In general relativity the parallel transfer of a vector around a closed curve in spacetime, or along two curves which together form a closed loop, usually results in a nonzero deficit angle between the vector's initial and final positions. We show that such holonomy in the McVittie spacetime, which represents a gravitating object imbedded in an expanding universe, can in principle be used to directly detect the expansion of the universe, for example by measuring changes in the components of a gyroscopic spin axis. Although such changes are of course small, they are large enough (\D S \sim 10^{-7}) that they could conceivably be measured if the real universe behaved like the McVittie spacetime. The real problem is that virialization will lead to domains decoupled from the global expansion on a scale much larger than that of the solar system, making such an experiment infeasible probably even in principle. Nevertheless the effect is of interest in relation to ongoing discussions, dating back at least to Einstein and Straus, which concern the relationship between the expansion of the universe and local systems.

In 1904 Austrian physicist Fritz Hasenohrl (1874-1915) examined blackbody radiation in a reflecting cavity. By calculating the work necessary to keep the cavity moving at a constant velocity against the radiation pressure he concluded that to a moving observer the energy of the radiation would appear to increase by an amount E=(3/8)mc^2, which in early 1905 he corrected to E=(3/4)mc^2. Because relativistic corrections come in at order v^2/c^2 and Hasenohrl's gedankenexperiment evidently required calculations only to order v/c, it is initially puzzling why he did not achieve the answer universally accepted today. Moreover, that $m$ should be equal to (4/3)E/c^2 has led commentators to believe that this problem is identical to the famous "4/3 problem" of the self-energy of the electron and they have invariably attributed Hasenohrl's mistake to neglect of the cavity stresses. We examine Hasenohrl's papers from a modern, relativistic point of view in an attempt to understand where exactly he went wrong. The problem turns out to be a rich and challenging one with strong resonances to matters that remain controversial. We give an acceptable relativistic solution to the conundrum and show that virtually everything ever written about Hasenohrl's thought experiment, including a 1923 paper by Enrico Fermi, is misleading if not incorrect.

Vilkovisky has claimed to have solved the black hole backreaction problem and finds that black holes lose only ten percent of their mass to Hawking radiation before evaporation ceases. We examine the implications of this scenario for cold dark matter, assuming that primordial black holes are created during the reheating period after inflation. The mass spectrum is expected to be dominated by 10-gram black holes. Nucleosynthesis constraints and the requirement that the earth presently exist do not come close to ruling out such black holes as dark matter candidates. They also evade the demand that the photon density produced by evaporating primordial black holes does not exceed the present cosmic radiation background by a factor of about one thousand.

Freeman Dyson has questioned whether any conceivable experiment in the real universe can detect a single graviton. If not, is it meaningful to talk about gravitons as physical entities? We attempt to answer Dyson's question and find it is possible concoct an idealized thought experiment capable of detecting one graviton; however, when anything remotely resembling realistic physics is taken into account, detection becomes impossible, indicating that Dyson's conjecture is very likely true. We also point out several mistakes in the literature dealing with graviton detection and production.

Graviton absorption cross sections and emission rates for hydrogen are calculated by both semi-classical and field theoretic methods. We point out several mistakes in the literature concerning spontaneous emission of gravitons and related phenomena, some of which are due to a subtle issue concerning gauge invariance of the linearized interaction Hamiltonian.