The rights and wrongs of Henri Bergson

[Markus Hanke]

17 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

Lorentz Transformations are proclaimed to be non-orbital and only in certain parts of orbital motion.

I have no idea what you mean by this, you need to explain some more.
A Lorentz transformation is a relationship between inertial frames; if one of the frames is not inertial, or if spacetime in between the frames isn’t flat, then the relationship will be more complicated. Note also that Special Relativity encompasses not just inertial frames, but any situation so long as the respective region of spacetime is approximately flat.

17 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

A non-systematic Pioneer anomaly can be successfully modeled with its tacit violation, both of the theory of the weak equivalence of general relativity

The Pioneer “anomaly” has nothing to do with relativity, it’s simply due to uneven heat loss from the probe. There is no mystery here.

17 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

If you conclude that the  Lorentz transformation  does not apply to the entire curve, that means that there is no particular relativity

What curve?

[Prof Reza Sanaye]

6 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

I have no idea what you mean by this, you need to explain some more.
A Lorentz transformation is a relationship between inertial frames; if one of the frames is not inertial, or if spacetime in between the frames isn’t flat, then the relationship will be more complicated. Note also that Special Relativity encompasses not just inertial frames, but any situation so long as the respective region of spacetime is approximately flat.

The Pioneer “anomaly” has nothing to do with relativity, it’s simply due to uneven heat loss from the probe. There is no mystery here.

What curve?

quote : 

"A Lorentz transformation is a relationship between inertial frames; if one of the frames is not inertial, or if spacetime in between the frames isn’t flat, then the relationship will be more complicated. Note also that Special Relativity encompasses not just inertial frames, but any situation so long as the respective region of spacetime is approximately flat." 

 

But you know full well that it is not deemed approximately flat. 

 

quote: 

"The Pioneer “anomaly” has nothing to do with relativity, it’s simply due to uneven heat loss from the probe. There is no mystery here." 

 

If the Pioneer anomaly has a gravitational origin, it would, according to the equivalence principle, distort the motions of the planets in the Solar System. Since no anomalous motion of the planets has been detected, it is generally believed that the Pioneer anomaly can not originate from a gravitational source in the Solar System. However, this conclusion becomes less obvious when considering models that either imply modifications to gravity at long range or gravitational sources localized to the outer Solar System, given the uncertainty in the orbital parameters of the outer planets. Following the general assumption that the Pioneer spacecraft move geodesically in a spherically symmetric spacetime metric, we derive the metric disturbance that is needed in order to account for the Pioneer anomaly. We then analyze the residual effects on the astronomical observables of the three outer planets that would arise from this metric disturbance, given an arbitrary metric theory of gravity. 

link : https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0602089 

 

This paper discusses the likelihood of whether the Pioneer anomaly is due to „mundane‟ systematic errors/effects or indicative of new or unappreciated physics. The main aim of this paper is to argue that recent publications suggesting that the anomaly is previously overlooked thermal recoil forces, which is in stark contrast to the earlier consensus (1998- 2010), are open to questioning. 

link : https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1307/1307.0537.pdf 

 

Radio-metric Doppler tracking data received from the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft from heliocentric distances of 20–70 AU has consistently indicated the presence of a small, anomalous, blue-shifted frequency drift uniformly changing with a rate of ∼ 6 × 10⁻⁹ Hz/s. Ultimately, the drift was interpreted as a constant sunward deceleration of each particular spacecraft at the level of a_P = (8.74 ± 1.33) × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s². This apparent violation of the Newton’s gravitational inverse-square law has become known as the Pioneer anomaly; the nature of this anomaly remains unexplained. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of the physical properties of the anomaly and the conditions that led to its detection and characterization. We review various mechanisms proposed to explain the anomaly and discuss the current state of efforts to determine its nature. 

link : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5255541/

 

 

[swansont]

It's one thing to write a paper proposing new physics. It's quite another to find evidence that this new physics is correct. IOW, finding a paper that proposes a novel solution to the anomaly means very little.

Also, two of the papers you cite predate 2012, when the thermal radiation solution was published. They are now moot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly

[studiot]

I am not particularly interested in conspiracy theories, but I wonder if there is some sort of clique in Paris, dedicated to an anti-Einstein campaign ?

One of the 'papers' offered seems to be from one Valentin Danci who has authored a fair number of anti-Einstein papers and hails from Paris.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Valentin-Danci

 

 

[swansont]

There are two tropes in play here.

One is "I can find a paper that proposes an alternative explanation for the phenomenon!" 

Well, good for you, but that's meaningless. If it's a sufficiently well-known problem, I'd be surprised if you can't. People rushed forward with "new physics" solutions to the Gran Sasso superluminal neutrino issue some years back. It ended up being a loose fiber optic connector, not new physics.

The other is "somebody is not convinced!"

Again, it's not hard to find one or two people - with some credentials, even - that are not convinced of an explanation to a complex problem. It's one reason that science runs on consensus, rather than unanimous agreement. (again, with the superluminal neutrino problem, multiple people proposed the researchers weren't doing their timing correctly, which was bunk)

Neither is evidence of anything at all. Both of these objections pass over looking at the science itself. They are a dodge, a distraction.

 

(and the result of that neutrino issue was: people got the physics right, no new physics needed, but they overlooked a simple problem. The people involved with the problem never advertised that new physics was going to be the answer. The process worked.)

[beecee]

5 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5255541/

The paper is dated 2010. 

Here is some more recent stuff.....

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0901.4597.pdf

Thermal recoil force, telemetry, and the Pioneer anomaly:

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91109-8099, USA† (Dated: May 30, 2018)

Precision navigation of spacecraft requires accurate knowledge of small forces, including the recoil force due to anisotropies of thermal radiation emitted by spacecraft systems. We develop a formalism to derive the thermal recoil force from the basic principles of radiative heat exchange and energymomentum conservation. The thermal power emitted by the spacecraft can be computed from engineering data obtained from flight telemetry, which yields a practical approach to incorporate the thermal recoil force into precision spacecraft navigation. Alternatively, orbit determination can be used to estimate the contribution of the thermal recoil force. We apply this approach to the Pioneer anomaly using a simulated Pioneer 10 Doppler data set.

Conclusion:

An object that emits heat experiences a recoil force due to radiation pressure. In this paper, we developed the basic equations that can be used to estimate the magnitude of this recoil force, and relate the recoil force to the amount of heat produced internally. We have been able to show how, under specific circumstances, the recoil force can be modeled as an homogeneous linear function of the power of discrete internal power sources. When this approach is applicable, the linear relationship can be readily incorporated into orbit determination efforts. To analyze the trajectory of Pioneer 10 and 11, we developed orbit determination software that estimates the thermal recoil force acting on the spacecraft. Our software uses telemetry information as it calculates the thermal power of on-board heat sources as functions of time. A comprehensive thermal model, presently under development, will allow us to verify the key assumptions behind our modeling, most notably the assertion that the thermal recoil force is accurately modeled as a linear, homogeneous function of electrical heat and heat from the radioisotope thermoelectric generators. Using a simulated Doppler data set and actual Pioneer 10 telemetry, we demonstrated that it is possible in principle to distinguish acceleration due thermal radiation from a constant sunward acceleration term. Newly recovered Doppler data are now available as a result of an extensive data recovery effort [1, 7]. This will allow us to extend our analysis, and verify whether or not the thermal recoil force can account for the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11. These results will be published elsewhere when they become available. We emphasize that the approach presented here, notably the direct utilization of flight telemetry in precision spacecraft navigation codes, has never been attempted before. The approach we describe is applicable not only to the case of Pioneer 10 and 11, but also to the case of present and future spacecraft. One mission in particular that may benefit from this approach is New Horizons, on its way towards an encounter with Pluto in 2015. While presently not used for gravitational research, such investigations could be conducted during its multiyear cruise. If such an investigation is undertaken, it will require accurate estimates of the thermal recoil force due to the waste heat produced by New Horizons’ RTG and cal equipment.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

https://astronomy.com/news/2018/08/how-the-pioneer-anomaly-was-solved

extract:

An explanation emerges

When all of these possibilities were considered, one potential cause of the Pioneer anomaly repeatedly came to the fore: thermal effects, mostly originating from the four RTGs aboard each Pioneer. To fully analyze this possibility, Turyshev and colleagues (most notably Viktor Toth) used predicted and actual thermal measurements to create a highly accurate thermal model of the spacecraft. They first modeled the effects of heating from the Sun on the trailing face of the Pioneers. Then they turned to heat sources on the spacecraft. Heat from the RTGs radiated toward the leading edge of the spacecraft, in the direction of its motion, and heat from the electronics box also primarily radiated in this same direction. This generated a sunward (backward) pressure on the entire spacecraft. As a result, the overall heating of the craft, when all factors were included, was asymmetric. Ultimately, Turyshev and colleagues concluded that radiation forces from the differential heating of the spacecraft, known as thermal recoil forces, from the RTGs and electronics were enough to explain the entire Pioneer anomaly. Additional analysis showed that the Pioneer anomaly also appears to be decreasing in intensity with time, likely as a result of the RTGs’ radioactive decay and slow decline in power output, providing further support for the conclusions reached by Turyshev.

In the end, the theory of relativity was not overthrown, our understanding of physics is not flawed, the Pioneer anomaly was explained to people’s satisfaction, and, for now, the question has been put to rest. But the story of the Pioneer anomaly shows how exacting measurements in science can generate new questions, challenge old ideas, and stimulate new ways to solve complex problems.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.2886v1.pdf

Support for temporally varying behavior of the Pioneer anomaly from the extended Pioneer 10 and 11 Doppler data sets: (Dated: May 28, 2018)

The Pioneer anomaly is a small sunward anomalous acceleration found in the trajectory analysis of the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft. As part of the investigation of the effect, analysis of recently recovered Doppler data for both spacecraft has been completed. The presence of a small anomalous acceleration is confirmed using data spans more than twice as long as those that were previously analyzed. We examine the constancy and direction of the Pioneer anomaly, and conclude that: i) the data favor a temporally decaying anomalous acceleration ( ∼ 2 × 10 −11 m/s 2 /yr) with an over 10% improvement in the residuals compared to a constant acceleration model; ii) although the direction of the acceleration remains imprecisely determined, we find no support in favor of a Sun-pointing direction over the Earth-pointing or along the spin-axis directions, and iii) support for an early “onset” of the acceleration remains weak in the pre-Saturn Pioneer 11 tracking data. We present these new findings and discuss their implications for the nature of the Pioneer anomaly.

 

4 hours ago, studiot said:

One of the 'papers' offered seems to be from one Valentin Danci who has authored a fair number of anti-Einstein papers and hails from Paris.

In Australia, we call it "Tall Poppy Syndrome"

Tall poppy syndrome is the questionable behaviour in some people that feel uncomfortable when confronted with superior intelligence or acts, as it brings into question there own mediocre efforts and/or personal ability.

Edited February 26, 2021 by beecee

[Markus Hanke]

16 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

But you know full well that it is not deemed approximately flat. 

You didn’t respond to my request for clarification as to what the scenario you are talking about actually is, so no, I didn’t know.
But it doesn’t matter, because if we are not in a flat spacetime then this isn’t a Special Relativistic scenario, and you need to use the usual General Relativistic relations between frames. Either way, it is no problem to do this.
But then, why do you keep talking about Lorentz transformations?

16 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

If the Pioneer anomaly has a gravitational origin

As I have pointed out, we already know the source of the Pioneer anomaly, and it doesn’t have anything to do with gravity or new physics.

[Prof Reza Sanaye]

18 hours ago, beecee said:

The paper is dated 2010. 

Here is some more recent stuff.....

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0901.4597.pdf

Thermal recoil force, telemetry, and the Pioneer anomaly:

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91109-8099, USA† (Dated: May 30, 2018)

Precision navigation of spacecraft requires accurate knowledge of small forces, including the recoil force due to anisotropies of thermal radiation emitted by spacecraft systems. We develop a formalism to derive the thermal recoil force from the basic principles of radiative heat exchange and energymomentum conservation. The thermal power emitted by the spacecraft can be computed from engineering data obtained from flight telemetry, which yields a practical approach to incorporate the thermal recoil force into precision spacecraft navigation. Alternatively, orbit determination can be used to estimate the contribution of the thermal recoil force. We apply this approach to the Pioneer anomaly using a simulated Pioneer 10 Doppler data set.

Conclusion:

An object that emits heat experiences a recoil force due to radiation pressure. In this paper, we developed the basic equations that can be used to estimate the magnitude of this recoil force, and relate the recoil force to the amount of heat produced internally. We have been able to show how, under specific circumstances, the recoil force can be modeled as an homogeneous linear function of the power of discrete internal power sources. When this approach is applicable, the linear relationship can be readily incorporated into orbit determination efforts. To analyze the trajectory of Pioneer 10 and 11, we developed orbit determination software that estimates the thermal recoil force acting on the spacecraft. Our software uses telemetry information as it calculates the thermal power of on-board heat sources as functions of time. A comprehensive thermal model, presently under development, will allow us to verify the key assumptions behind our modeling, most notably the assertion that the thermal recoil force is accurately modeled as a linear, homogeneous function of electrical heat and heat from the radioisotope thermoelectric generators. Using a simulated Doppler data set and actual Pioneer 10 telemetry, we demonstrated that it is possible in principle to distinguish acceleration due thermal radiation from a constant sunward acceleration term. Newly recovered Doppler data are now available as a result of an extensive data recovery effort [1, 7]. This will allow us to extend our analysis, and verify whether or not the thermal recoil force can account for the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11. These results will be published elsewhere when they become available. We emphasize that the approach presented here, notably the direct utilization of flight telemetry in precision spacecraft navigation codes, has never been attempted before. The approach we describe is applicable not only to the case of Pioneer 10 and 11, but also to the case of present and future spacecraft. One mission in particular that may benefit from this approach is New Horizons, on its way towards an encounter with Pluto in 2015. While presently not used for gravitational research, such investigations could be conducted during its multiyear cruise. If such an investigation is undertaken, it will require accurate estimates of the thermal recoil force due to the waste heat produced by New Horizons’ RTG and cal equipment.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

https://astronomy.com/news/2018/08/how-the-pioneer-anomaly-was-solved

extract:

An explanation emerges

When all of these possibilities were considered, one potential cause of the Pioneer anomaly repeatedly came to the fore: thermal effects, mostly originating from the four RTGs aboard each Pioneer. To fully analyze this possibility, Turyshev and colleagues (most notably Viktor Toth) used predicted and actual thermal measurements to create a highly accurate thermal model of the spacecraft. They first modeled the effects of heating from the Sun on the trailing face of the Pioneers. Then they turned to heat sources on the spacecraft. Heat from the RTGs radiated toward the leading edge of the spacecraft, in the direction of its motion, and heat from the electronics box also primarily radiated in this same direction. This generated a sunward (backward) pressure on the entire spacecraft. As a result, the overall heating of the craft, when all factors were included, was asymmetric. Ultimately, Turyshev and colleagues concluded that radiation forces from the differential heating of the spacecraft, known as thermal recoil forces, from the RTGs and electronics were enough to explain the entire Pioneer anomaly. Additional analysis showed that the Pioneer anomaly also appears to be decreasing in intensity with time, likely as a result of the RTGs’ radioactive decay and slow decline in power output, providing further support for the conclusions reached by Turyshev.

In the end, the theory of relativity was not overthrown, our understanding of physics is not flawed, the Pioneer anomaly was explained to people’s satisfaction, and, for now, the question has been put to rest. But the story of the Pioneer anomaly shows how exacting measurements in science can generate new questions, challenge old ideas, and stimulate new ways to solve complex problems.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

https://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.2886v1.pdf

Support for temporally varying behavior of the Pioneer anomaly from the extended Pioneer 10 and 11 Doppler data sets: (Dated: May 28, 2018)

The Pioneer anomaly is a small sunward anomalous acceleration found in the trajectory analysis of the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft. As part of the investigation of the effect, analysis of recently recovered Doppler data for both spacecraft has been completed. The presence of a small anomalous acceleration is confirmed using data spans more than twice as long as those that were previously analyzed. We examine the constancy and direction of the Pioneer anomaly, and conclude that: i) the data favor a temporally decaying anomalous acceleration ( ∼ 2 × 10 −11 m/s 2 /yr) with an over 10% improvement in the residuals compared to a constant acceleration model; ii) although the direction of the acceleration remains imprecisely determined, we find no support in favor of a Sun-pointing direction over the Earth-pointing or along the spin-axis directions, and iii) support for an early “onset” of the acceleration remains weak in the pre-Saturn Pioneer 11 tracking data. We present these new findings and discuss their implications for the nature of the Pioneer anomaly.

 

In Australia, we call it "Tall Poppy Syndrome"

Tall poppy syndrome is the questionable behaviour in some people that feel uncomfortable when confronted with superior intelligence or acts, as it brings into question there own mediocre efforts and/or personal ability.

And we also have gotten "Authority_Awe_Award" ( AAA ) syndrome as a result of which some people are scared to death if they ever find themselves faced with smallest scent of Anti_Establishment traces , ,  ,  , ,, 

[swansont]

20 minutes ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

And we also have gotten "Authority_Awe_Award" ( AAA ) syndrome as a result of which some people are scared to death if they ever find themselves faced with smallest scent of Anti_Establishment traces , ,  ,  , ,, 

Not at all.

What scientists are interested in is evidence, and that rarely makes an appearance. Here is no exception.

Plus, if there was legitimately some new science phenomenon, we would be ecstatic to investigate. 

[beecee]

5 hours ago, Prof Reza Sanaye said:

And we also have gotten "Authority_Awe_Award" ( AAA ) syndrome as a result of which some people are scared to death if they ever find themselves faced with smallest scent of Anti_Establishment traces , ,  ,  , ,, 

That's totally false and a fabrication to suit your personal agenda. History shows science of all disciplines to be in eternal progress when new evidence comes to light. It's not always immediate, but any new theory or model also needs to "run the gauntlet" as did the incumbent model. History is full of those examples.