Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.

Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. It would be most unusual if a
gravity-wave would travel with an infinite speed. Only seeing/measuring
is knowing, but it would be out of character for nature as we know
it. Predicting the future on the basis of the past (experiments),
is a corner-stone of physics, and has served us well.

I just like to have this on record, because I can already see the
newspaper headlines "Gravity waves found, Einstein was right all
along". When that happens, you'll know that it proves nothing for
Einstein.

The scientists who push the gravity-wave thing as a proof for
Einstein (the ol' *******), may also have followed the above classical
argumentation. They knew it would probably exist, they knew that when
gravity-waves will be found, that if they had predicted it supposedly
using Einsteinian "physics", that it would hold up Einsteinian physics
for a little longer still (at least in the public mind, which has
no clue whatsoever what Einstein is about, but what do they care).

It's been a pleasure once again, cya.
--

dear Jos
please visit http://www.ldolphin.org/vanFlandern/gravityspeed.html
which is a paper published on gfield waves.

.... and thanks for respecting Einstien so much, i'm sure someone willi
kill u in ur sleep tonight

Jos wrote:
Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.

Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. It would be most unusual if a
gravity-wave would travel with an infinite speed. Only seeing/measuring
is knowing, but it would be out of character for nature as we know
it. Predicting the future on the basis of the past (experiments),
is a corner-stone of physics, and has served us well.

I just like to have this on record, because I can already see the
newspaper headlines "Gravity waves found, Einstein was right all
along". When that happens, you'll know that it proves nothing for
Einstein.

The predicted effects of relativistic gravity waves are not
identical to those of a simple classically oscillating mass. Newtonian
theory predicts only that that acceleration of a test mass will change
directions. That is all. GR predicts changes in the metric properties
of space itself, and that GR gravity waves radiate energy directly out
of the system. A pair or co-orbiting massive bodies will slowly lose
orbital energy simply in that act of orbital motion. Newtonian theory
forecasts no such thing.

-Mark Martin

Jos wrote:
Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.

Except that we've not reliably and directly detected gravity waves.

Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. It would be most unusual if a
gravity-wave would travel with an infinite speed. Only seeing/measuring
is knowing, but it would be out of character for nature as we know
it. Predicting the future on the basis of the past (experiments),
is a corner-stone of physics, and has served us well.

Again, except that we've not reliably and directly detected
gravity waves.

Whether gravity has waves or not depends on the nature of gravity.
It is easy to construct a gravity theory that has no waves. It's
not so easy to do that and still get solar system observations
correct. Newtonian gravity, for example, has not waves. Being
classical is not a guarantee that a theory includes gravity waves.

General relativity does include gravity waves as solutions to the
classical theory. Indeed, since we don't have a quantum gravity
theory with predictive ability, the classical theory is all we
have to go by. And GR most assuredly has wave solutions.
Socks

"Jos" wrote in message ...
Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.

Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. It would be most unusual if a
gravity-wave would travel with an infinite speed. Only seeing/measuring
is knowing, but it would be out of character for nature as we know
it. Predicting the future on the basis of the past (experiments),
is a corner-stone of physics, and has served us well.

I just like to have this on record, because I can already see the
newspaper headlines "Gravity waves found, Einstein was right all
along". When that happens, you'll know that it proves nothing for
Einstein.

The scientists who push the gravity-wave thing as a proof for
Einstein (the ol' *******), may also have followed the above classical
argumentation.

As opposed to the "above classical argumentation", you will
find the "standard classical argumentation" briefly described
he
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...rav_speed.html
| In the simple Newtonian model, gravity propagates
| instantaneously: the force exerted by a massive object
| points directly toward that object's present position. For
| example, even though the Sun is 500 light seconds from the
| Earth, Newtonian gravity describes a force on Earth directed
| towards the Sun's position "now," not its position 500
| seconds ago. Putting a "light travel delay" (technically
| called "retardation") into Newtonian gravity would make
| orbits unstable, leading to predictions that clearly
| contradict Solar System observations.

Dirk Vdm

Jos wrote:
Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.

Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. [...]

I just like to have this on record, because I can already see the
newspaper headlines "Gravity waves found, Einstein was right all
along". When that happens, you'll know that it proves nothing for
Einstein.

I can't speak for the newspapers, but for scientists actually working
in the field, the reaction will be, "Good, now let's start looking
at the details."

General relativity does not just predict the existence of gravitational
waves (which, as you say, might be expected in other theories as well).
It makes specific, quantitative predictions about the detailed wave forms
from particular sources; the polarizations of the waves (which are likely
to be *very* different in most other theories); the power carried by the
waves; and the strength of interaction of the waves with various types
of detectors. *That's* what will give the real tests.

Steve Carlip

wrote in message
...
| Jos wrote:
| Everything we know in nature, moves at a finite speed. When fields
| are affected, such as matter-fields (fields of molecules), or
| electromagnetic fields, the effect is spread with a finite speed.
|
| Therefore it can be expected that changes in the gravity field
| will also travel at a finite speed. The spreading effect within
| a gravity-field, is a gravity wave. [...]
|
| I just like to have this on record, because I can already see the
| newspaper headlines "Gravity waves found, Einstein was right all
| along". When that happens, you'll know that it proves nothing for
| Einstein.
|
| I can't speak for the newspapers, but for scientists actually working
| in the field, the reaction will be, "Good, now let's start looking
| at the details."
|
| General relativity does not just predict the existence of
gravitational
| waves (which, as you say, might be expected in other theories as
well).
| It makes specific, quantitative predictions about the detailed wave
forms
| from particular sources; the polarizations of the waves (which are
likely
| to be *very* different in most other theories); the power carried by
the
| waves; and the strength of interaction of the waves with various types
| of detectors. *That's* what will give the real tests.
|
| Steve Carlip

Gravity wave:
http://www.sfgate.com/getoutside/1996/jun/tides.html
Androcles.

Androcles wrote:

[snip]


Gravity wave:
http://www.sfgate.com/getoutside/1996/jun/tides.html
Androcles.

Tides are not the results of gravitational waves. Stop being such a
loud idiot.