|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ranging and Pioneer
Thus spake Gordon D. Pusch
Oh No writes: Thus spake "John (Liberty) Bell" Oh No wrote: Thus spake "John (Liberty) Bell" 2) I have yet to see an adequately satisfactory explanation of how that proposed effect can produce a red shift on one side of a galaxy, and a blue shift on the opposite side, whilst still giving the observed Pioneer blue shift, on both sides of the Solar System. What is measured is a shift in the wavefunction corresponding to an eigenstate of acceleration. The obvious problem with your above claim is that, even if one assumes that one _can_ construct a self-adjoint "acceleration operator," an "eigenstate of acceleration" would almost certainly be unphysical and non-normalizable, for the same reasons that eigenstates of position or momentum are unphysical and non-normalizable. In particular, one may expect that an "eigenstate of acceleration" would be _completely delocalized_, much as an eigenstate of momentum is completely delocalized --- leaving one with absolutely no information about position. By contrast, in "Real World" measurements, one would only be able to observe position, velocity, and acceleration to _finite precision_, and hence, even if one believes that "wave function collapse" is a "physical process" rather than an artifact of the observer's revised knowledge about the state of the quantum system, the result of a finite precision "acceleration measurement" will =NOT= in fact be an "eigenstate of acceleration," but rather an incoherent _MIXTURE_ of eigenstates of acceleration, with an uncertainty determined by the precision of the "acceleration measurement"... Of course what you say is correct. I have been guilty once again of expressing myself in a sloppy manner. What one actually measures is a shift in the momentum space wave function for each detected photon. At the time of each measurement we have an eigenstate of momentum (to "real world" accuracy), not an eigenstate of acceleration. I am suggesting that, notwithstanding this shift, the classical value of momentum is unchanged for Pioneer and for an orbiting star, so I refer to the shift as an "illusory momentum". In the case of Pioneer the illusory momentum varies, which I interpret as an illusory acceleration. In the case of an orbiting star the illusory momentum corresponds to an illusory increase in orbital velocity, which again is interpreted as illusory acceleration toward the galactic centre. Regards -- Charles Francis substitute charles for NotI to email |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ranging and Pioneer
Oh No wrote: Thus spake Gordon D. Pusch Oh No writes: Thus spake "John (Liberty) Bell" Oh No wrote: Thus spake "John (Liberty) Bell" 2) I have yet to see an adequately satisfactory explanation of how that proposed effect can produce a red shift on one side of a galaxy, and a blue shift on the opposite side, whilst still giving the observed Pioneer blue shift, on both sides of the Solar System. What is measured is a shift in the wavefunction corresponding to an eigenstate of acceleration. The obvious problem with your above claim is that, even if one assumes that one _can_ construct a self-adjoint "acceleration operator," an "eigenstate of acceleration" would almost certainly be unphysical and non-normalizable, for the same reasons that eigenstates of position or momentum are unphysical and non-normalizable. In particular, one may expect that an "eigenstate of acceleration" would be _completely delocalized_, much as an eigenstate of momentum is completely delocalized --- leaving one with absolutely no information about position. By contrast, in "Real World" measurements, one would only be able to observe position, velocity, and acceleration to _finite precision_, and hence, even if one believes that "wave function collapse" is a "physical process" rather than an artifact of the observer's revised knowledge about the state of the quantum system, the result of a finite precision "acceleration measurement" will =NOT= in fact be an "eigenstate of acceleration," but rather an incoherent _MIXTURE_ of eigenstates of acceleration, with an uncertainty determined by the precision of the "acceleration measurement"... Of course what you say is correct. I have been guilty once again of expressing myself in a sloppy manner. What one actually measures is a shift in the momentum space wave function for each detected photon. At the time of each measurement we have an eigenstate of momentum (to "real world" accuracy), not an eigenstate of acceleration. I am suggesting that, notwithstanding this shift, the classical value of momentum is unchanged for Pioneer and for an orbiting star, so I refer to the shift as an "illusory momentum". In the case of Pioneer the illusory momentum varies, which I interpret as an illusory acceleration. In the case of an orbiting star the illusory momentum corresponds to an illusory increase in orbital velocity, which again is interpreted as illusory acceleration toward the galactic centre. But you have already claimed, in prior discussions, that observers placed on opposite sides of Pioneer 10 or 11 would both see an illusory acceleration (now illusory momentum) directed towards them. You are now simultaneously claiming that extragalactic observers on opposite sides of any star within the galaxy will, in contrast, see illusory momenta in the same physical direction (ie towards one and away from the other). These two momentum illusion claims also appear mutually incompatible. John Bell http://global.accelerators.co.uk (Change John to Liberty to respond by email) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ranging and Pioneer
Thus spake "John (Liberty) Bell"
But you have already claimed, in prior discussions, that observers placed on opposite sides of Pioneer 10 or 11 would both see an illusory acceleration (now illusory momentum) directed towards them. acceleration is measured as a drift in momentum. Essentially this is not much different from the standard idea in an expanding universe that every point is moving away from every other, and appears in the model as a correction to that idea. You are now simultaneously claiming that extragalactic observers on opposite sides of any star within the galaxy will, in contrast, see illusory momenta in the same physical direction (ie towards one and away from the other). These two momentum illusion claims also appear mutually incompatible. This is a different instance, where what is measured is an effect only apparent due to the distortion of space-time due to galactic mass. Regards -- Charles Francis substitute charles for NotI to email |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ranging and Pioneer | [email protected] | Research | 0 | August 13th 06 07:22 PM |
Ranging and Pioneer | Oh No | Research | 0 | August 13th 06 08:53 AM |
Ranging and Pioneer | [email protected] | Research | 0 | August 12th 06 01:25 PM |
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 |