does Graviton really exist ...??

[cable]

graviton reminds me of Darwin's "missing links". some say : we can't find them kuz they never existed.

light is both a wave and a particle, the photon with mass=0 and v=c ( in vacuum).
according to GR, a mass curvates the space-time. a ligt wave coming close to a mass must folow a geodesic, thus deviates.
the experiment (with sun eclypse) is an evidence to GR, if and only if we are sure the mass of photon =0.
if not, say an infinitesimal mass #0, then the light deviation may be caused by attracting that tiny mass, not by curvature.
ie. the mass did not necessarily curvate space-time. it simply added a force field, so that any material particle/object "feels" the presence of that mass thru a force.
in this case any non-material (m=0) wave or particle, will not deviate, near a mass.

I don't believe in space curvature.
and btw, to accept curvature, we have to explain why a mass should curvate the space-time.

consider the following analogy:

let's think like Einstein.
a magnet ( with 2 poles), curvates space-time. if we send a jet of magnetic paticles, it deviates.
if we rotate/move the magnet, and we place a magnetic needle at a distance, we should detect a "magnetic wave" ( this not an EM) and an associate particle , the "magneton".
the needle does detect oscillation. but this is not a wave. it's merely a variable mag. field.
nor do we have any "magneton".

this non material( ie with no inerty) force-field is added to space-time frame , that has no inerty.
thus, it's istantly added, ie. with an infinite propagation velocity.

to detect graviton, they use a metallic cylinder pointing to stars, hoping to detect oscillation = a gravity wave.
what we should detect -- if ever we detect something, due to huuuge distance -- is merely a varying g.

so I believe ther's no gravity wave nor a graviton.
there is a gravity-(force)-field added instantly to space-time, ie. with infinite propagation velocity.

any comment ??

[JS Princeton]

My comment is first of all, go to http://www.talkorigins.org

Secondly it is impossible for light to have mass (even infinitessimal mass) and travel at the speed of light in a relativistic treatment.

Thirdly mass curves spacetime because of the relationship that is embodied in Einstein's Equations. It's as simple as that.

Fourthly a magnet does not curve spacetime because a magnet does not effect energetic relationships of all objects with a mass. In fact, the magnetic force does no work! Moreover, if you use electromagnetism and form a self-consistent wave in empty space you get not a "magneton" but a photon.

Fifthly I have no idea what inerty is.

Sixthly I think you should check out how LIGO and LISA are looking for gravitational waves.

[DStahl]

Also, remember Kip Thorne: gravity can be described as spacetime curvature, or as a field in flat spacetime which has the ability to distort rulers and clocks--the equations come out the same. And, if we get a good theory of quantum gravitation, we may be able to describe it via Feynman diagrams and gravitons...but again, the equations describing large-scale quantum gravitation will almost certainly be perfectly equivalent to the curved-spacetime and flat-field paradigms.

There's some indication, if I remember rightly, that superstring theory has to include a graviton as a result of symmetry considerations.

<a name="3-1-16.be"> page= 3-1-16.be aka Beyound
because i've personally 1assed beyound
a Time in space of space curvature {ei 4 miles from e8?0}
and 2: also taken a ride inside a gravity wave POD
of course I believe THAT..
and No I do Not think, the way you suggest 2B
correct. My fault with E=MC^2 is multi fold
but I will sum it up with one word and one deravitive thereof
Curvature & its Major Harmonic ({:}) Thats my argument against =
so ({:BWUW:})

[cable]

There's some indication, if I remember rightly, that superstring theory has to include a graviton as a result of symmetry considerations.

superstring with graviton and some 10 dimensions ... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
does this resolve the "missing or invisible mass" ?? if not add more dimensions ... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

NOW, seriously:
a part from that experiment with sun eclipse to support space curvature theory (GR), is ther any other experimental evidence of the curvature ??

[cable]

HUB,
some say Gravity is not universal. it's the result of other ( unknown ) forces , probably due to unvisible/dark matter within the galaxy.
ie. it depends on the galaxy, where u are.
if this is true, then GR is not universal.

[JS Princeton]

On 2003-01-16 10:46, cable wrote:

There's some indication, if I remember rightly, that superstring theory has to include a graviton as a result of symmetry considerations.

superstring with graviton and some 10 dimensions ... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]
does this resolve the "missing or invisible mass" ?? if not add more dimensions ... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

NOW, seriously:
a part from that experiment with sun eclipse to support space curvature theory (GR), is ther any other experimental evidence of the curvature ??

Sure: GPS units use GR corrections to get things right.

Check out this page

There are other examples too. If you need more, just ask.

[DStahl]

cable--Again, I suggest that "curvature" is an excellent conceptual way to think about spacetime, and the GR equations can certainly be construed as describing curvature. However, they are equations: they do not say spacetime "really" curves; they may equally well say that spacetime is flat and gravitational fields in flat spacetime distort spatial dimensions and the flow of time.

But whatever interpretation you attach to the equations, JS Princeton is right: GR has been tested extensively in the weak-field realm (the only one directly accessible to us) and its predictions agree very solidly with observation. As far as stong-field predictions, GR predicts that gravity waves will carry energy away from closely orbiting systems with large concentrations of mass, causing the orbits to decay. This orbital decay has been observed in pulsar binaries and it's consistent with the predictions of GR for rate of energy loss by radiation of gravitational waves.

I think I phrased that kind of clumsily; still, I hope you get the point.