About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
To Scruffy:
are you serious? a 1 sigma observational discrepancy means that, given a large number of repeats of such an experiment, roughly 33% of such experiments would disagree at the 1 sigma level, even if they were perfectly consistent with Einstein's GR (given an observation with no experimental error)... so I would consider this excellent agreement with GR - only if there were something like a 3 sigma or greater discrepancy would I begin to get worried -
they do, of course, have a long way to go to verify the Lens-Thirring (frame-dragging) effect ... much more difficult analysis ..
X-ray man