

52 Years and $750 Million Prove Einstein Was Right - jonburs
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/science/space/05gravity.html

======
ars
Here's the wikipedia page on it:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_B>

One point about it is that the probe had a lot of noise, so much noise that it
swamped the signal. It was only by developing computer models of the source of
the noise, and then subtracting it from the signal that the result was found.

But I find such "adjustments" distasteful. I mean everyone expects a certain
answer, and voilà you get that answer. Is there a bug in your code? Or course
not - you got the expected answer didn't you?

(See the section called "NASA review" in the wikipedia article.)

Anyway, now that they learned so much about such probes they should launch
another one and get much cleaner data.

~~~
starwed
_But I find such "adjustments" distasteful._

Well, you have to deal with it somehow. If you know the source of the noise,
there's no excuse for not modelling it.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Sure, but the point is that if there's something wrong with your model of the
noise, the result could be completely invalid.

Look at the history of Milliken's oil-drop experiment:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan.27...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment#Millikan.27s_experiment_and_cargo_cult_science)

He got the wrong answer, but subsequent researchers who got different results
kind of smoothed their own results to match the "correct" (actually wrong)
expected result.

I'm not saying that happened here, but it's always a possibility.

Essentially, how do you know when you've modelled the noise accurately enough?
When you get the expected right answer? Why not continue to refine the noise
model, or consider other ones?

~~~
yequalsx
The role that psychology and social dynamics plays in science ought to be more
studied. To ignore it is foolish. One person I knew in commutative algebra
said that he always adds references to the famous people in the field in his
papers for ass kissing purposes. It's just one anecdote but this sort of
stuff, I suspect, is much more common than it is thought.

~~~
absconditus
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science>

------
mattlanger
_For Dr. Everitt, who joined the Gravity Probe experiment in 1962 as a young
postdoctoral fellow and has worked on nothing else since, the announcement on
Wednesday capped a career-long journey._

There's something so profound about that.

To think of how many jobs I've held in my comparatively short life, how many
minor career changes I've had here and there, how many massive shifts in
interest and passion I've had over the years, and to hold these up beside
someone who has _been wholly dedicated to the same singular goal since before
I was even born_ \--that's just mind-boggling.

And it was selfless! This one singular goal to which he's dedicated himself,
every one of the fifty years of work that went into it, ultimately ended up
becoming--at least when boiled down to a headline--a footnote to someone
else's greatness.

 _Five decades._ I can't even begin to fathom what sort of drive and passion
and commitment that must require.

Bravo.

~~~
hugh3
_And it was selfless! This one singular goal to which he's dedicated himself,
every one of the fifty years of work that went into it, ultimately ended up
becoming--at least when boiled down to a headline--a footnote to someone
else's greatness._

Don't forget that we do science because we don't know the answer, not because
we do. The best-case scenario would have been that after forty years you prove
that relativity is _wrong_.

------
bostonpete
According to the article below, everything measured by the probe has long
since been measured in other ways with greater precision. Based on that, I'd
have to say, this probe didn't really prove anything...

[http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20444-beleaguered-
miss...](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20444-beleaguered-mission-
measures-swirling-spacetime-at-last.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news)

~~~
pedalpete
I thought this had been proven long ago by measuring the gravitation pull the
sun had on light from stars as it passed by.

------
SeanLuke
[ugh] NYT headline writers again.

Falsifiable scientific experiment -- the gold standard for physics -- cannot
prove that something is _right_. It can only fail to demonstrate that
something is _wrong_.

------
joeguilmette
it's not necessarily a tl;dr i'm requestion, so much as a physic geek
deciphering.

~~~
masklinn
RobotRollCall gave an explanation of the thing in the relevant /r/science
thread:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/h45c8/nasa_announced_...](http://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/h45c8/nasa_announced_the_results_of_an_epic_physics/c1sgv0p?context=3)

(side note: RRC is one of the best commenters to ever happen to /r/science, or
more generally Reddit)

~~~
Lost_BiomedE
Wow. If he/she has any spare time, or interest, at all he should teach mini
science courses online to the public. He has a gift.

~~~
masklinn
RRC is an absolutely excellent teacher and explainer of science. I strongly
recommend browsing her comments list:
<http://www.reddit.com/user/RobotRollCall?sort=top>

------
athom
And for just three-quarters of a billion dollars.

It took me a second look to realized, but in today's dollars, quite the
bargain!

------
mildweed
Does this mean that it is no longer the Theory of Relativity, but now the Law
of Relativity?

~~~
wmobit
That's not how theories work. A scientific theory is more like a framework and
not really the same meaning as what people usually mean by theory (which is
closer to hypothesis). Also nothing in science can ever be 100% definite; the
term law shouldn't really ever be used.

~~~
gxs
As an aside to your comment, misuse of the word theory is a big pet peeve of
mine.

In day to day conversation, people use it interchangeably with the word
opinion (or as you mentioned hypothesis).

"My theory is the government should such and such." This is bogus! So later,
when someone hears about the "theory" of evolution, it strikes them as
something with which they can disagree.

------
gsivil
Is there an arXiv paper on that?

------
trustfundbaby
Anyone who's feeling like they can't handle the physics here should probably
just leave now ...

~~~
trustfundbaby
... its a joke people. relax. <http://xkcd.com/849/>

