NASA Test of Light Speed Extrapolation

The evidence for light speed delay extrapolation beyond a second
is confounded by the delays of packing and unpacking bits in the
uplink and downlink streams etc..
Also the software for communications between earth and the
craft assumes light speed delay extrapolation.
How to test it?
1)The Mars Rover could wave in response to a command from the
Earth and successive images from the cameras before during and
after this command might show it.
2) The Pioneer 10 Doppler Data could show that data was only
received when transmission was going on at the same time at the
same or other site in view of the craft and that the Doppler
shifts were more accurately predicted on this assumption.
The data is available at http://bestweb.net/~sansbury/Doppler

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...
The evidence for light speed delay extrapolation beyond a
second
is confounded by the delays of packing and unpacking bits in
the
uplink and downlink streams etc..
Also the software for communications between earth and the
craft assumes light speed delay extrapolation.
How to test it?
1)The Mars Rover could wave in response to a command from the
Earth and successive images from the cameras before during and
after this command might show it.
2) The Pioneer 10 Doppler Data could show that data was only
received when transmission was going on at the same time at the
same or other site in view of the craft and that the Doppler
shifts were more accurately predicted on this assumption.
The data is available at http://bestweb.net/~sansbury/Doppler


Previous Discussion with William Owen of NASA( He acknowledges
that he does not
know the details of how the radio science time processes the data
but no one from these
teams has entered this discussion):
WO
Here are some examples:[of evidence that the speed of light delay
extrapolates beyond a second]
1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

WO
2)The light curves of binary stars are shifted in phase according
to the
earth's position in its orbit and so it is necessary to change
the time
of observation from what it is on the ground to what it is when
the same
light wave passes the sun. For example an eclipse of V471 Tauri
lasts ten
minutes but this recorded as occurring ten minutes before it is
actually observed.
RS
I gather that the time between eclipses is more regular when you
do this
but that is an imposed regularity and need have no other
significance.
WO
Radar ranging to the planets has a round trip light time as
expected...
RS If you look at the details you will see that the analysis of
the time series
of radar noise from the direction of the planet eg Venus is done
by starting
the time series at various microsecond interval near the expected
time of
the reflected signal and selecting the time series that most
resembles the sent
time series and attributing variations to surface irregulaties.
This map needless to
say has never been confirmed in any detail by later radar data
using spacecraft
orbiting Venus.
WO Laser ranging to retroreflectors left on the moon's surface;
RS The return signals are very weak and the few seconds delay of
the return signals and atmospheric scattering do not permit a
precise confirmation
that the delay is greater than two seconds.
WO Countinual Ranging Code indicate the speed of light
extrapolates.
RSYour word "continual" suggests that a ranging signal could be
going out
during the same time interval as an incoming ranging signal is
received as expected
and the incoming ranging signal could be due to the just sent
outgoing ranging signal.
WOI can ask around and find out *exactly* how it is done, but
the nuts and bolts of
if must work soemthing like this. First, the spacecraft must be
told to point its antenna
at the earth and keep its "ears"open. These commands to the
attitude system and to the
radio system are typically included in a "sequence" of commands
that are sent to the
spacecraft days or weeks in advance. Second the particular DSN
antenna must also be
configured correctly. Then when the right time comes, the antenna
starts transmitting
the range code dand it does this continuously for the prescribed
time,
perhhaps as long as 10 or 12 hours. As the time approaches for
the
return signal to arrive, either that antenna *or a different one*
listens for
the incoming signal. The arrival time of the bits is determined,
compared to the
known transmittal time of the same bits, and the difference is
the round
trip light time" which is in essence the observation that we use
in our orbit
determination process,
And the piece of this that speaks particularly to your
objection is that
the range code has a beginning and an end. True, the bit pattern
repeats
after a while, but if the return signal also has a beginning and
an end, would
that not satisfy you?...the code repeats at least for the Mark 1
ranging system
every 2 and 2/3 seconds about.
RS But this is not long enough. So there is no way of telling if
your are receiving
a part of this code that was sent a few seconds before or that
was sent hours before.
And isnt it the case that the estimation of craft location is
based not only on estimates
of light speed delay but on previous estimates of position going
back to launch and
maybe small corrections at that time due to Doppler etc and
Newtonian forces mainly
the sun and Jupiter on the craft after it has left earth?
WOYes

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

Ralph, why not repeat the observations yourself?

George

"George Dishman" wrote in message
...

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to
changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

Ralph, why not repeat the observations yourself?

George

George, you miss the point. The point is that the observed
greater
delays in the emergence of a moon from Jupiter's shadow when the
earth was
further from Jupiter are attributable to the difference in the
line of sight between
Jupiter and Earth at these different relative orientations.
Astronomers since Cassini know this. Now with more and better
observations
of Jupiter etc it is perhaps not just a possible interpretation
but the only interpretation.

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

"George Dishman" wrote in message
...

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

Ralph, why not repeat the observations yourself?

George, you miss the point. The point is that the observed greater
delays in the emergence of a moon from Jupiter's shadow when the earth was
further from Jupiter are attributable to the difference in the line of
sight between
Jupiter and Earth at these different relative orientations.
Astronomers since Cassini know this. Now with more and better
observations
of Jupiter etc it is perhaps not just a possible interpretation
but the only interpretation.

Well isn't that the point? The line-of-sight distance changes
and there is a matching delay in the observed time of the
transit. The ratio of these gives the speed of light. If there
was a problem with observability, which I take to mean some
events were not observable for example due to cloud cover, it
has long since been eliminated.

George

"George Dishman" wrote in message
...

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

"George Dishman" wrote in message
...

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to
changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

Ralph, why not repeat the observations yourself?

George, you miss the point. The point is that the
observed greater
delays in the emergence of a moon from Jupiter's shadow when
the earth was
further from Jupiter are attributable to the difference in
the line of
sight between
Jupiter and Earth at these different relative orientations.
Astronomers since Cassini know this. Now with more and
better
observations
of Jupiter etc it is perhaps not just a possible
interpretation
but the only interpretation.

Well isn't that the point? The line-of-sight distance changes
and there is a matching delay in the observed time of the
transit.
There need be no delay at all. Look out the window at a car
driving by. If you are at various distances from the window and
at different positions in the room the car will come into view
and disappear from view at different times.
Nothing to do with the speed of light.


The ratio of these gives the speed of light. If there
was a problem with observability, which I take to mean some
events were not observable for example due to cloud cover, it
has long since been eliminated.

George

ralph sansbury wrote:
"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

The evidence for light speed delay extrapolation beyond a

second

is confounded by the delays of packing and unpacking bits in

the

uplink and downlink streams etc..
Also the software for communications between earth and the
craft assumes light speed delay extrapolation.
How to test it?
1)The Mars Rover could wave in response to a command from the
Earth and successive images from the cameras before during and
after this command might show it.
2) The Pioneer 10 Doppler Data could show that data was only
received when transmission was going on at the same time at the
same or other site in view of the craft and that the Doppler
shifts were more accurately predicted on this assumption.
The data is available at http://bestweb.net/~sansbury/Doppler



Previous Discussion with William Owen of NASA( He acknowledges
that he does not
know the details of how the radio science time processes the data
but no one from these
teams has entered this discussion):
WO
Here are some examples:[of evidence that the speed of light delay
extrapolates beyond a second]
1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

WO
2)The light curves of binary stars are shifted in phase according
to the
earth's position in its orbit and so it is necessary to change
the time
of observation from what it is on the ground to what it is when
the same
light wave passes the sun. For example an eclipse of V471 Tauri
lasts ten
minutes but this recorded as occurring ten minutes before it is
actually observed.
RS
I gather that the time between eclipses is more regular when you
do this
but that is an imposed regularity and need have no other
significance.

I'll just comment on this one since BD +16d516 (V471 Tau) has long
been one of my favorite objects. Actually, Bill Owen was slightly
off as V471 has eclipses about every 12.5 hours and the ingress to
eclipse takes about 60 seconds (the duration is about 60 minutes ...
quick question I ask my students (I probably asked Bill years ago)
.... what is the approximate ratio of radii of the stars involved).
I nearly missed my first observation of a V471 eclipse (many years
ago) because I had neglected to include the light-time correction in
my planning and was about to take one more observation of the
comparison star when I saw the strip chart recorder dropping rapidly
in U. If light-time is taken into effect, the eclipses of V471 are
easily predicted to an accuracy of a second in time, without it one
has to assume that the time of eclipses is exactly modulated by a
function that mimics the earth's orbital motion. The same is true
of all eclipsing systems but few have such a sharply defined eclipse
as V471.
--
John Oliver
Associate Professor
Associate Chair/Undergraduate Coordinator
Department of Astronomy
University of Florida
Project AST@RHO http://astrho.astro.ufl.edu
see the night sky at http://concam.net/rh/

"John Oliver" wrote in message
news:UobTb.1809$Yj.1735@lakeread02...
ralph sansbury wrote:
"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

The evidence for light speed delay extrapolation beyond a

second

is confounded by the delays of packing and unpacking bits in

the

uplink and downlink streams etc..
Also the software for communications between earth and the
craft assumes light speed delay extrapolation.
How to test it?
1)The Mars Rover could wave in response to a command from the
Earth and successive images from the cameras before during
and
after this command might show it.
2) The Pioneer 10 Doppler Data could show that data was only
received when transmission was going on at the same time at
the
same or other site in view of the craft and that the Doppler
shifts were more accurately predicted on this assumption.
The data is available at
http://bestweb.net/~sansbury/Doppler



Previous Discussion with William Owen of NASA( He
acknowledges
that he does not
know the details of how the radio science time processes the
data
but no one from these
teams has entered this discussion):
WO
Here are some examples:[of evidence that the speed of light
delay
extrapolates beyond a second]
1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to
changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

WO
2)The light curves of binary stars are shifted in phase
according
to the
earth's position in its orbit and so it is necessary to
change
the time
of observation from what it is on the ground to what it is
when
the same
light wave passes the sun. For example an eclipse of V471
Tauri
lasts ten
minutes but this recorded as occurring ten minutes before it
is
actually observed.
RS
I gather that the time between eclipses is more regular when
you
do this
but that is an imposed regularity and need have no other
significance.

I'll just comment on this one since BD +16d516 (V471 Tau) has
long
been one of my favorite objects. Actually, Bill Owen was
slightly
off as V471 has eclipses about every 12.5 hours and the ingress
to
eclipse takes about 60 seconds (the duration is about 60
minutes ...
quick question I ask my students (I probably asked Bill years
ago)
... what is the approximate ratio of radii of the stars
involved).
I nearly missed my first observation of a V471 eclipse (many
years
ago) because I had neglected to include the light-time
correction in
my planning and was about to take one more observation of the
comparison star when I saw the strip chart recorder dropping
rapidly
in U. If light-time is taken into effect, the eclipses of V471
are
easily predicted to an accuracy of a second in time, without it
one
has to assume that the time of eclipses is exactly modulated by
a
function that mimics the earth's orbital motion. The same is
true
of all eclipsing systems but few have such a sharply defined
eclipse
as V471.

Could you expand on this and the possibility that this is
not
due to the speed of light delay.


--
John Oliver
Associate Professor
Associate Chair/Undergraduate Coordinator
Department of Astronomy
University of Florida
Project AST@RHO http://astrho.astro.ufl.edu
see the night sky at http://concam.net/rh/

"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

"John Oliver" wrote in message
news:UobTb.1809$Yj.1735@lakeread02...
ralph sansbury wrote:
"ralph sansbury" wrote in message
...

The evidence for light speed delay extrapolation beyond a

second

is confounded by the delays of packing and unpacking bits
in

the

uplink and downlink streams etc..
Also the software for communications between earth and
the
craft assumes light speed delay extrapolation.
How to test it?
1)The Mars Rover could wave in response to a command from
the
Earth and successive images from the cameras before during
and
after this command might show it.
2) The Pioneer 10 Doppler Data could show that data was
only
received when transmission was going on at the same time at
the
same or other site in view of the craft and that the
Doppler
shifts were more accurately predicted on this assumption.
The data is available at
http://bestweb.net/~sansbury/Doppler



Previous Discussion with William Owen of NASA( He
acknowledges
that he does not
know the details of how the radio science time processes
the
data
but no one from these
teams has entered this discussion):
WO
Here are some examples:[of evidence that the speed of light
delay
extrapolates beyond a second]
1)The eclipses of Jupiter's moons....
RS
Cassini said that Roemer's delays could have been due to
changes
in the observability of Jupiter's moons from the earth.

WO
2)The light curves of binary stars are shifted in phase
according
to the
earth's position in its orbit and so it is necessary to
change
the time
of observation from what it is on the ground to what it is
when
the same
light wave passes the sun. For example an eclipse of V471
Tauri
lasts ten
minutes but this recorded as occurring ten minutes before
it
is
actually observed.
RS
I gather that the time between eclipses is more regular
when
you
do this
but that is an imposed regularity and need have no other
significance.

I'll just comment on this one since BD +16d516 (V471 Tau) has
long
been one of my favorite objects. Actually, Bill Owen was
slightly
off as V471 has eclipses about every 12.5 hours and the
ingress
to
eclipse takes about 60 seconds (the duration is about 60
minutes ...
quick question I ask my students (I probably asked Bill years
ago)
... what is the approximate ratio of radii of the stars
involved).
I nearly missed my first observation of a V471 eclipse (many
years
ago) because I had neglected to include the light-time
correction in
my planning and was about to take one more observation of the
comparison star when I saw the strip chart recorder dropping
rapidly
in U. If light-time is taken into effect, the eclipses of
V471
are
easily predicted to an accuracy of a second in time, without
it
one
has to assume that the time of eclipses is exactly modulated
by
a
function that mimics the earth's orbital motion. The same is
true
of all eclipsing systems but few have such a sharply defined
eclipse
as V471.

Could you expand on this and the possibility that this is
not
due to the speed of light delay.

In the case of Bradley's observations of stars in the tail
of the
great bear as instances of stellar aberration, the roughly
30second of arc change
in position of the stars when viewed six months apart could be
regarded
as due to a 3nanosecond delay before their light registered on
the rods of
the retina of the viewer. So as the earth moved 1meter at the
rate of 67000miles/hr in one direction
and then six months later in the opposite direction while the
polar star was
being observed, it would appear to be coming from slightly
different positions
on the heavenly sphere. This was interpreted as the speed of
light relative to
the speed of the earth but could equally well be interpreted as
the response time
to the source of light.
Maybe something similar is going on here with respect to the
time before the
changes in light strength register on the rods of the antenna of
the observers eye
or on the photoelectric surface aimed at the light source.

"ralph sansbury" writes:
[ Oliver writes: ]
in U. If light-time is taken into effect, the eclipses of V471 are
easily predicted to an accuracy of a second in time, without it one
has to assume that the time of eclipses is exactly modulated by a
function that mimics the earth's orbital motion. The same is true
of all eclipsing systems but few have such a sharply defined eclipse
as V471.

Could you expand on this and the possibility that this is not
due to the speed of light delay.

There are lots of binary systems where precision timing can be
performed. These include eclipsing systems and binary pulsars. In
the case of binary pulsars, the timing residuals can be as small as
~35 NANOseconds ( = 10 meters of light travel ).

Without correction for light travel time effects, all binaries show a
365.25 day periodic variations in their times of detection of
pulsations or eclipses.

So the question is: could it really be that all the binaries in the
solar system have a planet with 365.25 day period? And furthermore,
that the inclinations of those planets are somehow exactly aligned
with the plane of the ecliptic? (because light travel time effects
scale as cos(ecliptic_latitude))

And further yet, could it really be that radar ranging time to
spacecraft, Venus and other asteroids, always scale as the distance
between the earth and the target, is just a coincidence?

And still further, do we really believe that pulsars' pulsations, and
the unique stochastic variations of distant AGN used for VLBI studies,
both have time delays which vary *exactly* according to the motion of
the observatory(ies) around the earth's center?

The answer is of course, NO, to all of these questions. It is not a
coincidence that all of these phenomena are observed. One cannot
simply explain away each and every binary star system, every
spacecraft, every planet, every VLBI observation as coincidental
source variations, because then that makes a bigger problem of
thousands of unexplained coincidences.

There is one simple explanation for all of these phenomena: finite
light travel time.

CM