
A New Challenge to Einstein? (good discussion about that link posted yesterday) - jacquesm
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/10/12/a-new-challenge-to-einstein/
======
Eliezer
Likelihood ratio not strong enough at this point. There's a reason why
physicists don't go with the usual p-value of 0.05, and that's because, at
that level, most of your results are coincidence. If you really take your
science seriously, 0.0001 is a reasonable level.

Big kudos to the study authors for graphing the likelihoods in explicitly
Bayesian terms, so that the above is fairly clearly spelled out. They've found
something that's worthy of further investigation, just in case. But for now,
I'd take bets at pretty heavy odds in favor of this not going anywhere.

------
zeynel1
If you look at the original paper Section I. Modeling deviations from GR,
their equation 1 gives the metric they've decided to use for this paper. This
equation contains 2 "Newtonian potentials describing temporal and spatial
perturbations to the metric." In other words, the paper is about testing
Newtonian parameters. They refer to this paper as the source of their equation
1:

Cosmological Perturbation Theory in the Synchronous and Conformal Newtonian
Gauges by Ma and Bertschinger. <http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9506072> Again,
it's about Newtonian parameters.

