Ranging and Pioneer

Thus spake Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Oz wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax writes
Oz wrote:

Charles Francis' proposal (gr-qc/0604047 backed by gr-qc/0604047, gr-
qc/0605127) places the shift as a correction due to quantum gravity
since photons are essentially quantised. The same effect modified by
being seen "edgeways on" produces a shift that matches the doppler shift
that mond seeks to explain but with this explanation the galaxies rotate
in a newtonian manner when the doppler shift is properly interpreted.
So where does this leave Dark Matter if Francis' explanation for the
accuracy of MOND is correct?


Given this, why don't I read about this all across the media as 'Dark
Matter' is debunked? Especially given the contortions that
astrophysicists are putting themselves through to try and explain what
it is, and apparently having to come up with multiple bizarre
properties? Just Occam's Razor would suggest that Francis' proposal
should be preferred. So, what's the problem with it?


It's not yet refereed. There is a problem getting it refereed, since it
requires a deep understanding of foundations of quantum theory (an
unpopular field) together with a deep understanding of differential
geometry, since it alters the connection. Those who do understand both
those fields at the required level are unlikely to have much knowledge
of observational cosmology. I don't think this creates insurmountable
problems, but I do think that a referee will have to put in quite a lot
more than a couple of days work to give it a proper assessment.
Hopefully this will happen in the course of time and I am awaiting
reports on submitted papers. By comparison with other discoveries, I
think one is talking of timescales of years before one can hope for a
reasonable level of acceptance which would justify media headlines
saying "dark matter debunked".



Regards

--
Charles Francis
substitute charles for NotI to email