On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 00:18, Eugen Leitl wrote: > It does sound fishy. They deny it's anything like Podkletnov, > but it sure involves the same ingridients.
The theory they claim behind the experiment is totally wacko, full of nonsense about photons with mass, and references which are complete non-sequiters. A quick google search turns up crowds of nay-sayers, and nothing at all except the papers themselves to support the work. > They operate near the noise limit of the accelerometers. > Could be a dirt effect. Their results are a mere three times the background noise, IIUC. This sounds like a lot unless you understand statistics. > We're sure overdue for a new TOE, but is that it? Doubtful. > > > Towards a new test of general relativity? I'm doubtful anytime someone makes a claim that their results aren't in line with Einstein. Relativity explains most phenomena very well. The cases where it doesn't are all on much smaller scales, or at much higher energies than this experiment operates at. The work appears on the face of it, too good to be true. -- Brian McNett: Forensic Spam Investigator Work: <http://consult.spamresource.com/> Play: <http://www.mycoinfo.com/> Online Store: <http://store.mycoinfo.com/>
