Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.physics.research    |    Current physics research. (Moderated)    |    17,520 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 16,776 of 17,520    |
|    Jos Bergervoet to All    |
|    Re: confirmation of undisputed results    |
|    04 Jan 21 20:19:28    |
      From: jos.bergervoet@xs4all.nl              On 21/01/04 10:49 AM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:       > Not much effort is put into confirming or refuting undisputed results or       > expectations, but occasionally it does happen. For example, according       > to theory muons are supposed to be essentially just like electrons but       > heavier, but there seems to be experimental evidence that that is not       > the case, presumably because someone decided to look for it.              Are you referring to the muon g-2 experiment? Or what other results       are there to indicate this?              > What about even more-basic stuff? For example, over what range (say,       > multiple or fraction of the peak wavelength) has the Planck black-body       > radiation law been experimentally verified? Or that radioactive decay       > really follows an exponential law? Or that the various forms (weak,       > strong, Einstein) of the equivalence principle hold?              Einstein's GR predictions have had attention, but mainly at large scale.       Testing the short-range part of gravity at the lab-experiment scale       would basically be testing Newton's theory, and departures from 1/r^2       have been looked for. Also Eötvös' experiment has often been checked.       I think we need even more basic examples to find something new!              > I realize that it is difficult to get funding for things like those, but       > at least in some cases the corresponding experiment shouldn't be too       > expensive.              But what can we still do?       Ohm's law? Has been done.. (Hall effect, SQUIDs, tunneling, "break       junctions" etc..)       Maybe Maxwell?! Non-linearity at high field-strength is predicted by       QED but has it been tested? And coupling to the axion might also give       low-energy departures (but ADMX is in fact looking for that..)              Conservation of energy, then? Departure from unitarity in QM?       Flatness/isotropy of space at the lab scale? That's all really basic       but I think it is already addressed by some existing experiments. The       real problem here seems to be finding something that is overlooked!              --       Jos              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca