuff to be sure.

 

[rod]

FYI, S2 star moving around Sgr A* black hole, has been measured for many years. In 2018, the gravitational redshift predicted by GR was observed, Star Swings Around Black Hole, Tests Gravity

Now the orbital precession according to GR is validated as the new report shows. Black Hole Changes Star’s Orbit in Gravity Test

The star, S2 and Sgr A* black hole offer a combination punch here supporting Einstein GR Sgr A* is considered about 4E+6 solar mass black hole. The Schwarzschild radius is about 11.813E+7 km, the diameter then is about 0.16 AU.

 

[mviswanathan]

Einstein's theory of general relativity just passed a dramatic black-hole test with flying colors.

Star's motion around Milky Way's monster black hole proves Einstein right yet again : Read more

Interestingly, when the the planet motions are calculated just applying the Newton's Laws also produces precesion in orbit. For example when i tried just the Earth, Moon and the Sun, the orbit of the Moon was precessing at about one rotation of the Major axis in about 9 years. Is this different from what is expected with Einstein theory. I just want to understand.

I have to check if any precession results considering just the Sun and Earth

 

[IG2007]

Interestingly, when the the planet motions are calculated just applying the Newton's Laws also produces precesion in orbit. For example when i tried just the Earth, Moon and the Sun, the orbit of the Moon was precessing at about one rotation of the Major axis in about 9 years. Is this different from what is expected with Einstein theory. I just want to understand

Einstein's theory is just more accurate and more perfect than Newton's. The thing is Newton's theory doesn't work well outside our solar system.

 

[Think twice]

Einstein's theory of general relativity just passed a dramatic black-hole test with flying colors.

Star's motion around Milky Way's monster black hole proves Einstein right yet again : Read more

Is Einstein being right yet again really surprising any more?

Actually isn't it the case that Le Verrier noted apsidal procession centuries ago and Einstein only tried to explain it. Anyone can fiddle up a formula to "predict" precession, as long as you know what it is already. As Albert already knew. He certainly didn't predict any orbital precession.

 

[IG2007]

Actually isn't it the case that Le Verrier noted apsidal procession centuries ago and Einstein only tried to explain it. Anyone can fiddle up a formula to "predict" precession, as long as you know what it is already. As Albert already knew. He certainly didn't predict any orbital precession.

Sorry sir, I disagree. Not anyone can make up a formula of gravitation. As I said, Newtonian Gravity does not work well outside our universe. Without Relativity the whole system of gravity would have fallen down. Einstein didn't predict anything, he just made up the formula. And, we have just observed the star and matched it with Einstein's formula and it came up that both are perfectly matching.

 

[Think twice]

Sorry sir, I disagree. Not anyone can make up a formula of gravitation. As I said, Newtonian Gravity does not work well outside our universe. Without Relativity the whole system of gravity would have fallen down. Einstein didn't predict anything, he just made up the formula. And, we have just observed the star and matched it with Einstein's formula and it came up that both are perfectly matching.

You disagree that Le Verrier noted apsidal precession before Einstein worked out the formula for the observed precession? Looks like history proves you wrong there. Anyone with a bit of maths skills can make up a formula if they know the answer ahead of time.