The General Theory of Relativity Is True

For this round, I will be attempting to affirm the resolution that the general theory of relativity is true. Therefore, I will provide a more in-depth definition, and then provide three tests that show that this theory is true. What Is the General Theory of Relativity? "In it [the theory], he [Albert Einstein] determined that massive objects cause a distortion in space-time, which is felt as gravity. " "As he worked out the equations for his general theory of relativity, Einstein realized that massive objects caused a distortion in space-time. Imagine setting a large body in the center of a trampoline. The body would press down into the fabric, causing it to dimple. A marble rolled around the edge would spiral inward toward the body, pulled in much the same way that the gravity of a planet pulls at rocks in space. "[9] The Perihelion Precession of Mercury The precession of Mercury can prove relativity. What is this? Under Newtonian physics, a two-body system consisting of a lone object orbiting a spherical mass would trace out an ellipse with the spherical mass at a focus. The point of closest approach, called the periapsis (or, as the central body in our Solar System is the sun, perihelion), is fixed. A number of effects in our solar system cause the perihelia of planets to precess (rotate) around the sun. The principal cause is the presence of other planets which perturb each other's orbit. Another (much more minor) effect is solar oblateness. Mercury deviates from the precession predicted from these Newtonian effects. This anomalous rate of precession of the perihelion of Mercury's orbit was first recognized in 1859 as a problem in celestial mechanics, by Urbain Le Verrier. His re-analysis of available timed observations of transits of Mercury over the Sun's disk from 1697 to 1848 showed that the actual rate of the precession disagreed from that predicted from Newton's theory by 38" (arc seconds) per tropical century (later re-estimated at 43"). A number of ad hoc and ultimately unsuccessful solutions were proposed, but they tended to introduce more problems. [1][2] How does relativity solve this problem? A number of ad hoc and ultimately unsuccessful solutions were proposed, but they tended to introduce more problems. In general relativity, this remaining precession, or change of orientation of the orbital ellipse within its orbital plane, is explained by gravitation being mediated by the curvature of space-time. Einstein showed that general relativity agrees closely with the observed amount of perihelion shift. This was a powerful factor motivating the adoption of general relativity. [1] What is the evidence? The total observed precession of Mercury is 574.10±0.65 arc-seconds per century relative to the inertial ICFR. The total observed relativity is 42.98 ±0.04. The correction by 42.98" is 3/2 multiple of classical prediction with PPN parameters: Thus the effect can be fully explained by general relativity. More recent calculations based on more precise measurements have not materially changed the situation. [3][4][5] The Expansion of the UniverseThe fact that the universe is expanding proves relativity. What is this? In 1922 Alexander Friedmann found that Einstein equations have non-stationary solutions (even in the presence of the cosmological constant). In 1927 Georges Lemaître showed that static solutions of the Einstein equations, which are possible in the presence of the cosmological constant, are unstable, and therefore the static universe envisioned by Einstein could not exist (it must either expand or contract). Lemaître made an explicit prediction that the universe should expand. He also derived a redshift-distance relationship, which is now known as the Hubble Law. [6] How does relativity solve this problem? If the expansion of the universe exists, so does relativity, because the latter would be the cause of the former. What is the evidence? The expansion of the universe discovered by Edwin Hubble in 1929 was then considered by many (and continues to be considered by some now) as a direct confirmation of the general relativity. In the 1930s, largely due to the work of E. A. Milne, it was realized that the linear relationship between redshift and distance derives from the general assumption of uniformity and isotropy rather than specifically from general relativity. However the prediction of a non-static universe was non-trivial, indeed dramatic, and primarily motivated by general relativity. [7][8] Gravitational LensingThe phenomena known as gravitational lensing can prove relativity. What is this? Light around a massive object, such as a black hole, is bent, causing it to act as a lens for the things that lay behind it. Astronomers routinely use this method to study stars and galaxies behind massive objects. A gravitational lens refers to a distribution of matter (such as a cluster of galaxies) between a distant source (a background galaxy) and an observer, that is capable of bending (lensing) the light from the source, as it travels towards the observer. [9][10] How does relativity solve this problem? If gravitational lensing exists, so does relativity, because the latter would be the cause of the former. What is the evidence? Einstein's Cross, a quasar in the Pegasus constellation, is an excellent example of gravitational lensing. The quasar is about 8 billion light-years from Earth, and sits behind a galaxy that is 400 million light-years away. Four images of the quasar appear around the galaxy because the intense gravity of the galaxy bends the light coming from the quasar. The entire sky is slightly distorted due to the gravitational deflection of light caused by the Sun (the anti-Sun direction excepted). This effect has been observed by the European Space Agency astrometric satellite Hipparcos. It measured the positions of about 105 stars. During the full mission about 3.5×106 relative positions have been determined, each to an accuracy of typically 3 milliarcseconds (the accuracy for an 8–9 magnitude star). Since the gravitation deflection perpendicular to the Earth-Sun direction is already 4.07 mas, corrections are needed for practically all stars. Without systematic effects, the error in an individual observation of 3 milliarcseconds, could be reduced by the square root of the number of positions, leading to a precision of 0.0016 mas. [9][6][10]Sources:[1]: . http://www.alberteinstein.info...[2]: U. Le Verrier (1859), (in French), Comptes rendus hebdomadaires des séances de l'Académie des sciences (Paris), vol. 49 (1859), pp.379–383. [3]: Clemence, G. M. (1947). "The Relativity Effect in Planetary Motions". Reviews of Modern Physics 19 (4): 361–364. [4]: Lorenzo Iorio (2005). "On the possibility of measuring the solar oblateness and some relativistic effects from planetary ranging". Astronomy and Astrophysics 433: 385–393. [5]: . http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de...[6]: . http://en.wikipedia.org...[7]: J. W. Rudnicki, M. Wu, C. H. Kuo and L. M. Keer, "Surface Deformation and Energy Release Rates for Constant Stress Drop Slip Zones in an Elastic Half-space", Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 96, 16,509-16,524, 1991. , pg. 28. [8]: "X-Ray Scattering Study of the Critical Exponent h in Argon," E. Gurmen, M. Chandrasekhar, P. E. Chumbley, H. D. Bale, D. A. Dolejsi, J. S. Lin and P. W. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. A22, 170 (1980). , pg. 37. [9]: . http://www.space.com... [10]: . http://www.rssd.esa.int...