http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_B
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/25/11/114002
http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/final_report/GPB_FinalPFAR-091907-scrn.pdf
I'm afraid Eric's idiocy may be contagious, so to prevent the
contagion, let me clarify:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Probe_B
For topic such as GPB, where bias abounds, Wikipedia is not reliable.
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/25/11/114002
I have addressed this topic before. This is an article by Everitt
published on the obscure journal Classical and Quantum Gravity. First
of all, no GPB experiment official result, which cost almost a
billion, will see publicatin in an obscure journal. This article is
merely a preliminary result of a POST-HOC analysis.
http://einstein.stanford.edu/content/final_report/GPB_FinalPFAR-091907-scrn.pdf
I have also addressed this as well before. This is a report dated
March 2007 about the Experimental Procedural summary of the gravity
probe B. Nowhere is there an official report. The report was
supposed to come out on the American Physical Society meeting in April
2007.
But here are the reports on that April 2007 APS meeting:
http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/APR07/SearchAbstract
Type gravity probe and you will have 28 articles, none of which give a
positive result for GPB. All of these give negative results. Here is
the first search result:
http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/APR07/Event/64567
Note that it is an excuse about the failure of GPB to come up with a
positive result.
Note also the vast amounts of confounding links available about GPB.
That is the whole point of the Gravity Probe being a PONZI scheme.
The negative results are being reinterpreted by a flurry of literature
that seeks to cover the its true NEGATIVE result.
But it is only obvious, since the official website of the GPB cannot
state a positive result but merely skirts around the fact of the
NEGATIVE result:
http://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/status1.html