Aether theory. Pioneer anomaly

[bane357]

 

What do you think about my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly

 

http://vixra.org/abs/1407.0102

 

 

I have a few questions.

Is there a link between Pioneer anomaly and flyby anomaly?

 

OK They solved Pioneer anomaly. They used thermal model of the two spacecraft Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11.

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507

 

Astrophysicist Slava G. Turyshev said

 

” We still have an uncertainty in our study of less than 18 percent. But for me, this is the answer. Some may argue it is not final, but in my mind we did a good job, and it's very clear what happened.”

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/08/the_pioneer_anomaly_heat_generators_slowed_down_pioneer_10_and_11_in_deep_space_.html

 

In article we can read

 

http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9808081v2.pdf

 

” Radio metric data from the Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses spacecraft indicate an

apparent anomalous, constant, acceleration acting on the spacecraft with a magnitude ∼

8.5 × 10 −8 cm/s 2 , directed towards the Sun.”

 

ap∼ 8.5 × 10 −8 cm/s 2

 

Did they used their thermal model to explain anomaly for Galileo, and Ulysses spacecraft, or only used thermal model for Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11?

 

Here is one intresting article

 

http://archive.today/YvUP#selection-507.173-507.192

 

”Gary Page of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and his colleagues have identified 15 asteroids that might also be subjected to the mysterious force. The asteroids' orbits all stretch far into the outer ...”

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0504367

 

Doppler residuals (observed minus computed data) is very important. Doppler residuals (frequency residuals) is linked to ap, so if anyone wants to explain anomaly, he should explain origin of Doppler residuals or ap. In case Pioneer anomaly they used thermal model.

 

In case fly by anomaly Doppler residuals should be explaind too.

” While the Doppler residuals (observed minus computed data) were expected to remain flat, the analysis revealed an unexpected 66 mHz shift, which corresponds to a velocity increase of 3.92 mm/s at perigee. “

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

 

[Sensei]

Yet Another "Aether theory"...

 

 

Not again.....

[swansont]

What do you think about my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly

 

 

!

Moderator Note

The rules require that you post enough of the idea to discuss it here.

[bane357]

 

Here's one of my discussion of ether and the Michelson–Morley experiment

 

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?144893-Aether-theory-with-experimental-verification

[Strange]

Here's one of my discussion of ether and the Michelson–Morley experiment

 

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?144893-Aether-theory-with-experimental-verification

 

Where you were repeatedly shown to be wrong until you eventually just gave up...

What do you think about my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly

 

If it involves "aether" it is presumably bogus.

 

 

Here is one intresting article

 

http://archive.today...507.173-507.192

 

”Gary Page of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, and his colleagues have identified 15 asteroids that might also be subjected to the mysterious force. The asteroids' orbits all stretch far into the outer ...”

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0504367

 

They propose observations that could be made. How is that relevant?

[bane357]

 

 

If it involves "aether" it is presumably bogus.

 

 

 

OK Can you explain why you think that my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly is probably wrong

[swansont]

Here's one of my discussion of ether and the Michelson–Morley experiment

 

http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?144893-Aether-theory-with-experimental-verification

 

!

Moderator Note

I'm not sure what part of "post it here" is being mis-comprehended. You need to present your argument here, not via some link to another site.

[Strange]

OK Can you explain why you think that my explanation of Pioneer аnomaly is probably wrong

 

"If it involves aether ..."

 

How can something that doesn't exist be an explanation?

[Sensei]

XIX century argumentation for aether was that all waves they knew were requiring medium in which wave is propagating.

Waves in ocean need water. Sound waves need air or other material. etc. etc.

 

So that argumentation was also expanded to light propagating in vacuum.

 

To create vacuum you need to suck the all air molecules that are in hermetic container.

 

How do you create aether by sucking regular molecules out?

Is aether only in vacuum or everywhere, even inside of us and all matter?

 

You should first create experiment that is creating aether (if it exists) in lab then come with theory. Not reverse..

Edited July 27, 2014 by Sensei

[hoola]

It seems the main problem with measuring anything, light included, against a proposed aether, is that the particles disappear too quickly for any particular measurement to take place, so there is no stable point with which to reference anything against...that doesn't mean the aether doesn't exist, only that part of it's particular properties preclude reference against any (virtual) point in normal space. But the sharnhorst effect supposedly opens the door to the possibility of the aether (as virtual particles), affecting photon speeds...a major point of contention is considering VPs as the aether...which I presume is discounted as too simplistic or simply incorrect...

[swansont]

It seems the main problem with measuring anything, light included, against a proposed aether, is that the particles disappear too quickly for any particular measurement to take place, so there is no stable point with which to reference anything against...that doesn't mean the aether doesn't exist, only that part of it's particular properties preclude reference against any (virtual) point in normal space. But the sharnhorst effect supposedly opens the door to the possibility of the aether (as virtual particles), affecting photon speeds...a major point of contention is considering VPs as the aether...which I presume is discounted as too simplistic or simply incorrect...

 

That's not really a problem because as with a fair amount of physics, a direct measurement is not strictly necessary. If there was an aether you could measure the effect it had on everything else, as compare it to the model of the aether you must have in order to be advancing an aether theory.

If it has no measurable effect, that's indistinguishable from not existing in the first place.

[hoola]

presumably a test of transmission of energy through a casimir gap could be more easily accomplished with microwaves or even radio waves, with the gap not having to be so small, as related to the sharnhorst effect. It does look like the aether is an obsolete term. The quantum foam is still there and may act as a resistance to EMF instead of a conductor...

[swansont]

presumably a test of transmission of energy through a casimir gap could be more easily accomplished with microwaves or even radio waves, with the gap not having to be so small, as related to the sharnhorst effect. It does look like the aether is an obsolete term. The quantum foam is still there and may act as a resistance to EMF instead of a conductor...

 

It's the opposite. The effect gets smaller as the plates get further apart. You exclude fewer electromagnetic modes.