PDA

View Full Version : Pioneer retardation solved?



Prince
2002-Apr-10, 04:04 PM
http://www.holoscience.com/news/mystery_solved.html

Jigsaw
2002-Apr-11, 12:23 AM
Total non-astronomy person here. Um, I don't get it. :confused: Is it a joke, or a hoax, or is there really a mysterious force pulling Pioneer 10 towards the sun?

Sorry, I don't have the background to know.

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.
Really? :confused:

roidspop
2002-Apr-11, 02:07 AM
There's no hoax. Careful tracking has revealed that there is an unexplained force causing a very small but detectable retardation of the Pioneers in excess of what would be expected from gravity. Since they are separated by a vast distance, it's unlikely that this effect is caused by the gravitation of an unseen object. Radiation effects from the power supplies and antennas has been ruled out, as has leakage of gas or propellants. The interpretation offered in the link you posted is certainly interesting. We've also recently seen a post here about a possible adjustment to physics that might produce similar effects on objects that are undergoing very, very small accelerations (such as things way out in the solar system)... a little difference between gravitational and inertial mass. Some interesting stuff going down out there (faster than it should!)

Chip
2002-Apr-11, 04:29 AM
On 2002-04-10 12:04, Prince wrote:
http://www.holoscience.com/news/mystery_solved.html


Chip:
This was also discussed by some of the folks here in this thread: http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=469&forum=1&20
There might be another thread about it too. People expressed a lot of interesting and diverse opinions /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

The holoscience website about the electric solar system mixes a few observed facts with sweeping statements about how physics (all physics?) as taught in colleges, is all wrong. This, and other sweeping pronouncements unfortunately puts it squarely within the crackpot category, in my opinion. It suffers from the "I have the only truth" syndrome. Just another example of how pseudo science gets in the way of the real mysteries the people are trying to solve rationally.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chip on 2002-04-11 00:30 ]</font>

DStahl
2002-Apr-11, 06:20 AM
From the "Electric Universe" website linked above:

"At the level of the atom, the Electric Universe model takes a lead from the work of Ralph Sansbury, an independent New York researcher. Foremost is the simple recognition of the basic electrical nature of matter and the primacy of the electrostatic force** in matter interactions. It also rests upon the simple assumption that the proton, neutron and electron are composed of smaller charged particles, orbiting each other in a classical sense in stable, resonant orbits. That is, the energy exchanged between those sub-particles in elastic deformation during each orbit sums to zero. Being charged, the sub-particles interact via the electrostatic force. A simple calculation shows that the sub-particles that form an electron must travel at a speed far in excess of the speed of light - some 2.5 million light-years per second, or from here to the far side of the Andromeda galaxy in one second! So the electrostatic force must act at a speed which is almost infinite on our scale for the electron to be stable. It is the stable orbital resonances of these sub-particles, both within and between particles that give rise to the phenomena of protons, neutrons, electrons and atoms. Other denizens of the particle 'zoo' are merely transient resonant states of the same charged sub-particles. The so-called 'creation' of matter from energetic photons is an illusion in which pre-existing matter is reorganized into new resonant states that give the impression that a particle has suddenly materialized. Antimatter is a misnomer since it too is formed from the same sub-particles as 'normal' matter except that the total charge is mirrored. Matter cannot be created or annihilated."

Well, that's it then! Away with workaday quantum electrodynamics! Away, away with special relativity and quarks! And best of all, the Electrick Universe Theory of Everything is completely expressible in plain English! You'll never have find a hamiltonian again! Yay!

--Don Stahl

[Chip: you posted whilst I was mangling the html above. Of course I agree with you completely.]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DStahl on 2002-04-11 02:22 ]</font>

Simon
2002-Apr-11, 07:57 AM
I can't follow the link. Is there another site with it somewhere?

2002-Apr-11, 08:29 AM
<a name="20020411.2:1"> page 20020411.2:1 aka Daily Emerald
On 2002-04-11 02:20, DStahl wrote: To: Archives
From the "Electric Universe" website linked above:
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu
http://uocareer.uoregon.edu/outcomes/
http://www.dailyemerald.com
<pre>__d5__ clock 1: no words would be know about these(orbit//spin)Making HTTP connection to http://www.dailyemerald.com
***[ PREPOSED TABLE of minisqualPHYSICAL UNITS ]*********Alert!: Unable to connect to remote host
_____ {{ gravitons? }}
__d4__ clock 2: electrons orbit proton // electrons spin
***[ PREPOSED TABLE of quantmPHYSICAL UNITS ]********
so yeah: My word for thats miniSqual
as small than quaNtM

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HUb' on 2002-04-11 04:34 ]</font>

Valiant Dancer
2002-Apr-11, 12:44 PM
On 2002-04-10 12:04, Prince wrote:
http://www.holoscience.com/news/mystery_solved.html


Besides the mistaken labling of Pioneer 11 as Voyager 11 in the diagram, the site tries to use obscure references to an additional electrical force hitherto unmeasured. This is one of the more lucid sites I've seen. He correctly states the acceleration sunward (slowing) of the Pioneer and Ulysses projects. I don't have the scientific background to judge if his arguements are sound or not from a physics point of view, but he makes some interesting arguements. They tend to be pretty simple as well. (Occam would be pleased.) Unfourtunately, he does attack the very science that could be used to support his claim. This makes the site a little suspect.



_________________
Valiant Dancer

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Valiant Dancer on 2002-04-11 08:46 ]</font>

2002-Apr-12, 12:43 PM
On 2002-04-11 08:44, Valiant Dancer wrote:


On 2002-04-10 12:04, Prince wrote:
http://www.holoscience.com/news/mystery_solved.html


Besides the mistaken labling of Pioneer 11 as Voyager 11 in the diagram, the site tries to use obscure references to an additional electrical force hitherto unmeasured. This is one of the more lucid sites I've seen. He correctly states the acceleration sunward (slowing) of the Pioneer and Ulysses projects. I don't have the scientific background to judge if his arguements are sound or not from a physics point of view, but he makes some interesting arguements. They tend to be pretty simple as well. (Occam would be pleased.) Unfourtunately, he does attack the very science that could be used to support his claim. This makes the site a little suspect.
HUb' 6:31 A.M. Shirley, the electrostatic/dynamic
theory of "slowing" makes theoretical sence.
So I agree with the theory.. What I disagree
_________________with would be the facts
Valiant Dancer
perhaps it just the other way around.. instead of 10 slowing.. [oh never mind]
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Valiant Dancer on 2002-04-11 08:46 ]</font>

David Hall
2002-Apr-12, 12:51 PM
Yes, this site does appear to be mostly a bunch of gobbldygook, but they do mention Hannes Alfvén and the Plasma Cosmology, which, while maybe not accurate, isn't crackpot stuff. I think there are a lot of reasonable things to consider in it and if treated more fairly could benefit mainstream cosmology quite a bit.

DaveC
2002-Apr-12, 01:03 PM
If this observation is found to truly identify a hitherto unknown attractive force in the universe, what impact might that have on the current view that the universe will expand forever. I thought the mass needed to cause contraction was only slightly more than what is known to exist in the universe. Maybe this "Pioneer force" means the universe will oscillate through endless big bang, expansion and contraction cycles?

MAXX
2006-Sep-11, 05:31 AM
Chip:
This was also discussed by some of the folks here in this thread: http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=469&forum=1&20
There might be another thread about it too. People expressed a lot of interesting and diverse opinions /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

The holoscience website about the electric solar system mixes a few observed facts with sweeping statements about how physics (all physics?) as taught in colleges, is all wrong. This, and other sweeping pronouncements unfortunately puts it squarely within the crackpot category, in my opinion. It suffers from the "I have the only truth" syndrome. Just another example of how pseudo science gets in the way of the real mysteries the people are trying to solve rationally.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chip on 2002-04-11 00:30 ]</font>
OHMYGOD!!
I can't be hearing this. You call The electric/plasma universe model ,which uses REAL EMPIRICAL science (look up the word-its fundamental to science), crackpot,yet the "easter bunny rabbit,magic faeries,neutron stars,big bang,oort cloud,and magic pixie dust" get your respect??!!??
how can you ignore ALL the data that is coming in from space?
Astronomy IS a failed science that is going to fall .
How can a person have a PHD and yet be so stupid so as to forget that ONLY ELECTRICITY CAN GENERATE MAGNETIC FIELDS.
Truly wisdom is different from intelligence.
You are on the Titanic.
Good luck!!
www.thunderbolts.info
www.holoscience.com

MAXX
2006-Sep-11, 05:40 AM
Yes, this site does appear to be mostly a bunch of gobbldygook, but they do mention Hannes Alfv&#233;n and the Plasma Cosmology, which, while maybe not accurate, isn't crackpot stuff. I think there are a lot of reasonable things to consider in it and if treated more fairly could benefit mainstream cosmology quite a bit.
I can't be hearing this?
its very accurate.

Wolverine
2006-Sep-11, 07:25 AM
I can't be hearing this?
its very accurate.

Hello, MAXX.

Just to make sure you're aware, the person to whom you've replied hasn't logged in to the forum since 2003, so I wouldn't await a response with bated breath. ;)

If you're interested in discussion of EU ideas and/or models, please ensure you consult this thread (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=801822#post801822) before proceeding, as well as our forum rules (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=564845#post564845) (paying special attention to rule #13, detailing Alternative Concepts).

astro_uk
2006-Sep-11, 05:37 PM
Hi Maxx

Just wondering what your problem with the Oort cloud could be. Or neutron stars for that matter. Just curious, the Oort cloud can't really be that contentious can it?

Speaking for someone that works in the field, I really dont see what evidence your talkign about that invalidates the BB etc. I'm happy to be corrected though.

Oh and I think that if magnetic monopoles exist then electric charges are not the only things that generate magnetic fields, just an observation. Someone probably knows if this is true or not.

publiusr
2006-Oct-04, 12:22 AM
We just need more probes out there to tell us whats going on.

Thanatos
2006-Oct-04, 08:09 AM
How can a person have a PHD and yet be so stupid so as to forget that ONLY ELECTRICITY CAN GENERATE MAGNETIC FIELDS.
Truly wisdom is different from intelligence.
You are on the Titanic.
Good luck!!
www.thunderbolts.info
www.holoscience.comI have magnets that cling to my refrigerator. I pulled the power plug to the fridge and they did not fall to the floor. I hooked up a voltmeter and the needle did not flinch, even when I removed and repositioned the magnets on the fridge. I concluded, on the basis of this empirical evidence, a magnetic field can exist in the absence of an electrical field.

gwiz
2006-Oct-04, 08:59 AM
Try following a few of the links from the Wikipedia article on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

At present there are quite a few attempts to explain it, not all of which involve new physics.

Ihopeso
2006-Oct-05, 01:19 AM
I have magnets that cling to my refrigerator. I pulled the power plug to the fridge and they did not fall to the floor. I hooked up a voltmeter and the needle did not flinch, even when I removed and repositioned the magnets on the fridge. I concluded, on the basis of this empirical evidence, a magnetic field can exist in the absence of an electrical field.

Ahh the Sun, Earth, Jupiter Saturn etc etc are just big fridge magnets then, that explains it all.

Come on you mob get it together, is it electricity making magnetic fields or is it magnetic fields making electricity??? Sooner we can agree the faster we can move toward the inevitable undeniable truth.

For a thought experiment if we could charge a spacecraft to a high + potential and another to a high – potential (in regard to the “space” there in) and made there trajectories for solar system escape what would each do??

Also


Well, that's it then! Away with workaday quantum electrodynamics! Away, away with special relativity and quarks! And best of all, the Electrick Universe Theory of Everything is completely expressible in plain English! You'll never have find a hamiltonian again! Yay!

fantastic isn’t it!!! :clap: I mean math’s is just English in numbers...no? lets take E=Mc^2

E=Energy (English word)
M=Mass (also an English word)
c= the speed of light (sorta a sentence in English)
^2 = squared (English word again)

So the equation could be written some thing like energy equals mass squared by the speed of light. No?

Plus there is plenty of mathematical equations regarding this subject if you need some links here ya go

Plasma physics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_physics) lots of math’s there.

A little more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_layer)

But I ask you why would holoscience use very complicated math’s for a very simple explanation, when all most other web sites also use none?? :wall:

Eg Black hole formation (http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/blackholes.php) not 1 iota of math in there my friend! And it also managed to explain to me how and why they form, amazing. :clap: :)

Thanatos
2006-Oct-13, 07:41 AM
Perhaps it was unclear I was addressing the claim:
"ONLY ELECTRICITY CAN GENERATE MAGNETIC FIELDS"
Hence, I fail to see the relevance of your comments.

Post carefully. Some of the denizens who frequent this realm have a profound understanding of physics.