Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mysterious Force Holds Back NASA Probe In Deep Space
The Telegraph (UK) ^ | 2-10-2002 | Robert Matthews

Posted on 02/09/2002 6:34:49 PM PST by blam

Mysterious force holds back Nasa probe in deep space

By Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent
(Filed: 10/02/2002)

A SPACE probe launched 30 years ago has come under the influence of a force that has baffled scientists and could rewrite the laws of physics.

Researchers say Pioneer 10, which took the first close-up pictures of Jupiter before leaving our solar system in 1983, is being pulled back to the sun by an unknown force. The effect shows no sign of getting weaker as the spacecraft travels deeper into space, and scientists are considering the possibility that the probe has revealed a new force of nature.

Dr Philip Laing, a member of the research team tracking the craft, said: "We have examined every mechanism and theory we can think of and so far nothing works.

"If the effect is real, it will have a big impact on cosmology and spacecraft navigation," said Dr Laing, of the Aerospace Corporation of California.

Pioneer 10 was launched by Nasa on March 2 1972, and with Pioneer 11, its twin, revolutionised astronomy with detailed images of Jupiter and Saturn. In June 1983, Pioneer 10 passed Pluto, the most distant planet in our solar system.

Both probes are now travelling at 27,000mph towards stars that they will encounter several million years from now. Scientists are continuing to monitor signals from Pioneer 10, which is more than seven billion miles from Earth.

Research to be published shortly in The Physical Review, a leading physics journal, will show that the speed of the two probes is being changed by about 6 mph per century - a barely-perceptible effect about 10 billion times weaker than gravity.

Scientists initially suspected that gas escaping from tiny rocket motors aboard the probes, or heat leaking from their nuclear power plants might be responsible. Both have now been ruled out. The team says no current theories explain why the force stays constant: all the most plausible forces, from gravity to the effect of solar radiation, decrease rapidly with distance.

The bizarre behaviour has also eliminated the possibility that the two probes are being affected by the gravitational pull of unknown planets beyond the solar system.

Assertions by some scientists that the force is due to a quirk in the Pioneer probes have also been discounted by the discovery that the effect seems to be affecting Galileo and Ulysses, two other space probes still in the solar system. Data from these two probes suggests the force is of the same strength as that found for the Pioneers.

Dr Duncan Steel, a space scientist at Salford University, says even such a weak force could have huge effects on a cosmic scale. "It might alter the number of comets that come towards us over millions of years, which would have consequences for life on Earth. It also raises the question of whether we know enough about the law of gravity."

Until 1988, Pioneer 10 was the most remote object made by man - a distinction now held by Voyager 1. Should Pioneer 10 make contact with alien life, it carries a gold-plated aluminium plaque on which the figures of a man and woman are shown to scale, along with a map showing its origin that Nasa calls "the cosmic equivalent of a message in a bottle".


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: astronomy; heliopause; heliosphere; pioneer10; pioneer11; science; space; voyager1; voyager2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 last
To: PatrickHenry
"-- the mass of such extra firmamento fluid is sufficient to cause the redshift of distant stars."

So, why isn't the red shift of all stars the same? (If they aren't at different distances.)

181 posted on 02/11/2002 4:27:30 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: wasfree
That was just some crazy rock band! It's how they end their set.
182 posted on 02/11/2002 4:30:42 PM PST by tet68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: blam
bump
183 posted on 02/11/2002 4:31:14 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreePaul
Why is Nasa showing aliens our wee wee's? I for one am embarased! ;)
184 posted on 02/11/2002 4:43:39 PM PST by GreaserX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
The equation for gravitational attraction is something like G * M1 * M2 /(R * R) where G is the gravitational constant, M1 is the mass of one body, M2 is the mass of a second body, and R is the distance between them. Assuming M1 is the spacecraft, M2 is our sun and R is a light year or two, the variable that is most likely to affect the calculation is the mass of the spacecraft.

The acceleration due to gravity of a small mass toward a large mass can be calculated, and is 32.17405 ft/sec-sec at sea level (average) on Earth. The small body moves toward the large body and the large body hardly moves at all (when a rock falls down, the earth would fall up toward it if the rock was large enough).

As stated before, my view is that the value of G is not known with sufficient accuracy and errors of 6 mph out of 10 billion are bound to happen.

185 posted on 02/11/2002 6:45:15 PM PST by RandyRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
First, the probe must get past Uranus, which as all can see, is so huge that it engulfs everything.

Awwww, there ya go with the gratuitous "Uranus" allusion again.

Is there some sort of prize for the poster who uses "Uranus" more times than anyone else on an astronomy thread?

186 posted on 02/11/2002 6:45:26 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep
The equation for gravitational attraction is something like G * M1 * M2 /(R * R) [snip]

That's the equation for the FORCE, not the acceleration.

The acceleration due to gravity acting on an object is constant, regardless of its mass. That's what Galileo was trying to find out when he dropped objects of differing masses off the balcony of the Tower of Pisa; they all fell at the same rate.

The mass of the spacecraft is irrelevant to how much acceleration it experiences due to gravity; it is very much relevant to how much FORCE is produced as a consequence of it.

187 posted on 02/11/2002 6:54:01 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: tali whacker
You throw a ball into the air, eventually it comes down.

Well, actually, no. I searched and since no one else had decided to field this one, I thought I would. It has to do with the notion of escape velocity. If you "throw" a ball or a rock hard enough it will travel far enough away from the earth that the pull of the earth's graviational field will fall off faster than the rock (whatever) loses velocity. The escape velocity from the surface of the earth is about 11.2 km/sec. Even if you attained this velocity it would not allow you to escape from the sun's attraction. At the radius of the earth's orbit, the escape velocity from the sun is more than 42 km/sec. But you could lauch to the east at midnight and let the earth's orbital and rotational motion give you a 30 km/sec head start.

188 posted on 02/11/2002 7:11:15 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep
As stated before, my view is that the value of G is not known with sufficient accuracy and errors of 6 mph out of 10 billion are bound to happen.

Nor is the mass of the sun. However, the graviational constant of the sun is very well know, since it determines the sidereal period of planetary orbits. We have a baseline of observations stretching back over two thousand years based on well documented planetary occulations of distant stars, which tell us precisely when a planet was where.

189 posted on 02/11/2002 7:20:39 PM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: boris
Thanks. I needed that.
190 posted on 02/11/2002 8:46:33 PM PST by LantzALot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep
G * M1 * M2 /(R * R)

True, that is the equation for the force the two bodies exert on each other. However the equation for the accelleration, say of the smaller mass, is

A = F/M (from F=M*A) So let M==M2 the much smaller mass.

Substituting we get

A = F/M2 = ( (G*M1*M2) / (R*R) ) / M2 = (G*M1)/(R*R)

with M2 canceling. Ergo it doesn't matter for the accelleration. However G is just as important as before. And it may indeed be known to the proper precision. I have my doubts about M1, the mass of the solar system, being known with sufficient precision.

191 posted on 02/12/2002 4:57:49 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets
Nor is the mass of the sun. However, the graviational constant of the sun is very well known.

FYI that would be (G * M1) in the equation above. Of course it's not just the mass of the Sun that counts, but the mass of everything else in the solar system too. However since the mass of all the rest is small compared to the mass of the sun, it need not bee known to the same precision as the total effective mass , and I suspect the net (G*M) is known to the required precision, in fact I'd bet on it, else there would not be all this who-hah. The astronomers understand those equations much better than most of us, I say most, because I suspect some of us are astronomers or astrophysicts, orbit mechanics specialists and so forth. (but not me, I do airplanes and such)

192 posted on 02/12/2002 5:14:47 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Good catch on my equation - you are right, of course ... I've been away too long (out of school).

Since the craft is ten billion miles away from our Sol (I think that was the number - is that 11 light years?), it is outside the solar system. So we need the mass and distance from the stars in the neighborhood. If it is accelerating then it may be attracted to something ahead of it or to the side. Or its path may be curving if it is out of the plane of the galaxy. Seems to me that this error is really pretty small...

193 posted on 02/12/2002 7:00:24 PM PST by RandyRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: GreaserX
Why is Nasa showing aliens our wee wee's? I for one am embarased! ;)

Why don't we just send that Pioneer some Viagra and then its bound to make its way back to Earth?

194 posted on 02/12/2002 7:13:39 PM PST by Grassontop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: blam
There's a very simple concept that could explain this effect. Instead of the curvature of space being perfectly smooth, it could have a quantized "curvature". Consider a diagonal line as representing a very small portion of the classical gravity curve, while a staircase line that is centered over the diagonal line represents the quantum version. The integral of the two lines is equivalent to gravitational potential and, in the limit, is the same for both lines. Where the staircase line is below the diagonal line, the pull of quantum gravity is greater than the classical gravity pull. The steps become wider as the curve flattens with increasing distance from the source of gravity, and so the discrepancy between pulls becomes more evident as Pioneer spends a greater amount of time within a single tread. At the interections of the two lines, the discrepancy effect reverses. In this scenario, Pioneer is apparently at a region where the quantum pull is greater than the classical pull.

The staircase would eventually meet the last, topmost tread where, in order to maintain the same integral volume, the classical pull would be slightly greater than the quantum pull. This quantum limit effect would isolate the effect of gravity to a finite region surrounded by the last tread.

The concept could also explain the acceleration of expansion in the universe, for as various gravitational subsystems, such as solar systems and galaxies, converge within gradually smaller regions, the size of the topmost tread regions becomes greater. In this way, the effect of gravity is increased within the gravitational subsystems, and it is decreased outside of them.

195 posted on 02/13/2002 7:44:29 AM PST by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-195 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson