 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Posted on 06/26/2007 5:59:25 AM PDT by BGHater
The 'Pioneer anomaly' – the mystifying observation that NASA's two Pioneer spacecraft have drifted far off their expected paths – cannot be explained by tinkering with the law of gravity, a new study concludes.
The study's author suggests an unknown, but conventional, force is instead acting on the spacecraft. But others say even more radical changes to the laws of physics could explain the phenomenon.
Launched in the early 1970s, NASA's Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft are drifting out of the solar system in opposite directions, gradually slowing down as the Sun's gravity pulls back on them.
But they are slowing down slightly more than expected and no one knows why. Some physicists say the law of gravity itself needs revising, so that gravity retains more strength in the outer solar system. But there has been disagreement about whether such modifications would accurately predict the orbits of the outer planets.
Now, Kjell Tangen, a physicist at the firm DNV in Hovik, Norway, says tweaking the law of gravity in a variety of ways cannot explain the anomaly – while also getting the orbits of the outer planets right. After modifying gravity in ways that would match the Pioneer anomaly, he inevitably got wrong answers for the motion of Uranus and Pluto.
Conventional explanation
(Excerpt) Read more at space.newscientist.com ...
It’s a start, but entanglement doesn’t work that way.
Modification of the gravitational potential field equation will not cure this one.
Maybe empty space isn’t all that empty.
Dark matter has gravity but otherwise does not interact with anything. What could it be? It is localized and is near ordinary matter, mixed in with it, but the Bullet Nebula shows that it can be extracted from the vicinity of ordinary matter, so it is something and does not fill empty space.
Well, which is it? If it has gravity, it must interact.
Couldn't these spacecraft just be running into 'dust' and that's what's slowing them down. Sort of like drag in the air, but at much less magnitude.
I mean for every micro-meteor or particle of dust that strikes the spacecraft, there must be a resulting loss of velocity. Right?
I presume Newtons Laws still apply out there, of course.
L
No, they are not running into dust. They are instrumented and data does not indicate dust particles. Note the presence of the word ‘otherwise’ in the suspect statement.
It’s Galactus approaching.
” radical changes to the laws of physics”
I waiting for changes to the distributive laws of mathematics. That should be fun.
Clearly those spacecraft are not ‘hooked-up’ the way they could be. Time to pit for new rubber and a round of wedge.
“Myles Standish, who calculates solar system motions...”
...had parents with a sense of humor.
Maybe their factoring in of the friction offered by space dust was wrong? Maybe the accumulating dust on the spacecraft is slowing it down...
Maybe high velocity microscopic dust is colliding with the craft from ahead? Maybe, just maybe...
I was wondering about an orbit 90º off of the orbits of the other planets, so that it would affect planets on both sides of the ecliptic...
Your explanations are totally possible, in fact they may be probable — but they’re not human error.
Well, those influences have to be factored in, to derive the expected velocity of the craft, and compare it to the actual velocity. Why can’t human error factor in that “coefficient” wrongly?
"Speak for yourself, John."
And the Pioneer's probably don't have the instrumentation and or power to investigate, so such knowledge will still be lacking until we send out more extra-solar spacecraft to specifically study the phenomena.
Well, if that is the case, then the very premise of predicting the theoretical velocity of the craft, to compare with the actual velocity, should be an erroneous proposition, shouldn't it?
No offense to the mathematicians out there, ok, well maybe a little bit of offense, but, math is just made up. You make up some numbers and some rules, and you deduce stuff from that. You can prove some of the propositions. Physics isn’t like that at all, it isn’t made up. Physical laws describe nature, and it’s up to us to discover them - you can’t do it just by thinking about it, like you can with math. You can postulate alternative explanations for physically observable processes, but ultimately, these hypotheses either withstand scrutiny, or they do not. With math, you can simply postulate other systems, and see what you get from there.
Here’s an example: There is exactly one line parallel to a given line, that passes through a point not on the given line. Euclidian geometry. You don’t like it? Ok, simply postulate that there are no lines that pass through a point parallel to a given line (spherical geometry) or, if you’d prefer, there are an infinity of distinct lines, all parallel to a given line, that pass through a point not on the given line (hyperbolic geometry).
related:
Mystery force tugs distant probes
Source: BBC News
Published: Tuesday, 15 May, 2001, 15:46 GMT 16:46 UK Author: Dr David Whitehouse
Posted on 05/17/2001 01:31:37 PDT by AndrewC
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b038c692f17.htm
Gravitational anomalies: An invisible hand?
From The Economist print edition | Aug 19th 2004
Posted on 08/21/2004 4:31:57 AM EDT by ScuzzyTerminator
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1196132/posts
Pioneer [gravitational] anomaly put to the test
Physics World | September 2004 | Slava Turyshev and John Anderson
Posted on 09/27/2004 2:38:32 PM EDT by PatrickHenry
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1228396/posts
Scientists ponder the problem with gravity
Space COM | October 18, 2004 | Robert Roy Britt
Posted on 10/18/2004 3:27:05 PM EDT by roaddog727
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1248992/posts
Gravity May Lose its Pull
The LA Times | Dec. 21, 2004 | John Johnson
Posted on 12/21/2004 2:05:13 PM EST by bruin66
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1305997/posts
The Unfinished Quest to Solve the Pioneer Anomaly (unknown gravitational effect)
The Planetary Society | 11 May 05 | John D. Anderson, Philip A. Laing, Eunice L. Lau, Michael Martin Nieto, and Slava G. Turyshev
Posted on 05/11/2005 9:33:22 AM EDT by Arkie2
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1400907/posts
Computer Sleuths Try To Crack Pioneer Anomaly
New Scientist | 3-2-2007 | Stuart Clark
Posted on 03/02/2007 7:30:53 PM EST by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1794297/posts
Newfound Data Could Solve NASA’s Great Gravity Mystery
space.com | 03/27/07 | Tariq Malik
Posted on 03/28/2007 9:18:54 PM EDT by KevinDavis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1808454/posts
10 posted on 04/01/2007 1:07:28 AM EDT by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1808454/posts?page=10#10
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.