Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Newton wrong [from an article]?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538

    Newton wrong [from an article]?

    They claim Newton was wrong in a specific article:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...ein-black-hole

    How? (They donít speculate on Newton)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,142
    Newtonian gravitation has been known to be inconsistent with observations for a hundred years. And the criteria for where Newtonian laws are a good approximation to GR have been well known for a similar amount of time. The headline "Newton's laws don't predict what we see around a black hole" is probably up there with "Quantum mechanics is a better model than the Bohr atom", "The Sun is made of hydrogen" and "Some materials have zero resistivity at very low temperatures" in terms of shock value.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaula View Post
    Newtonian gravitation has been known to be inconsistent with observations for a hundred years. And the criteria for where Newtonian laws are a good approximation to GR have been well known for a similar amount of time. The headline "Newton's laws don't predict what we see around a black hole" is probably up there with "Quantum mechanics is a better model than the Bohr atom", "The Sun is made of hydrogen" and "Some materials have zero resistivity at very low temperatures" in terms of shock value.
    Ok but this sounds like the galactic rotation curve problem but applied to a lower scale, no?

    And they do not have an exact uncertainty of Newtonís and Einsteinís gravity yet but they are about to now with their new observations if I understand correctly?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,663
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Ok but this sounds like the galactic rotation curve problem but applied to a lower scale, no?
    No.

    You really shouldn't try and extract any sense from articles like that. Here is a more accurate description of the research: https://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1825/

    Basically, confirming the results of GR in more extreme conditions than has been possible before (ie. a star in close orbit around black hole).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    They claim Newton was wrong in a specific article:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...ein-black-hole

    How? (They donít speculate on Newton)
    Come now, it's The Express. Read it, if you must, for the football scores, not for accurate science reporting.

    Fred
    Hey, you! "It's" with an apostrophe means "it is" or "it has." "Its" without an apostrophe means "belongs to it."

    "For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time."
    -- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684

    Earth's sole legacy will be a very slight increase (0.01%) of the solar metallicity.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    17,753
    Yep, that's an idiotic article from an idiotic newspaper.
    Why not just read the original research paper? It took about ten seconds to find, and most of that was spent typing "ghez s0-2 2019" into a search engine.

    Grant Hutchison

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    No.
    Ok I understand it is no yet disproved and that the title of the article is misleading but I think this needs to be further investigated because weíre on the right track.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,663
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Ok I understand it is no yet disproved and that the title of the article is misleading but I think this needs to be further investigated because we’re on the right track.
    What is not yet disproved?

    What needs further investigating?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    What is not yet disproved?

    What needs further investigating?
    The exact speed if the stars around the black hole, just like the galactic rotation curve.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    17,753
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    What is not yet disproved?

    What needs further investigating?
    The exact speed if the stars around the black hole, just like the galactic rotation curve.
    The speed of the stars is already explained by general relativity, as the original research paper (link in my previous post) makes clear. There's no mystery, merely confirmation of existing theory.

    Grant Hutchison

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    The speed of the stars is already explained by general relativity, as the original research paper (link in my previous post) makes clear. There's no mystery, merely confirmation of existing theory.

    Grant Hutchison
    Thanks for the clarifications.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    10,663
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    The exact speed if the stars around the black hole, just like the galactic rotation curve.
    There is no connection with galactic rotation curves.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,827
    Originally Posted by Strange

    What is not yet disproved?

    What needs further investigating?
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    The exact speed if the stars around the black hole, just like the galactic rotation curve.
    Have no fear. Plenty of astronomers will be measuring the motions of these stars for the next few decades.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    26,704
    Quote Originally Posted by philippeb8 View Post
    They claim Newton was wrong in a specific article:
    https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...ein-black-hole
    What bothers me about articles like this is they tend to propagate misconceptions about how science works. We've had science going pretty much how it works today for 400 years or so, so you'd think there would be a general clue about what science does. Not so, false ideas about how science works are much more common than good language that really explains what scientists do. For example, this article says that Newton's theory has been "dismissed" because it is "wrong." Those two simple words say more about what this article doesn't understand about science than the whole rest of the article could possibly recover from by quoting the words of actual scientists ("We can absolutely rule out Newton’s law of gravity. Our observations are consistent with Einstein’s theory of general relativity"). Unfortunately quotes like that must be translated so that people can understand what they mean, and pop sci writers generally fail to do that. Instead, they interpret "ruling out" as meaning "dismissing," when in fact it just means "we have found a context where the theory is unsatisfactory." Of course we knew there would be such contexts from the start, if we were paying any attention at all to the history of science. Which apparently, we still aren't, because it's not the better story.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by StupendousMan View Post
    Have no fear. Plenty of astronomers will be measuring the motions of these stars for the next few decades.
    Good.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,447
    Express New flash:
    Newtonian physics doesn't apply to black holes.

    Also in Express:
    6000 year old Earth is discredited by newly found fossils of ancient monsters.
    Atoms are not hard little billiard balls.
    Diseases are caused by microbes too small to see.
    Passengers on trains doing 60mph will not have their uteruses fall out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •