On Sunday, April 9, 2017 at 9:24:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:
Il giorno venerdì 7 aprile 2017 16:03:50 UTC+2, Craig Markwardt ha scritto:
On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 4:18:06 AM UTC-4, wrote:
...
.. Mr. Craig seems to me an interesting competitor .. we shall try to speak completely (?) in one point, each time ...
.. first point : is quantitatively similar the magnitude of acceleration of Pioneer and Hubble constant ?
No

.. i don't know the paper of Anderson 2002 .. modestly i know that the acceleration in the International Sistem is given in meter each sec * sec .. ..: if i translate the Pioneer 'datas 8.7cm * 10^-8 sec*sec in meter , i get 8.7 m *10^-10 sec*sec

Yes

..: if i tranlate the Hubble 'datas 25 km sec * M y , i get 25*10^3 sec *sec/ 3.1 *10^6 * 10 *6 or 8.2 m*10^-10 sec*sec ...and so the two accelerations are , in absolute value , very similar ..(NB: i have forgotten the M. y. l. , the l. of 'light' because also in Pioneer datas , this quantity was forgotten..)

Don't forget it, it's important. Hubble constant is about 75 km/s/Mpc (Mpc = megaparsec) That is a velocity change of 75 km/s for each megaparsec of distance increase. Typical escape speed for Pioneers is about 12 km/s, so (75 km/s/Mpc * 12 km/s) = 2.9e-14 m/s^2. No way this is close to 8.7e-10 m/s^2.

Now if Pioneers were traveling at the speed of light, then yes, the numbers would be comparable, but that is not the case.
CM

..i refer to the paper arxiv : gr ..q../010406..
1) Turyshev wrote that an other people (like me) had noted the similarity of the quantity of the Pioneer acceleration and the Hubble constant ..
2) at page 32 of the paper , the formula 15 keeps at denominator the c ( migth that authorize to write M.y.l. only M.y. ?

There is no equation 15 on page 32 of 0104064.pdf, but if you mean equation 57 on page 44... This was a throwaway line in the paper, and unfortunately stimulated too many people. It is meaningless numerology.

3) of course , i take the datas from the arxiv'paper , but the measures of distance are done with signals coming of light'speed in the two cases ( Pioneer and Hubble)
.. the tipical escape'speed of 12 km.sec is not inside the question , because the anomaly is an extraspeed , out of the 12k.s. (initial speed) and the gravitational 'speed adjustments..

Nope. Problem 1 of course is that the Hubble expansion is an expansion which accelerates "outward" with increased distance, whereas the Pioneer effect is an acceleration "inward." So of course the direction is totally wrong.

But even then the explanation fails. If one takes the Hubble effect as it is conventionally understood, it is an expansion of space which carries objects along with it. Hubble expansion alone at a single distance could never lead to the Pioneer effect, because the Hubble effect is a constant velocity at fixed distance (i.e. no acceleration). Fail. However, Pioneer is moving from smaller distance to larger distance at about 12 km/s so it does sample regions of smaller, then large expansion. That *does* lead to differential Hubble expansion, i.e. acceleration, *but* the magnitude is too small as already noted.

Your appeal to light speed of the measurement is not founded upon anything known about the Hubble effect. The Hubble effect is still a amount of speed change *per distance*. The Pioneer spacecraft just doesn't have a large distance (and distance is not increasing at a large rate).

CM