#1
|
|||
|
|||
Neptune anomaly
Stupendous_Man ha scritto:
Jonathan Thornburg -- remove -animal to reply wrote: I don't recall the reference, but I recall reading a paper in the Astronomical Journal dated sometime in the 1980s, which concluded that after due consideration of the error bars in the observations, there were no unresolved deviations. That is, the authors found that the modern (very accurately known) orbits of the outer planets did indeed fit all the observations (including the older ones) to within reasonable estimates of the observational accuracy. Perhaps you were remembering this paper: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/np...510b 0d825109 Thanks for the precious reference ([1]). In [1] Standish demostrates the "lack of problems with Neptune's orbit" by re-examining the available data . On pp. 2001-2006 he argues that: 1) Galileo did not mean what he wrote. His observations should be interpreted so as to fit what we expect. 2) Lalande's data are uncertain. If one fits the uncertainty to our reasonable expectations then the problem disappears. 3) It is not true that Neptune does not behave as predicted. Long-terms predictions about it are affected by uncontrollable indeterminacies in the observational data. They are however conceptually within our current understanding ("Any residual systematic trends in the residuals of Uranus and Neptune are certainly explainable by these uncertainties in the observational data"). Uncertainties provide a certain explanation. It is a plausible debunking argument, but , as pointed out by others in this thread, it is not predictive (and hence not falsifiable). If some day a theory (my original question was motivated by my interest in MOND) will describe correctly, say, the Pioneer anomaly, get rid of dark matter AND fit the "unplausible" data that Myles Standish discards, then this Neptune issue may be worth a second look. Interestingly in [2] Standish writes that "while the ephemerides of Uranus and Neptune seem to have no unexplained problems, the ephemeris of Pluto does have problems ... there is a large bias which cannot be removed from the residuals by a mere orbit adjustment; its cause is presently unknown though it probably is the result of inhomogeneous data reductions". Cheers, IV [1] Standish, E. M. ""Planet X - No dynamical evidence in the optical observations" Astronomical Journal vol. 105, no. 5, p. 2000-2006 (1993) [2] Standish, E. M. " Pluto and Planets X" Completing the Inventory of the Solar System, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Proceedings, volume 107, T.W. Rettig and J.M. Hahn, Eds., pp. 163-170 (1996) http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/np...TML&format |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Neptune anomaly
[[referring to the paper
[1] Standish, E. M. ""Planet X - No dynamical evidence in the optical observations" Astronomical Journal vol. 105, no. 5, p. 2000-2006 (1993) which argues that outer-planet observations are consistent with a dynamical model (= general relativity + planetary orbits/masses), to within reasonable estimates of the accuracy of the observations]] tttito wrote: It is a plausible debunking argument, but , as pointed out by others in this thread, it is not predictive (and hence not falsifiable). I would say it _is_ both predictive and falsifiable: if the best-fitting theoretical orbit were to disagree with modern observations by (say) 1 degree [an amount much larger than any reasonable estimate of these observations' accuracy], then our theoretical model would be wrong. Of course, some degree of judgement is needed to make a "reasonable estimate" of the observations' accuracy. This is true for all areas of observational/experimental science (i.e. all of science except mathematics). -- -- "Jonathan Thornburg -- remove -animal to reply" Max-Planck-Institut fuer Gravitationsphysik (Albert-Einstein-Institut), Golm, Germany, "Old Europe" http://www.aei.mpg.de/~jthorn/home.html "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." -- quote by Freire / poster by Oxfam |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
30 Years of Pioneer Spacecraft Data Rescued: The Planetary Society Enables Study of the Mysterious Pioneer Anomaly | [email protected] | News | 0 | June 6th 06 05:35 PM |
Neptune anomaly | Stupendous_Man | Research | 2 | May 31st 06 07:16 PM |
Neptune anomaly | Jonathan Thornburg -- remove -animal to reply | Research | 0 | May 29th 06 08:43 PM |
Nuclear-Powered Mission to Neptune Could Answer Questions About Planetary Formation | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 2 | December 10th 04 03:19 PM |