|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 1:19*pm, kenseto wrote:
On Apr 27, 10:37*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 9:28*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 27, 9:48*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 8:17*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 26, 1:00*pm, Sam Wormley wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. Right....so it is an anomaly that current theories did not predict. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 9:24*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 4/27/11 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: On Apr 26, 1:00 pm, Sam *wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks.... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. Right....so it is an anomaly that current theories did not predict. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. Model mechanics includes a physical explanation for the Pioneer anomaly. * *Which just goes to show that "model mechanics" was wrong again! * *Now you have to un-patch "model mechanics" because good old * *Newtonian mechanics was right all along on for observations of * *Pioneer spacecraft. Model mechancis agrees with Newtonian mechanics but GR give different prediction for the path of Pioneer 10. That means that GR givces wrong prediction. "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". These are pure speculations and not within the provision of the current theories. Ken Seto See:http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...ved-thanks...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On 4/27/11 2:02 PM, kenseto wrote:
On Apr 27, 9:24 am, Sam wrote: On 4/27/11 8:17 AM, kenseto wrote: On Apr 26, 1:00 pm, Sam wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. Right....so it is an anomaly that current theories did not predict. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. Model mechanics includes a physical explanation for the Pioneer anomaly. Which just goes to show that "model mechanics" was wrong again! Now you have to un-patch "model mechanics" because good old Newtonian mechanics was right all along on for observations of Pioneer spacecraft. Model mechancis agrees with Newtonian mechanics but GR give different prediction for the path of Pioneer 10. That means that GR givces wrong prediction. Poor Seto--There was no discrepancy with general relativity! There was an unaccounted for force that has now been explained. Be honest, your "Model Mechanics" has NEVER been able to calculate anything. NEVER! "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". These are pure speculations and not within the provision of the current theories. Ken Seto See:http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...ved-thanks...- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 26, 1:00*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". See:http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks.... It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 2:23*pm, PD wrote:
On Apr 27, 1:19*pm, kenseto wrote: On Apr 27, 10:37*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 9:28*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 27, 9:48*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 8:17*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 26, 1:00*pm, Sam Wormley wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. Right....so it is an anomaly that current theories did not predict. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. Model mechanics includes a physical explanation for the Pioneer anomaly. "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". These are pure speculations and not within the provision of the current theories. Of course they are in the provision of current theories, Ken. That's what the announced results are about. It really is sad that a) you can't keep up with the experimental results, and b) you cling to problems and refuse to believe it when they are resolved. Hey idiot....they wouldn't call it the pioneer anomaly if it is within the provisions of the current theories. These are add-ons (epicycles)outside of the current theories. Ken, you are using OLD, OUTDATED information. The Pioneer anomaly is no longer an anomaly now that it is understood and it is no longer called the Pioneer anomaly. Assertion is not a valid arguement. This is not a matter of assertion, Ken. It is a matter of DOCUMENTATION. It is a FACT that the label "Pioneer anomaly" is associated with OLDER and OUTDATED documents surrounding the Pioneer, and NEWER and UP-TO-DATE documents surrounding Pioneer do not regard it as an anomaly. It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? When it comes to DOCUMENTED FACTS, Ken, argument has nothing to do with it. Either you avail yourself of the documentation, or you don't. If you don't, then it's nobody's fault but your own.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 2:26*pm, kenseto wrote:
On Apr 27, 2:23*pm, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 1:19*pm, kenseto wrote: On Apr 27, 10:37*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 9:28*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 27, 9:48*am, PD wrote: On Apr 27, 8:17*am, kenseto wrote: On Apr 26, 1:00*pm, Sam Wormley wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. Right....so it is an anomaly that current theories did not predict. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. Model mechanics includes a physical explanation for the Pioneer anomaly. "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". These are pure speculations and not within the provision of the current theories. Of course they are in the provision of current theories, Ken. That's what the announced results are about. It really is sad that a) you can't keep up with the experimental results, and b) you cling to problems and refuse to believe it when they are resolved. Hey idiot....they wouldn't call it the pioneer anomaly if it is within the provisions of the current theories. These are add-ons (epicycles)outside of the current theories. Ken, you are using OLD, OUTDATED information. The Pioneer anomaly is no longer an anomaly now that it is understood and it is no longer called the Pioneer anomaly. Assertion is not a valid arguement. This is not a matter of assertion, Ken. It is a matter of DOCUMENTATION. It is a FACT that the label "Pioneer anomaly" is associated with OLDER and OUTDATED documents surrounding the Pioneer, and NEWER and UP-TO-DATE documents surrounding Pioneer do not regard it as an anomaly. It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system?' Read the paper, Ken. The anomaly is not observed ONLY when the spaceship is almost outside the solar system. But the heat effect is constant, and the gravitational pull declines. Inside the solar system, the gravitational effect swamps the heat effect, and so the deceleration due to the heat is below measurement sensitivity. Near the edge of the solar system, when the gravitational deceleration is very small, then the heat effect becomes noticeable compared to that other effect. Ken, Ken, Ken. Does it not occur to you to READ first before shooting your mouth off? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? When it comes to DOCUMENTED FACTS, Ken, argument has nothing to do with it. Either you avail yourself of the documentation, or you don't. If you don't, then it's nobody's fault but your own.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 12:23*pm, kenseto wrote:
On Apr 26, 1:00*pm, Sam Wormley wrote: On 4/26/11 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote: 6. The pioneer 10 anormalie problem. The Pioneer Anomaly is finally solved, thanks to 1970s computer graphics http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... "The Pioneer probes are both on escape trajectories that will eventually take them out of the solar system. They're travelling fast, but both are slightly decelerating because the Sun's gravity is pulling them back. The so-called Pioneer Anomaly comes from the fact that both probes are slowing down slightly more than they ought to. It's less than an extra billionth of a meter per second squared, but that's still enough to fall outside our understanding of physics. "There was much speculation on the sorts strange and bizarre hidden effects that could be causing this, including the exotic idea that gravity itself somehow becomes stronger over the distances separating the Sun from the Pioneer probes. These by and large fell by the wayside when physicists realized the heat produced by the probes might be able to account for the extra deceleration. But even then, calculations revealed thermal effects could only account for about two-thirds of the anomaly, still leaving the basic mystery unsolved. "That's where researchers at Portugal's Institute for Plasmas and Nuclear Fusion enter the picture. They realized that all the previous calculations had only looked at the heat emitted, ignoring any heat reflected back at the probes. They used a computer modeling technique first developed in the 1970s known as Phong shading to figure out how the heat would reflect off the spacecraft and in which direction it would then travel". See:http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? It did, Ken. Starting around Jupiter's orbit, if I remember correctly. Might have something to do with the solar wind dominating until about there.... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On 4/27/11 2:23 PM, kenseto wrote:
It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? Did you even read the reference, Seto? http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...puter-graphics As PD explained: "Inside the solar system, the gravitational effect swamps the heat effect, and so the deceleration due to the heat is below measurement sensitivity. Near the edge of the solar system, when the gravitational deceleration is very small, then the heat effect becomes noticeable compared to that other effect". |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On Apr 27, 7:33*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 4/27/11 2:23 PM, kenseto wrote: It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? * *Did you even read the reference, Seto?http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... As PD explained: "Inside the solar system, the gravitational effect swamps the heat effect, and so the deceleration due to the heat is below measurement sensitivity. Near the edge of the solar system, when the gravitational deceleration is very small, then the heat effect becomes noticeable compared to that other effect". This explanation is purely ad hoc. Every time you encounter problems you guys invent an ad hoc solution. The basic problem is that the current theories are not complete....Model mechanics is complete. It includes the free S-Particles that act as the observed dark matter. Each planet contain a concentration of dark matter....So when the spacecraft is outside the solar system the combined gravitational effect of these dark matter will affect the path of the spacecraft. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Unification of physics
On 4/28/11 9:05 AM, kenseto wrote:
On Apr 27, 7:33 pm, Sam wrote: On 4/27/11 2:23 PM, kenseto wrote: It is not solved....the authors made assumptions that the heat generated by the spacecraft causes the deceleration of the spacecraft toward the sun. The problem is: why is the anomaly observed only when the spacecraft is almost outside the solar system? Why is the heat generated by the spacecaft did not affect the path of the spacecraft while it is still within the solar system???? Did you even read the reference, Seto?http://io9.com/#!5788543/the-pioneer...-solved-thanks... As PD explained: "Inside the solar system, the gravitational effect swamps the heat effect, and so the deceleration due to the heat is below measurement sensitivity. Near the edge of the solar system, when the gravitational deceleration is very small, then the heat effect becomes noticeable compared to that other effect". This explanation is purely ad hoc. Every time you encounter problems you guys invent an ad hoc solution. The basic problem is that the current theories are not complete. Actually, Seto, current theory and a better understanding of the factors involved was the solution to understanding to what was once thought of as an anomalous acceleration. Now that the details are understood, the physics laws and theory held up once again! This is at the heart of science -- observation confirming theory and bettering our understanding of nature. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GRAND UNIFICATION HYPOTHESIS | cosmojoe | Astronomy Misc | 0 | July 18th 09 01:57 AM |
GRAND UNIFICATION HYPOTHESIS | cosmojoe | Misc | 0 | July 18th 09 01:50 AM |
#18 Logically, you cannot have a force of gravity ; monograph-book:UNIFICATION OF THE FORCES OF PHYSICS AS A COULOMB UNIFICATION | a_plutonium[_1_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | February 26th 08 03:09 AM |
Unification of Physics | kenseto[_1_] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | February 11th 08 11:34 PM |
New Book - Unification of Electromagnetism and Gravity Available Now! | Fusioneer | Astronomy Misc | 40 | March 19th 05 12:17 PM |