FKM hat geschrieben: ↑21. Mär 2018, 20:04
Offenbar ist es ja nicht so einfach, die Gravitationskonstante ganz genau zu messen
Siehe der von dir genannte Artikel
https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.06604v2
Measurements of Newton's gravitational constant and the length of day
John D. Anderson, Gerald Schubert, Virginia Trimble, Michael R. Feldman
(Submitted on 24 Apr 2015 (v1), last revised 22 May 2015 (this version, v2))
About a dozen measurements of Newton's gravitational constant, G, since 1962 have yielded values that differ by far more than their reported random plus systematic errors. We find that these values for G are oscillatory in nature, with a period of P = 5.899 +/- 0.062 yr, an amplitude of (1.619 +/- 0.103) x 10^{-14} m^3 kg^{-1} s^{-2}, and mean-value crossings in 1994 and 1997. However, we do not suggest that G is actually varying by this much, this quickly, but instead that something in the measurement process varies. Of other recently reported results, to the best of our knowledge, the only measurement with the same period and phase is the Length of Day (LOD - defined as a frequency measurement such that a positive increase in LOD values means slower Earth rotation rates and therefore longer days). The aforementioned period is also about half of a solar activity cycle, but the correlation is far less convincing. The 5.9 year periodic signal in LOD has previously been interpreted as due to fluid core motions and inner-core coupling. We report the G/LOD correlation, whose statistical significance is 0.99764 assuming no difference in phase, without claiming to have any satisfactory explanation for it. Least unlikely, perhaps, are currents in the Earth's fluid core that change both its moment of inertia (affecting LOD) and the circumstances in which the Earth-based experiments measure G. In this case, there might be correlations with terrestrial magnetic field measurements.
Da steht ganz konkret:
The universal constant G does not vary at that scale, although Krasinsky and Brumberg report a detection of an unexplained secular increase in the astronomical unit (AU) over the years 1976 to 2008 ... However the effect on G, if real, is at the level of an increase of 3 parts in 1012 per year and undetectable with laboratory measurements of G.
FKM hat geschrieben: ↑21. Mär 2018, 20:04
... oder allmählich
altern.
Das Department of Physics and Astronomy am College of Science der King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia ist natürlich die erste Anlaufstelle, noch vor den Weisen aus dem Morgenlande (μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν).
FKM hat geschrieben: ↑21. Mär 2018, 20:04
Meine Frage: Ist das prinzipiell denkbar oder wäre das ein Widerspruch zur ART?
Ernsthaft: Ja, es ist denkbar, und ja, es wäre ein Widerspruch zur ART. Es gibt Ansätze zur Quantengravitation, insbs. die Stringtheorie, in der die Gravitationskonstante einem dynamischen Feld entspricht, sowie die Renormierungsgruppengleichungen zur nicht-perturbativen Quantisierung der ART, aus der eine "laufende Kopplung" resultiert. Beide sagen eine variable Gravitationskonstante bei extrem hohen Energien voraus; und beide sagen für das heutige Universum konstante Werte voraus.
Es handelt sich also um i) ein Missverständnis sowie ii) um haltlose Phantasien.