↓ Skip to main content

The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment

Overview of attention for article published in Living Reviews in Relativity, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 tweeter
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
20 Google+ users
q&a
4 Q&A threads

Citations

dimensions_citation
956 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment
Published in
Living Reviews in Relativity, January 2006
DOI 10.12942/lrr-2006-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Clifford M. Will

Abstract

The status of experimental tests of general relativity and of theoretical frameworks for analyzing them is reviewed. Einstein's equivalence principle (EEP) is well supported by experiments such as the Eötvös experiment, tests of special relativity, and the gravitational redshift experiment. Ongoing tests of EEP and of the inverse square law are searching for new interactions arising from unification or quantum gravity. Tests of general relativity at the post-Newtonian level have reached high precision, including the light deflection, the Shapiro time delay, the perihelion advance of Mercury, and the Nordtvedt effect in lunar motion. Gravitational wave damping has been detected in an amount that agrees with general relativity to better than half a percent using the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar, and other binary pulsar systems have yielded other tests, especially of strong-field effects. When direct observation of gravitational radiation from astrophysical sources begins, new tests of general relativity will be possible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 280%
China 8 160%
United Kingdom 7 140%
Italy 7 140%
Germany 6 120%
France 5 100%
Canada 3 60%
Japan 3 60%
South Africa 2 40%
Other 16 320%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 114 2280%
Researcher 103 2060%
Student > Master 66 1320%
Student > Bachelor 30 600%
Professor 26 520%
Other 95 1900%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 356 7120%
Unspecified 21 420%
Engineering 9 180%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 7 140%
Mathematics 5 100%
Other 36 720%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2018.
All research outputs
#316,057
of 11,902,583 outputs
Outputs from Living Reviews in Relativity
#4
of 95 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,831
of 272,755 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Living Reviews in Relativity
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,902,583 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 95 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 272,755 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them