Could there be a connection between standard kilogram having less weight then its copies, and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

Could there be a connection between standard kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

For a moment, if the copies of the standard kilogram moved a lot,
and the standard stayed in one place, and the copies are heavier,
it occurred to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down right?
because it is getting heavier perhaps?

On Sep 14, 3:00 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Could there be a connection between standard
kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

Sure. The angels are cleaning the Pioneer, and are removing a little
bit of mass. No wait, acceleration is not due to body mass, but due
to *system* mass. No wait, the acceleration acts like mass is being
added, not removed, inside the position of the Pioneer.

So, no.

For a moment, if the copies of the standard
kilogram moved a lot, and the standard stayed in
one place, and the copies are heavier, it occurred
to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down
right? because it is getting heavier perhaps?

Probably no correlation.

David A. Smith

Jan Panteltje wrote:

Could there be a connection between standard kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

For a moment, if the copies of the standard kilogram moved a lot,
and the standard stayed in one place, and the copies are heavier,
it occurred to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down right?
because it is getting heavier perhaps?

How is internally contradicting your own argument a means of proposal?

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:09:14 -0700) it happened Uncle Al
wrote in :

Jan Panteltje wrote:

Could there be a connection between standard kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

For a moment, if the copies of the standard kilogram moved a lot,
and the standard stayed in one place, and the copies are heavier,
it occurred to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down right?
because it is getting heavier perhaps?

How is internally contradicting your own argument a means of proposal?

You know Pioneer slowed down, or did you not?

On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 07:18:32 -0700) it happened dlzc
wrote in
om:

On Sep 14, 3:00 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Could there be a connection between standard
kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

Sure. The angels are cleaning the Pioneer, and are removing a little
bit of mass. No wait, acceleration is not due to body mass, but due
to *system* mass. No wait, the acceleration acts like mass is being
added, not removed, inside the position of the Pioneer.

So, no.

I stated that the moving copies of the kilogram added mass
(the stationary one weights less then the ones that moved).
See original text below.
So, YES.


For a moment, if the copies of the standard
kilogram moved a lot, and the standard stayed in
one place, and the copies are heavier, it occurred
to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down
right? because it is getting heavier perhaps?

Probably no correlation.

David A. Smith

Dear Jan Panteltje:

On Sep 14, 8:31 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 07:18:32 -0700) it happened dlzc
wrote in
om:

On Sep 14, 3:00 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Could there be a connection between standard
kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

Sure. The angels are cleaning the Pioneer, and
are removing a little bit of mass. No wait,
acceleration is not due to body mass, but due
to *system* mass. No wait, the acceleration
acts like mass is being added, not removed,
inside the position of the Pioneer.

So, no.

I stated that the moving copies of the kilogram
added mass (the stationary one weights less
then the ones that moved). See original text
below. So, YES.

So what you are saying is that moving the Pioneer, adds 1 part in 10^8
*to the Sun, Jupiter, etc.*? You understand that it appears as
"little g" is increasing, which means all the mass inside a circular
orbit whereever Pioneer is crossing is greater. Changing the mass of
Pioneer won't do it.

So, no.

David A. Smith

On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:18:25 -0700) it happened dlzc
wrote in
. com:

Dear Jan Panteltje:

On Sep 14, 8:31 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 07:18:32 -0700) it happened dlzc
wrote in
om:

On Sep 14, 3:00 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Could there be a connection between standard
kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

Sure. The angels are cleaning the Pioneer, and
are removing a little bit of mass. No wait,
acceleration is not due to body mass, but due
to *system* mass. No wait, the acceleration
acts like mass is being added, not removed,
inside the position of the Pioneer.

So, no.

I stated that the moving copies of the kilogram
added mass (the stationary one weights less
then the ones that moved). See original text
below. So, YES.

So what you are saying is that moving the Pioneer, adds 1 part in 10^8
*to the Sun, Jupiter, etc.*? You understand that it appears as
"little g" is increasing, which means all the mass inside a circular
orbit whereever Pioneer is crossing is greater. Changing the mass of
Pioneer won't do it.

So, no.

David A. Smith

Sorry, I absolutely cannot follow you here, this is the way I see it:
Say you launch a mass A into space, it sets out on a trajectory B that
takes it eventually out of the solar systm, and the speed
the thing distances itself from earth is S1.
Now it seems to me, that if my some mysterious process A's mass increased
after launch, it's orbit would take it away from the earth with less speed.
If this was not so, then you could launch a 100 kg spacecraft with the same
rocket as a 1000 kg one.

Although Pioneer did some gravity assist flyby, the same basic idea applies.
What is wrong with this reasoning?

"Jan Panteltje" wrote in message
...


Sorry, I absolutely cannot follow you here, this is the way I see it:
Say you launch a mass A into space, it sets out on a trajectory B that
takes it eventually out of the solar systm, and the speed
the thing distances itself from earth is S1.
Now it seems to me, that if my some mysterious process A's mass increased
after launch, it's orbit would take it away from the earth with less
speed.
If this was not so, then you could launch a 100 kg spacecraft with the
same
rocket as a 1000 kg one.

Although Pioneer did some gravity assist flyby, the same basic idea
applies.
What is wrong with this reasoning?

The overwhelmingly larger mass of the Sun and planets
means that the probe's acceleration is virtually independent
of its mass. Remember how different masses fall at the
same rate when you drop them?

On Sep 14, 6:00 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Could there be a connection between standard kilogram having less weight then its copies,
and Pioneer's anomalous acceleration?

For a moment, if the copies of the standard kilogram moved a lot,
and the standard stayed in one place, and the copies are heavier,
it occurred to me Pioneer also moves a lot, and slows down right?
because it is getting heavier perhaps?


But why would a body that moved around be heavier than an identical
body that didn't? Relativity says that mass is an invariant.

And as far as Pioneer goes, it's still not known what the answer is or
even if there is a real problem.

Dear Jan Panteltje:

On Sep 14, 10:13 am, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 14 Sep 2007 09:18:25 -0700) it happened dlzc
wrote in
. com:
Sorry, I absolutely cannot follow you here, this is
the way I see it: Say you launch a mass A into
space, it sets out on a trajectory B that takes it
eventually out of the solar systm, and the speed
the thing distances itself from earth is S1.
Now it seems to me, that if my some mysterious
process A's mass increased after launch,

.... without altering the total momentum that was imparted at
launch ...

it's orbit would take it away from the earth with
less speed.

I follow your reasoning this far. The mass of the Pioneers is not
increasing. It did not take longer or unexpectedly large thrusts to
adjust their positions. Additionally, if we are positing "mystery
mass increase" why not "mystery momentum increase" too? Also,
accumulations of mass as impactors has been discounted from similar
reasons.

If this was not so, then you could launch a
100 kg spacecraft with the same rocket as a
1000 kg one.

Different circumstances. You assume the source of momentum derives
from the Universe, rather than from the mass (whatever that is). Not
a bad assumption, but you left it unstated.

Although Pioneer did some gravity assist flyby, the
same basic idea applies. What is wrong with this
reasoning?

I did not figure out you were keeping the initial momentum the same.

Now keep in mind that:
- Pioneer was slowing down, so the effect should be decreasing. It
didn't.
- The Pioneer effect (really for four different satellites / probes)
was "sudden onset". Which belies a simple motion-related effect.
- The platinum standard is being cleaned, which removes metal oxides
from its surface. This removes metal.

David A. Smith