On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:49:17 GMT, Bill Vajk
wrote:

Ken S. Tucker wrote:

Well I think the OP is wrong...
The Anomalous acceleration is rather large about
1 part in 1700. This rules out any new g-field effect
or known GR effect or SR effect. These effects
would certainly appear as anomalies in the orbits
of bodies with high eccentricities.

IMO...
The error appears in the measurement procedure,
specifically in Galilean Relativity, let me explain,
why Gal. Rel. is a useful concept here.

snip

I went through a prolonged discussion of this some time
back in these newsgroups.

If you look at how the folks who came to the conclusion
arrived at it the first thing to note is the fudge factors
they enter into "correcting" the incoming data stream
to acommodate atmospheric conditions. There are other
problems as well, including the possibility of multiple
signal paths.

Clean and unadulterated data would make me a lot happier
about the whole situation. Till then the whole thing
remains suspect IMO. But doubtless it has brought
lots of funding over the years, and who can fault
the group for that?

Gentlemen: I have solved the problem of the Pioneer anomaly perfectly
in the forthcoming "Dual Space-new Science for a new Century". A_p is
a real acceleration. In deriving the solution, I also derived a model
for the entire cosmos. I will only give a hint here.

Just for starters, recall that recently Australian scientists said
there were 70 sextillion stars in the universe. It appears to come
mighty close.

Let each star equal the mass of the Sun, and let the age of the
universe be 10.98 billion years, with a radius R = 1.028x10^26 meters.
Then, using Newton's law we get Ap for the acceleration:
M = 70*10^21*M_s = 1.384x10^53 kg
g = MG/R^2 = 8.74x10^-10m/ss
Therefore, if we were located at range R from total mass M, we would
detect gravity equal to Ap.

One immediate problem is that the Schw. Radius for this mass is 2R-we
would be half inside a black hole! As a tentative fix, if we change M
to M/2 (being R distant from, on average, half the mass), we would be
on the horizon. This would be much more comfortable, but it is not the
answer.

Unfortunately, the fixes available in conventional science cannot help
here. To form a proper model of the cosmos we need to employ new
principles found only in Dual Space theory, such as my theory of
creation and new law of gravity. With these we solve not only the
horizon problem in the model, but also satisfy the Einstein-deSitter
criterion of omega = 1. We also show exactly how the so-called maximum
force of c^4/4G (which is twice too high) is derived.

The theory of Dual Space will have profound implications, including
that it has a much more palatable replacement for General Relativity.
It is impossible to write an acceptable paper on a single topic such
as the Pioneer 10 anomaly, since the solution will usually involve
some of the principles of Dual Space, to which no else is yet party.

(Furthermore, I have considered it, but it would be a form of
harlotry, if I were to load the title with such flatulent phrases as
"brane-world dynamics" or "spontaneous baryogenesis", and the like)
just to get under the radar beam of the screener, who has been trained
to accept only proper content).


Mr. Dual Space

If you have something to say, write an equation.
If you have nothing to say, write an essay.