Bjarne

I never asked about the location. I know what doppler is , but have never calculated such (which also not have much with the question to do) , I assume it’s simple, - just v relative to c, in this case, but still the problem is rather no questions have been answered, notice my previous post above have been updated, after you wrote your last post.

I see no relevant reply in this thread Below is the context where you copied the data, - but as you see this is related to the deceleration, not specific to the annual anomaly The Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft, launched in 1972 and 1973 respectively, represent an ideal system to perform precision celestial mechanics experiments [1]. The radiometric Doppler tracking data of these spacecraft (in the outer solar system and beyond) indicated the presence of a small, anomalous, frequency blue-shift (relative to expectations) of [latex]5.99*10^{-9}[/latex] hertz/s This unmodelled Doppler „drift‟, which is applicable to both spacecraft, has been interpreted as an anomalous deceleration – as compared to a clock (or time) acceleration effect [2]. The average value of this anomalous (Pioneer) deceleration ( P a ) is 10 2 (8.74 1.33) 10 m/s - ± ´ . Sourse.. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.0537.pdf I belive ithis is more relevant............. In Ref. [13] we reported, in addition to the constant anomalous acceleration term, a possible annual sinusoid. If approximated by a simple sine wave, the amplitudeof this oscillatory term is about 1.6 × 10−8 cm/s2. The integral of a sine wave in the acceleration, aP , with angular velocity ω and amplitude A0 yields the following first-order Doppler amplitude in two-way fractional frequency:_νν=2A0c ω. (50) The resulting Doppler amplitude for the annual angularvelocity ∼ 2 × 10−7 rad/s is _ν/ν = 5.3 × 10−12. At the Pioneer downlink S-band carrier frequency of ∼ 2.29 GHz, the corresponding Doppler amplitude is 0.012 Hz (i.e. 0.795 mm/s). Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0104064.pdf All I need to know is really, - is it right or wrong, - that the annual anomaly is (or can be) “hidden” in the graph (above), - as well , can the annual magnitude be +/- (peak) 10 to 20 Hz Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.2682.pdf And why does this paper https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0104064.pdf mention the corresponding Doppler amplitude is 0.012 Hz (i.e. 0.795 mm/s).

no

That’s the point yes, and that’s the question. I wonder why it seems that nobody really replies to the question ? Maybe nobody have the skills ? Or maybe it is because its Sunday today

However still it is not certain what was causing the annual anomaly, - that aspect is never properly investigated, at least if you ask me..

All I need to know is really is: - it right or wrong, - that the annual anomaly is (or can be) “hidden” in the graph (below), - as well as that the magnitude is (or can be) +/- (peak) 10 to 20 Hz Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.2682.pdf I do not understand how or why that is relevant to how strong the annual anomaly aspect of the Pioneer is anomaly is, - let’s say when it is peaking, - compared to when it is zero (not peaking)..

Why do you think so?

31536000seconds * 3.17e-8 Hz = 0,999 Hz ( or annual +/- 0,499 Hz) . Have I done anything wrong? I mean the graph shows that the annual anomaly rather is about +/- (peak) 10 to 20 Hz Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.2682.pdf

How did you came to that result ? I have found this................... Figure 1: Best fit residuals of the Doppler tracking data of Pioneer 10 with an anomalous acceleration aP . O−C(Xopt 0 , ˙X opt 0 ,Mopt, 0) where the anomalous acceleration has been nullified; this representation highlights the need of the constant acceleration to reduce the residuals. It can be emphasized that the level of the residuals on Fig. 1 is higher than the measurement noise. It is also clear on the figure that the postfit residuals do not correspond to a white gaussian noise. Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/0809.2682.pdf So the annual anomaly I asked about must be within the interval about +/- 20 hz Does anyone disagree to that?

Link was not working

Quote: C. Apparent annual/diurnal periodicities in the solution In Ref. [13] we reported, in addition to the constant anomalous acceleration term, a possible annual sinusoid. If approximated by a simple sine wave, the amplitude of this oscillatory term is about 1.6 × 10−8 cm/s2. The integral of a sine wave in the acceleration, aP , with angular velocity ω and amplitude A0 yields the following first-order Doppler amplitude in two-way fractional frequency Source https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0104064.pdf Page 40 The annual anomaly is converted to an acceleration, - but the data is extracted from the radio signal.

The paper is full of strange expressions and abbreviations above my head, so I am lost before really getting started.. To keep it simple, - so fare I understand the annual anomaly is discovered based on an anomaly discovered in the radio signals, which mean the signal must have an annual sinusoid blueshift / redshift anomaly. This is so fare I understand the only way an annual pioneer anomaly can be detected.

How strong was the diurnal and seasonal variations of the Pionner anomaly (in Hz)

Thanks

I read som time ago (but forgot where) that there is also a seasonal anomaly in the data, - can someone firfirm that ?

How strong is the perihelion precession anomali of the earth

Yes I ageee, can you suggest such a program ? The force is variable, and also applies opposite from perihelion towards aphelion

The force is increasing the orbit speed, and is effecting the orbiting object as pull , from lets say a direction always straight ahead of the object

Let say an object (orbiting the sun) not only would be affected by gravity, but also by a (weak) force accelerating the object between aphelion to perihelion. This would increase the orbit radius, but it will so far I understand also affected the perihelion precession How can the perihelion precession impact be calculated?

Right. I mean by low speed (almost). For example: 10 000 m/s = 5,6 E-8 20 000 m/s = 2,2 E-7

Which equation do I have to use to be able to calculate the total time dilation in an accelerating framework? Let say a space craft is accelerating away from us I need to calculate the time dilation for a certian period According to special relativity time dilation quadruples every time velocity doubles

I already did in the previous thread we had. But let me try to tell you more about the other principles. I was asked also to show calculation for other satellites. · It only makes sense to spend time on exact calculation for satellites we know will be properly tested for all kind of anomalies. · It requires more data release from ESA, (or NASA if they too would have Scientific test going on) if any prediction must be 100 % exact. · GPS satellites in action for commercial purpose are not suitable for prediction due to all the interruption of time and orbit that takes place. Hereunder is which deviations I expect when Galileo 5 and 6 is tested. This is to show a little more about the principles responsible. I cannot find very much data released from ESA, no orbit data and also not whether orbit stability at all is tested by ESA. So instead of losing a lot of time let me explain more about the principle how test can lead to the collapse of the aspect of relativity that claims that gravity is caused by the curvature of space. It is not possible very fast to understand all the principle that applies to different kind of orbits or different inclination as well as different kind of directions,. But let me mention one of the very central and important principle to be able to understand for example why the Earth doesn’t seems to be effected by RR and therefore have a stable orbit. Orbits Predominantly Perpendicular Relative to the Dark Flow Direction (inclination 45 to 90°) Astronomic objects following these orbits appear to be unaffected by RR. However, this is not true. RR is a reversible 'elastic' property of space. Thus, on the one hand, objects increasing its Dark Flow Speed will also feel an increasing RR On the other hand, as the object is continuously changing direction of movement, a circular orbit is also an expression of equal movement away from a direction in which it was previously affected by RR. In a completely circular orbit, Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy (in short RRPKE) on the one hand and RR on the other hand equalize each other completely since these are equal, opposite forces. But object following elliptical orbits is periodical following elongated path, and therefore following paths periodical dominated by RR, - because the loss of support from RRPKE.. Galileo 5 and 6 have 3 RR periods, Two RR periods as just described above must be expected, - and one more when moving towards the dark flow direction. The principle that applies for these periods are different but the effect the same. None of these are supported by RRPKE. – All these periods are dominated by RR. The influence on that orbitperiod with deceleration, - is deceleration increase, - and period with acceleration, - the accelerations is wakened. If the satellite speed is let’s say 3km/s and the orbit period is for example 56910 seconds, - we can calculate the Lorentz transformation factor to be 5E-11 Let’s say a resistance period duration = 11000 seconds (the duration depend for 2 of the periods of the duration of the elliptic orbits elongated path (inclination) The max achieved speed loss (for 1 period) is therefore for a orbit with low excentricity 0,00000055 m/s and the average = 0,00000027m/s Hence 1 RR period can in this case cause an orbit circumference lost = 0,003 meter per orbit. Or radius lost 0,00047meter . But the duration of the escalation effect in each period is different, because these will interact with the satellites deceleration or acceleration periods. One RR period can therefore split up in 2 escalation periods, or 2 period can be united to one escalation period. To calculate all this very precise, - computer software is very important. But this is not my mission. My mission is to show simple principle everybody can understand. I did this in the thread last week too. Thank you for your time everybody. I have not more to add for now As I wrote more principle can be read in my last thread. This is enough.

Agree These aspect of relativity that we soon will understand was wrong. Let’s say that in 2018 we know... 1. SR can only be correct understood in a absolution dark flow motion reference frame. 2. The cause of Mercury’s Perihelion Anomalies is now evidently solved, whereby the cause of gravity is still a force and only a force as Sir Isaac Newton through it to be, Einstein did not solve the cause of gravity. This should answer your question. Depend what you mean by "published form" Time dilation is easy. But the 2 Galileo orbits is due to the elliptic orbits good to show the speed braking force is in action. This need complicated and time consuming calculations, because the 'period' will interact with the already existing acceleration and deceleration period all orbit have. Furthermore ESA have released vey little data. And finnally will ESA at all test orbit stability ? - if not time can easy be wasted ? I refer to what I just wrote above; I can do estimations, no problem. But as you can test yourself little data are available. I think that because GPS have daily time synchronizing going on, it is simply impossible to trace any dilation anomaly Because it will then be necessary to have all the adjustment ESA does available, and that will be a gigantic work to put together again. This is why I many time have pointed out that 100% scientific test must have first priority. Waste of time can easy be an option. I refer to the 2 last replies above. You have to be patient. The question is rather how will the universe looks like, the day after the modification of the theory of relativity. Here is my guess…. Space is correctly a strange elastic 'substance', wonderful illustrated by the rubber sheet from the schools science lesson. To really to understand what is left from GR and SR it will be necessary to add to the theory, that the ruler is always stretching proportional with time. (This is what a simple the thought experiment mentioned above seems to shows).. This means that deep inside a field of gravity everything is stretching proportional to time, also the size of our bodies, as well as every process. The same relativistic transformation happens due to relativistic motion.. It’s all about tension in space. It will no longer be necessary to accept any irrationality based on wrong interpretation of SR; rather the universe and the theory of relativity will be much more simple and logical. Furthermore there are no longer any conflicts with quantum physics. The distance-contraction already predicted in the late 1800, - is therefore not real, what really happens is that the ruler expends as a result of larger true speed.. So as you see the GPS is still working, but as I wrote we shall expect orbit anomalies still not discovered, also in satellite orbits. Furthermore, the braking force (RR) responsible for orbit collapse, is also responsible for galaxy collapse as well huge amount of mass (periodical) can collapse into the center of a galaxy of that reason., But we cannot see it very deep within, because the ruler as well all nuclear processes is stretching proportional to time. A process taking place deep inside a so called black hole, is created redshifted seen from our perspective, and to extreme extend we will only “see” radio waves coming out. No mysterious infinity event are taking place.

The video shows quantum relativity make the problem "infinity" worse To be honest it’s much too early to discuss that right now, -. based on the last weeks experience here at the forum, - because this a consequences of a consequence, and must be discussed in the educational right order In a different thread last week I already explained it 1. ISS and Galileo 5 and 6, - will all be used for scientific test measurements , which will result in evidence, - that verifys that SR only can be understood correct in an absolute motion reference frame, and hence that SR must be modified. The current interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment is wrong. The result of the ISS test will be time dilation that SR cannot account for.. 2. In addition to that, the same test measurements can deliver the hard evidence that proves that both ISS and Galileo 5 and 6 are losing altitude that the theory of relativity or perturbation (etc.) cannot account for. This will demonstrate both that an unknown speed depending braking force must exist, responsible for all perihelion precession anomalies that applies for all elliptical orbits , included Mercury’s Perihelion precession anomaly. Therefore we shall sooner or later expect that 2 major aspect of the theory of relativity must be modified. Unfortunately I cannot find much data release from ESA regarding Galileo 5 and 6, orbits, - such as altitude elliptic inclination or orbit inclination, but estimation can easy be made already, based on the available data, to demonstrate this mathematical. I know time dilation test will be measured on both ISS and the Galileo. I assume and hope that orbit stability also will be measured. If this is the case we are now in a countdown period that soon mean goodbye to the idea that GR is the cause of gravity. It is all so naturally to understand these predictions, but I have a strong feeling that even though it’s a huge theory behind these statement, - that not violate any theory or aspect of any theory, that is supported by hard evidence, - new thought is automatically rejected as utopia, because Einstein cannot be wrong. This is a shame.. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry … There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. Our political life is also predicated on openness. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress. So you are saying that A and B's ruler both are comparable the same length, if we assume they could compare them even though they are at different gravity altitude. Or are you saying the stretch of time happens propotional to the stretch of the ruller ? Or are you saying, we don't know ?