In the preceding chapter we looked into the fundaments of General Relativity Theory (GR), and identified a number of contradictions within it. Just like Special Relativity (SR) however, GR has a number of experiments to confirm its contentions.
Some of them are: . Light bending . Gravity Lensing . Perihelion of Mercury . Clocks on GPS satellites
There are other experiments also but we’ll focus on the above since these cover the important elements of GR.
Light bending
The first item of evidence involves a famous experiment to determine whether gravity is able bend light, such as from stars.
First some background. To be precise, the idea that gravity could bend light is not entirely the domain of GR. We know from classical mechanics that an object moving through a gravitational field will do so in a curve. The degree of curvature is based only on speed and not on its mass. Therefore we could hypothesise that an object with zero mass, such as a photon, should also curve and its degree of curvature will be based on its speed: c. With GR however, the degree of curvature calculates to double this amount.
On May 29, 1919 an astronomer named Arthur Eddington took photos during a solar eclipse. The photos showed that stars close to the Sun appeared further out than they should be. This showed that the light from the star had somehow curved around the Sun and changed the apparent positions of the stars. Given that light might bend from a Newtonian perspective however, Eddington’s mission was not just to determine if gravity could bend light but whether it did so according to Newtonian or GR predictions. Eddington predicted a GR curvature of 1.75 arc-seconds, versus a Newtonian prediction of 0.87. He then measured a curvature of 1.61; a result which gave weight to the GR prediction and was heralded as a proof of GR.
Now it is frequently charged in academic circles that Eddington’s experiments were faulty. Particularly that: (a) his equipment wasn’t accurate enough to measure the predicted arc-second angular differences (b) the experiments were done during mostly cloudy weather, and (c) he threw out the photographs that didn’t confirm GR postulates [1].
Whether Eddington did so or not however is probably not very relevant now because since then the experiments have been apparently reproduced on several occasions. Does this mean that gravity does bend light after all, and to a degree predicted by GR? Or could there be another explanation?
In olden times, before GPS, seafaring navigators would turn to the stars. By looking at, e.g. the angle of the North Star above the horizon, they were able to calculate their latitude above the equator. Now it was well known then as it is now that the observed position of a star is not its actual position. The reason is that Earth’s atmosphere refracts/bends light and causes stars to appear at higher elevations. This is shown below.
The Earth is not the only planet with an atmosphere. Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, etc., also have atmospheres. In fact, every object in the Solar System with large enough gravity appears to hold an atmosphere. The Sun is far larger. Does it have an atmosphere? It sure does! The atmosphere of the Sun, also called the corona, is visible and extends many millions of miles into space.
Doesn’t it seem likely then that this atmosphere would also refract the stars around it, causing them to appear at higher ‘elevations’ much as they do on Earth? If the Sun had an atmosphere, regardless of what gasses composed it, light from stars would have no ‘choice’ but to refract through it as shown below.
So how do we know that this bending of light is nothing other than refraction through an atmosphere? One objection to this idea might be that the stars are above the corona and thus couldn’t be refracted by them. But the corona is just an illuminated portion of the atmosphere. Beyond the corona would likely be further gasses albeit less dense and not illuminated. After all, the Earth’s atmosphere doesn’t stop suddenly at some altitude; it just steadily becomes thinner. There is no reason to assume why the Sun wouldn’t do likewise.
A further objection might be that the light bending may be a combination of both refraction and gravity. This is a possibility certainly, however in order to confirm this it would be necessary to account for both of these effects in the measured total. As far as can be determined, Eddington didn’t do so, nor do more recent experiments make mention of the possibility.
Gravitational lensing
Beyond the Solar System a related phenomenon is occurring. It involves the bending of light around stars and large celestial bodies such as galaxies and galaxy clusters. The bending of light around all sides of these bodies can cause them to act like cosmic magnifying glasses. This is called gravitational lensing and allows astronomers to view larger images of the objects behind them (behind the celestial bodies, not the astronomers).
But if the Sun has an atmosphere then stars and other giant bodies must be likewise surrounded with gas. In fact formations called nebulae are known to be made up almost entirely of dust and gas. Therefore it stands to reason that these bodies should likewise refract light around them, leading to a magnifying effect. If refraction is the true cause of the gravitational lensing phenomenon then it would seem more appropriate to call it ‘gas lensing’.
There is one aspect of gravitational lensing however that’s quite different from the visual effects observed during solar eclipses. Namely, gravitational lensing can cause light to be bent or stretched into arcs. There are a number of curious aspects to this phenomenon that are too deep to go into here, but I discuss them in a supplemental chapter:
One of the earliest and most accurate items of evidence supporting GR theory has to do with the planet Mercury. Unlike most planets, Mercury has a strongly elliptical orbit about the Sun. Its orbit isn’t fixed however; instead the elliptical path steadily rotates forward. An exaggeration of the pattern looks like this:
As each orbit is completed the new orbit begins at a point slightly in advance of where the previous orbit began. This is known as "the advancement of the perihelion of Mercury". The reason the perihelion (the point in the orbit of a planet nearest to the Sun) advances has to do with a number of things, one of which is the influence of other planet’s orbits.
Using Newton’s gravity equations, we can determine that the predicted advancement in the orbit should be 532 arc-seconds per century. The measured advancement however is 575 arc-seconds: 43 more than predicted. In 1915 Einstein used GR to calculate the expected amount of precession using GR and found the calculation yielded a precession of 43 arc-seconds, which precisely accounted for the difference.
The work of Paul Gerber
Step back in time. Two decades earlier a German physicist named Paul Gerber was exploring the same subject. Gerber proposed that the speed of gravity was the same as light and this might account for the missing precession. In 1898 he published a paper "The Space and Time Propagation of Gravity" [2]. See an English translation here. In this he calculated the speed of gravity to be very close to light speed.
Toward the end of the paper it states light speed as:
Where a is the semi-major axis, e is the eccentricity, Ψ is the perihelion advance and T is the time of an orbit.
Kepler’s third law of planetary motion tells us that:
We can substitute T into the above formulae and give the precession as:
Where G = 6.673x10-11 N m2 kg-2, M (mass of sun)= 1.989x1030 kg, c = 2.998x108 m/s, a = 5.791x1010 m, e = 0.2056.
Substituting these values gives a precession of 5.019x10-7 radians per orbit. Multiplying this by 415.2 (orbits per century) and then by 3600*180/pi (converting to arc-seconds) we get 42.98 arc-seconds per century - an ideal match to observation!
In other words, using only Newtonian gravitation plus the reasonable assumption that gravity propagates at light-speed, Gerber calculated the correct result. Given that classical mechanics can fully account for the missing precession, in what way can we say that the precession proves GR theory instead of Gerber’s calculation? Here there is no need for the relativity calculation. It is also important to note that Gerber’s paper was published 17 years before the GR papers and thus developed independently of GR.
This doesn’t mean that Gerber’s method is correct either, just that there is more than one way of getting the required amount. A more important question is, is the actual descrepancy 43 arcseconds? A careful analysis indicates otherwise and is discussed in a supplemental chapter:
Another strong piece of evidence used in support of GR is the Global Positioning System (GPS). GPS satellites are said to experience a net time dilation of 38,700ns (nanoseconds) a day: +45900ns due to GR and -7200ns due to SR [3].
As explained in an earlier chapter, any time dilation experienced by the satellites won’t affect the accuracy of GPS receivers because the receivers determine their local time from the satellites’ clocks. But that aside, time dilation effects will show up in a comparison between satellite clocks and ground-based atomic clocks. We will examine this here by looking closely at the SR and GR numbers.
The amount of dilation due to SR can easily be determined using the LT. Plugging the satellites’ orbit velocity of 3780m/s into the LT and multiplying by the number of seconds per day gives:
This equals -7.2x10-6 seconds or -7200ns and agrees with the stated amount. So far so good. Now to calculate dilation due to GR.
The satellites orbit at an approximate altitude of 20,200km. Using equation (3) in the chapter on General Relativity we can calculate the expected differences in time dilation at the Earth’s surface and at the satellite:
Where M is the mass of Earth, R is the radius, A is the altitude of the GPS, and 86400 is the number of seconds in a day. Substituting values of M=5.974x1024, R=6.357x106, and A=2.02x107 we get:
Net dilation = 45850 ns.
And this closely matches the measured amount. Brilliant!
Relativity on the Earth’s surface
Before dissecting the above result, let’s look at a related question that has to do with relativity (both types) on the Earth’s surface: Given that the equator is in constant motion relative to the poles, is there any time dilation between the two? Put another way, should atomic clocks run at different rates at the pole and equator?
Since the equator is moving, SR would predict that clocks on the equator run slower. However, since the equator has lower gravity, GR would predict them to run faster. Which clock wins the race? To answer this we must calculate the amount of dilation of each type.
First the SR. The velocity at the equator is 465.1 m/s. For this speed, the Lorentz factor gives a value of 1+1.203x10-12. Over a 24 hour period this would make clocks on the equator run 104ns slower.
Now the GR. Earth’s gravity measures at 9.78 m/s2 at the equator and 9.83 m/s2 at the poles. It has a radius of 6,378 km at the equator and 6,357 km at the poles. Using equation (2) in the chapter on General Relativity we can calculate the expected differences in time dilation over a 24 hour period:
This comes to 108ns.
These two values almost cancel each other out meaning that the clocks will tick at the same rate. Actually the clocks should completely cancel due to equipotential of the Earth’s surface as shown at this site [4], but we are lacking enough numerical precision to make the values equal.
No equivalence for GPS
The fact that SR & GR cancel across the Earth’s surface is a mixed blessing. On one hand it’s good because we don’t need to worry about unsynchronized clocks at different latitudes. On the flip side it means that we can’t use them to verify relativity. But there is a reason for pointing this out and that has to do with the Equivalence Principle.
We know that gravity at the equator is made of two components: actual gravity from the Earth (a downward pull), and centrifugal (upward) force which lessens the effect. We can easily calculate the strength of the centrifugal component to be 0.034 m/s2.
In above equation (2) the quoted value of gravity at the equator, 9.78 m/s2, is the measured value. The true equatorial gravity must be 9.780+0.034=9.814 m/s2. However we don’t use this true value of gravity in our calculation of GR time-dilation, only the net (real gravity minus centrifugal force) value. The reason for this has to do with the Equivalence Principle which states that gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable and should be treated alike. If we used the number 9.814 we would calculate a gravitational dilation at the equator that is higher than at the pole – the opposite of what we need to counteract SR at the equator.
Now cast your eye to our earlier calculation of GPS GR time dilation shown in equation (1). Here we determined the difference between dilation at the equator and dilation at the satellite. The first term, with R in denominator, represents time dilation at the equator. The second, with R+A, represents dilation at the satellite. Let’s split these apart:
Time dilation at equator is: 1 + 6.9774x10-10
Time dilation at satellite is: 1 + 1.6702x10-10
The first term represents the gravity at the equator. The second represents gravity at the satellite. Is something amiss here?
Hang on a tick... gravity at the satellite? There’s no measurable gravity on man-made satellites! The satellite is in orbit and experiences an outward force exactly equal to the inward real-gravitational pull. The net gravity, according to the Equivalence Principle, is therefore zero and the satellite shouldn’t experience gravitational time dilation.
So what should the net dilation between the equator and satellite be? Using the above equation (2) with the second term set to 1 (for zero dilation), we get:
= 59960 ns
This value is 31% higher than the quoted value of 45900ns.
A GPS fudge?
What does this mean? Why is it that when calculating the GR dilation on Earth we take into account centrifugal force, basing calculations only on ‘net gravity’, while on GPS satellites we ignore centrifugal force? Put another way, why doesn’t the Equivalence Principle apply to GPS?
According to the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, experiments done during the initial testing of GPS satellites in 1977 showed that unadjusted satellites overall ran faster than Earth-based atomic clocks by 442.5 parts in 1012[5]. This equates to an inaccuracy of 38230ns per day [6] – a close fit to the SR+GR calculations shown above.
However these calculations are inconsistent with the Equivalence Principle as used in comparisons between pole & equator clocks. If the same logic was applied to both sets of clocks, the net dilation for GPS satellites would be 59960-7200 = 52760ns : 37% higher than the stated value of 38600ns. Why the difference?
Is it possible that ... GPS satellites experience NO dilation at all ?
Keep in mind that prior to the invention of satellites there was no easy way to test the SR and GR postulates properly. Up to this point the evidence was shaky, the errors large, and hence much of GR and SR was just assumed to be correct. What would happen then, when GPS was being developed, if the engineers discovered that in fact no dilation occurred?
Information like that would be pretty embarrassing, especially to the mainstream scientific community who had been preaching relativity for the past 70 years. What to do? Admit they’re wrong? Not likely! The simplest solution would be to calculate the expected amount of dilation and then claim to have built that into the satellites.
Problem solved! The theory of relativity is not only preserved, it’s also exalted to a stage where the average Joe with a GPS receiver can vouch for relativity on a daily basis. After all, who would even suspect that atomic clocks aboard satellites might actually be running at the same rate as clocks everywhere else?
The Holy Grail Story is told in ancient legends such as King Arthur and the Round Table. Meanwhile, Hollywood blockbuster movies like “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade” and (Dan Brown’s) “The Da Vinci Code” are today’s topics to discuss. These stories are defined in different aspects. They believe in a relic with supernatural powers that dates back to Christ. Furthermore, others believe the Grail is a miraculous “stone” or the sacred bloodline that carries Jesus’ blood.
But how many realities and secrets are hidden in these myths? We combine history and folk tales with science to investigate places and some of the literature. We also justify forgotten information to highlight this fantastic subject. Now it’s time to explore lost books and define major and incredible connections in our content.
BLOODY FATE of the Knights Templar Revealed | Buried: Knights Templar and Holy Grail
Here is a small reference to the previous article:-
Our last post highlighted “Rise TV Friday Night Live Show.” Rise TV is a unique streaming network that offers entertaining and inspiring shows, providing a refreshing escape from the negativity and confusion of the daily news cycle.
The Chalice Grail, the Church, and the Legend of Merlin and King Arthur:-
In infamous texts and journals, the Holy Grail is seen as a powerful item capable of granting unchanging life. These journals also describe abundance, healing, desires, and unlimited youth to its bearer.
According to traditional Christian belief, the chalice was held during the Last Supper as Jesus Christ used it as the holy Grail. Later, his blood was collected on the same chalice during his crucifixion. Some churches worldwide still claim to be the piece’s guardians and this chain of events gave the item its supernatural “powers.”
Centuries later, Robert de Boron and Parsifal by Chretien de Troyes and Wolfram von Eschenbach revived the Holy Grail tale in works like Merlin. These people identified themselves as poets and minstrels. But they were told the holy grail story that continues today and the story is full of difficulties and secrets. Their exceptional works slowly uncover these special tales brick by brick.
These poets described famous mythological Knight Templars such as King Arthur and his Round Table allies. A beginning and a spiritual trip continually described The Holy Grail hunt, the same as defined in legends. According to these legendary tales, the Knights Templars must show their purity of heart, and worth to face many trials and difficulties on their path.
The Living Grail, or Christ’s Bloodline:-
History explains that the sacred bloodline of “Jesus Christ” has been a controversial theory. However, it has recently achieved across-the-board attention because of Dan Brown’s writings. For centuries several authors have researched connecting this myth to find possible evidence. They searched for the secrets of the holy grail in monasteries, and libraries, and wrote chronicles for proof.
Some authors and academics believe in this theory. After settling in Europe, José de Arimathea established a hidden bloodline “The Protectors of the Sangreal”. The family through this bloodline is considered a direct descendant of holy Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. According to this theory, the power and monarchy of Christ’s blood are also assumed as The Living Grail or its carrier.
The Catholic Church regards Christ’s ancestry as a hidden secret. They attempted to hide the reality that Jesus Christ had a wife, “Mary Magdalene” and their child still exists today. Perhaps, a group of people who had saved the family from potential harm and assassination. Because it was necessary to protect the holy family. On the other side of the story, the Church was also required to retain power through the Roman Empire.
Mythology mentions that the Merovingian dynasty was another element. So, they controlled France from the fifth to the eighth centuries. Historians assumed that the Merovingians were descended from Jesus Christ and his wife Mary Magdalene. This secret bloodline is known as “Sangreal”. The history mentioned Merovingian kings as “The Holy Kings”. Perhaps they were gifted with heavenly authority because they proudly carried Jesus Christ’s holy blood in their veins.
The “STONE” or Alchemical Grail (Philosopher’s Stone):-
One of our research’s most fascinating authors Wolfram von Eschenbach provided fresh proof of the Grail Legend. This proof defined “the Grail as a stone”, “not a chalice” or “a bloodline”.
Wolfram von Eschenbach’s mythology explains a historical belief. This mythology proves that the Grail Stone was made of a substance known as “Lapis exilis” or “Exile Stone.” It presumably fell from the sky in the form of a meteor. According to this German composer, this stone was the Grail’s source of power and vitality. Only the holy people with a pure heart and noble intentions may approach it and use its abilities.
The legend of the Chintamani Stone of Asia is shockingly similar to this narrative. The legend of the Emerald of Lucifer is also comparable to the previous theory which we will explore in future articles. It is said that The Stone had therapeutic abilities like other stories. The holy stone had to cure wounds and diseases, grant desires, and deliver visions for spiritual acknowledgements.
The Establishment and Early History of the Knights Templar:-
The Knights Templar were formed about 1119 and received papal approval in 1129. It was a Catholic military order in which participants combined martial prowess with a monastic lifestyle to protect Christian sacred sites and pilgrims in the Middle East and beyond. The Templars, headquartered in Jerusalem and later Acre, were a significant and elite component of Crusader armies.
The Knights Templar eventually grew to be a powerful organization, controlling castles and territory throughout the Levant and Europe. Accused of heresy, corruption, and forbidden acts, the order was assailed by French king Philip IV (r. 1285–1314) on Friday, October 13, 1307, and officially dissolved by Pope Clement V (r. 1305–1314) in 1312.
Foundation and Early History:-
The order was founded around 1119 when seven knights, led by Hugh of Payns, a French knight and nobleman from Champagne, vowed to protect Christian pilgrims in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, forming a brotherhood that took monastic vows, including vows of poverty and lived in an enclosed community with a set of rules of conduct.
In 1120, Baldwin II, the ruler of the Kingdom of Jerusalem (r. 1118–1131), offered the knights his palace, the old Aqsa Mosque on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, to serve as headquarters. Because the structure was generally referred to as ‘The Temple of Solomon’, the brotherhood swiftly became known as ‘the Order of the Knights of the Temple of Solomon’ or simply the ‘Knights Templar’.
The Templars were formerly considered a branch of the Cistercians until Pope Honorius II (r. 1124–1130) officially recognized them as an order at the Council of Troyes in January 1129 (the first such military organization to be established). In 1145, knights of the order received authorization to wear the white hooded mantle that Cistercian monks had created.
The knights quickly adopted their unique white cloak and began to utilize the symbol of a red cross on a white background. Fighting was not prohibited by Catholic dogma as long as the purpose was just — the Wars of the Crusades and defense of the Holy Land being prime examples — and hence the organization got official Church endorsement. Templar knights fought their first significant combat against Muslims in 1147, during the Second Crusade (1147–1149).
Since the mid-12th era, the Templars have expanded their power by fighting in crusade battles in Iberia (the ‘Retake’) for different rulers in Spain and Portugal. By the 13th century, the Knights Templar held lands from England to Bohemia and had evolved into a truly multinational military organization with enormous resources (personnel, weaponry, equipment, and a sizable maritime fleet).
The Templars had devised a paradigm that would be followed by other military organizations such as the Teutonic Knights and Knights Hospitaller. However, there was one area where the Templars excelled: banking.
Uniform and Rules of the Knights Templar:-
Knights swore vows upon entering the order, similar to those taken in monasteries, but less rigorous and without the requirement to always remain in their communal quarters. The most essential commitment was obedience to the Grand Master; attendance at church services was required, as was celibacy, and community meals were provided (which occasionally included meat).
Worldly pleasures were not permitted, including such classically knightly pursuits as hunting and hawking, as well as not wearing the showy apparel and armaments that conventional knights were known for. Belts, for example, were frequently used as a means of ornamentation, but the Templars wore a simple wool cord belt to represent virginity.
Knights Templar wore a white coat and cloak over their armor, as previously stated, and a crimson cross on their left breast. The red cross appears in the horse livery and the order’s banner. This set them apart from the Knights Hospitaller (who wore a white cross on a black backdrop) and the Teutonic Knights (who wore a black cross on a white background).
Templar protection, in contrast, was often white with a broad black horizontal line over the top. Sergeants donned a brown or black cape or cloak. Another distinguishing aspect of the Templars was that they uniformly grew beards and had short hair.
Criticism, Trial, and Abolition:-
Western monarchs became leery of military instructions as they began to collect a vast network of holdings and cash reserves. The Templars, like other military orders, had long been accused of misusing their privileges and exploiting their financial affairs to maximize profit. They were charged with corruption, as well as excessive pride and greed. Critics claimed they led a leisurely life and wasted money that could have been spent preparing troops for the Holy War.
They were accused of squandering resources to compete with competing orders, particularly the Hospitallers. There was also the ancient belief that monks and warriors were an incompatible mix. Some even lambasted the directive for focusing solely on removing Muslims rather than converting them. The majority of these critiques were based on a lack of knowledge about the order’s operations, a distortion of their true wealth, and a general sense of jealousy and suspicion.
By the end of the 13th century, many people believed that the military orders were too independent for everyone’s benefit and that combining them into a single body would be the best way to make them more responsive to the Church and individual state rulers.
Then, beginning around 1307, much more serious accusations were leveled against the Templars. They were accused of denying Christ’s divinity, as well as the crucifixion and cross. There were rumors that initiation into the brotherhood entailed trampling, spitting, and peeing on a crucifix. These charges were made public, especially by the French government.
Ordinary clergy were also jealous of the order’s rights, such as burial, which might be a valuable sideline for any local church. The governmental and religious establishments.
What does the Knights Templar have to do with it…?
During the 12th century the Crusades era this order had been created. An armed and religious order of the Knights Templars officially came into existence. They defended the Christian people who came to Jerusalem. One of the most powerful and prominent Middle Ages orders had settled by this time. So, they accumulated money and property throughout Europe.
The Grail stories mentioned above (von Eschenbach, de Boron, and de Troyes) originated in the same period. Fresh evidence mentioned in studies is gaining attention. So, the association of the Templars with the Holy Grail is a repeating topic in several stories. In this scenario, everyone agreed with the story almost unanimously that the Templars were the guardians of the Grail (artefact or bloodline).
The Knights Templars came extinct in 1307, according to official history. There was a horrible time for the Templars. When French King Philip IV launched a campaign to eradicate them and seize their extensive treasures. The King accused the order of sinful behaviours like demon worship and heresy against the Catholic Church. They were also suspected of holding secret ceremonies involving the “Grail”.
The charges were based mainly on under-tortured statements. Philip IV also assembled a council to judge the Templars under his power from Pope Clement V. Most of the members of this order were captured, tortured, and executed. Unfortunately in 1314, Jacques de Molay the founder of the Knights Templars was burned alive at the stake.
A famous chronicle tells us. Before “Master of the Templers” de Molay’s death, he warned his accusers, including King Philip IV and Pope Clement V. He foretold them, they would perish before the year’s end. And true to his words, it happened.
Final Thoughts:-
We witnessed several theories concerning the Holy Grail but some of the stories were quite surprising like the Knights Templars story. We don’t want to convince a new one that one version is superior to the other, or even that it exists. It is up to each individual to consider the values of the information and use their conclusions.
We find the encouragement of legend and oral tradition with questions that matter more: What was the real purpose of the Knights Templar?
Could a mysterious organization have instructed The Knights Templers?
Why did they live only atop the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and fortify themselves there for years before being destroyed?
Was the Holy Grail frankly an object? Why do different religions and beliefs hold similar stories about this artefact?
Would the Knights Templar be extinct, or do they still exist today with the same mission and symbolism in various camouflages?
Soon, we shall be going on a journey that will bring us direct contact with these stories. The truth is out there!
Radio Data Using Vikings on Mars Further Confirm Einstein Theory
By Credit...The New York Times ArchivesEstimated Delay of Waves
Results of the experiment were reported at a news conference held at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. The Viking 1 and 2 spacecraft are being controlled there.
The experiment was conducted last Nov. 25, Thanksgiving Day, at the time of solar conjunction. At that time, Mars moved behind the sun in relation to Earth, causing a total blackout of communications between the Vikings and Earth.
But just before and after the blackout, radio signals were transmitted from antennaes at Goldstone, Calif., and Canberra, Australia, to both of the Viking orbiters and landers and then from the spacecraft back to Earth. The round‐trip travel times of the signals were carefully clocked. The transmissions were repeated frequently to check for accuracy.
The results, Dr. Shapiro said, were “in very good agreement with the theory of general relativity.”
Not that he expected to prove Einstein wrong. Previous tests using spacecraft communications systems tended to confirm the theory, but the Viking test is considered twice as accurate, or more, than the previous ones.
In a telephone interview after the conference, Dr. Shapiro said:
“I would have been very surprised Einstein was wrong. But one just can't take theories for granted. Physics is an experimental approach to nature. Einstein came along to explain deviations in Newton's theory of gravity. And at some level of probing we may find Einstein's theory will break down and no longer be a totally adequate theory of the way nature behaves.”
I write about physics, science, academia, and pop culture.
Sep 30, 2015,10:51am EDT
Updated Sep 30, 2015, 03:56pm EDT
This article is more than 9 years old.
The dominant science news story of the moment is the latest discovery of water on Mars, which is fortuitously timed to coincide with the release of the movie The Martian this week. A little over a month from now, the big story will be the 100th anniversary of Einstein's completion of General Relativity. These might not seem like they have much to do with each other, but in fact, Mars missions have a closer connection to relativity than you might think.
John Grunsfeld, associate administrator at NASA's Science Mission Directorate, speaks with... [+]
General relativity famously involves the warping of space and time by gravity, and it was observations during a 1919 eclipse showing the bending of light that catapulted Einstein to fame. Stars near the disk of the Sun had their apparent position (relative to stars farther from the Sun) shifted slightly, as the rays that passed close to the Sun were deflected by its warping of spacetime. The measured deflection agreed nicely with Einstein's prediction, and the rest is one of the great hyperbolic headlines is history.
Of course, relativity makes lots of predictions about what should happen near a massive object like the Sun, and the bending of starlight only tests one. Another thing that ought to happen is a slight "stretching" of space-- which is why discussions of relativity almost always include stretched rubber sheets. The distance between two points in space will be slightly longer along a path that passes close to the Sun than along one that never goes near it.
Embedding diagrams showing the spacetime distortion in the vicinity of a massive object, and the... [+]
This is kind of a difficult thing to get your head around, but like everything else, it comes back to the fact that keeping the laws of physics consistent regardless of how you're moving requires the mixing of space and time. In special relativity, what one observer sees as purely a distance in space, somebody moving at constant speed relative to them will see as a mix of space and time-- the position of the two endpoints is measured at two slightly different times. This is the root of most of the "paradoxes" of relativity. The exact mix of space and time depends on the speed of the observer, and the equations of relativity tell you how to calculate that.
General relativity tells us that the exact mix of space and time for a particular measurement also depends on the presence of gravity. What an observer near the Sun sees as purely a distance in space will look, from far away, like a mix of space and time. This mixing changes the result for distance measurements.
Foundation stone. On August 15, 1806, Emperor Napoleon I's birthday, the foundation stone of the building was laid at a depth of eight meters, between the two southern pillars.
This striking, high-resolution image of the Arc de Triomphe, in Paris, was captured by Planet SkySat – a fleet of satellites that have just joined ESA’s Third Party Mission Programme in April 2022. The Arc de Triomphe, or in full Arc de Triomphe de l’Étoile, is an iconic symbol of France and one of the world’s best-known commemorative monuments. The triumphal arch was commissioned by Napoleon I in 1806 to celebrate the military achievements of the French armies. Construction of the arch began the following year, on 15 August (Napoleon’s birthday).
The arch stands at the centre of the Place Charles de Gaulle, the meeting point of 12 grand avenues which form a star (or étoile), which is why it is also referred to as the Arch of Triumph of the Star. The arch is 50 m high and 45 m wide.
The names of all French victories and generals are inscribed on the arch’s inner and outer surfaces, while the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier from World War I lies beneath its vault. The tomb’s flame is rekindled every evening as a symbol of the enduring nature of the commemoration and respect shown to those who have fallen in the name of France.
The Arc de Triomphe’s location at the Place Charles de Gaulle places it at the heart of the capital and the western terminus of the Avenue des Champs-Élysées (visible in the bottom-right of the image). Often referred to as the ‘most beautiful avenue in the world’, the Champs-Élysées is known for its theatres, cafés and luxury shops, as the finish of the Tour de France cycling race, as well as for its annual Bastille Day military parade.
This image, captured on 9 April 2022, was provided by Planet SkySat – a fleet of 21 very high-resolution satellites capable of collecting images multiple times during the day. SkySat’s satellite imagery, with 50 cm spatial resolution, is high enough to focus on areas of great interest, identifying objects such as vehicles and shipping containers.
SkySat data, along with PlanetScope (both owned and operated by Planet Labs), serve numerous commercial and governmental applications. These data are now available through ESA’s Third Party Mission programme – enabling researchers, scientists and companies from around the world the ability to access Planet’s high-frequency, high-resolution satellite data for non-commercial use.
Within this programme, Planet joins more than 50 other missions to add near-daily PlanetScope imagery, 50 cm SkySat imagery, and RapidEye archive data to this global network.
Peggy Fischer, Mission Manager for ESA’s Third Party Missions, commented, “We are very pleased to welcome PlanetScope and SkySat to ESA’s Third Party Missions portfolio and to begin the distribution of the Planet data through the ESA Earthnet Programme.
“The high-resolution and high-frequency imagery from these satellite constellations will provide an invaluable resource for the European R&D and applications community, greatly benefiting research and business opportunities across a wide range of sectors.”
To find out more on how to apply to the Earthnet Programme and get started with Planet data, click here.
The Arc de Triomphe, or in full Arc de Triomphe de l’Étoile, is an iconic symbol of France and one of the world’s best-known commemorative monuments. The triumphal arch was commissioned by Napoleon I in 1806 to celebrate the military achievements of the French armies. Construction of the arch began the following year, on 15 August (Napoleon’s birthday).
Illustration on the base of the obelisk, showing how it was raised into place in 1836
Hieroglyphs on the obelisk.
Hieroglyphs on the upper obelisk. The Pharaoh on his throne is portrayed at the top
The centrepiece of the Place de la Concorde is an ancient Egyptian obelisk decorated with hieroglyphics exalting the reign of the pharaoh Ramesses II. It is one of two which the Egyptian government gave to the French in the 19th century. The other one stayed in Egypt, too difficult and heavy to move to France with the technology at that time. On 26 September 1981 President François Mitterrand formally returned the title of the second obelisk to Egypt.[16]
The obelisk once marked the entrance to the Luxor Temple. The wali of Egypt, or hereditary governor, Muhammad Ali Pasha, offered the 3,300-year-old Luxor Obelisk as a diplomatic gift to France in 1829. It arrived in Paris on 21 December 1833. Three years later, it was hoisted into place, on top of the pedestal which originally supported the statue of Louis XV, destroyed during the Revolution. The raising of the column was a major feat of engineering, depicted by illustrations on the base of the monument. King Louis Philippe dedicated the obelisk on 25 October 1836.[17]
The obelisk, a yellow granite column, rises 23 metres (75 ft) high, including the base, and weighs over 250 tonnes (280 short tons). Given the technical limitations of the day, transporting it was no easy feat – on the pedestal are drawn diagrams explaining the machinery that was used for the transportation. The government of France added a gold-leafed pyramidal cap to the top of the obelisk in 1998, replacing the missing original, believed stolen in the 6th century BC.[18]
La plaza de la Concordia se encuentra al pie de la avenida de los Campos Elíseos y bordea los jardines de las Tullerías. Hoy destaca por el Obelisco de Luxor (que data del año 3.300 a.C. y fue erigido en mayo de 1998), los prestigiosos hoteles que la bordean y sus dos fuentes monumentales (Fontaine des Mers y Fontaine des Fleuves). Creada a finales del siglo XVIII, la plaza de la Concordia fue conocida por ser uno de los lugares de ejecución durante la Revolución Francesa. Luis XVI y María Antonieta (entre otros) fueron guillotinados aquí. Entre 1836 y 1846, el arquitecto Jacques-Ignace Hittorf transformó la plaza en lo que es hoy.
Thème précédent
![John Grunsfeld, associate administrator at NASA's Science Mission Directorate, speaks with... [+] colleagues at a press conference where NASA announced new findings that provide the 'strongest evidence yet' of salty liquid water currently existing on Mars. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)](https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/490420754/640x0.jpg?format=jpg&width=1440)
.jpg)
.jpg)
