The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

Formulas derived from Kepler’s planetary laws allow us to determine
the masses of bodies in space because there is a direct relationship
between orbiting and orbited bodies. Kepler observed these
relationships for many years in the early 1600’s and expressed them in
three laws following arduous calculations. In the case of the sun, the
formulas will give the mass of the sun with the help of the
gravitational constant G which was obtained first in 1798 by
experiments in a laboratory by Cavendish.

Knowing the orbital periods of planets and their distances from the
sun we can use four methods to calculate the mass of the sun. All
formulas may use pi (3.14), G (6.674E-11), r (mean distance to sun in
m), r1 & r2 (perihelion in m), r3 (aphelion in m), v (volume in m^3)
and p (period in seconds). I have selected nine solar planets for
which these numbers are known.

Kepler’s laws are generally precise but the planets do not conform to
a single pattern of motion. Their orbits are ellipsis with varying
eccentricity. This together with the fact that the value of G has not
been established with accuracy or agreed to by different authorities
means that the mass of the sun cannot be calculated exactly but only
in a range of
1.425E+30 kg (1,425,079,319,967,270quadrillion kg) to 2.012E+30 kg
(2,012,272,500,399,950quadrillion kg) depending on which planet is
selected and what method of calculation is used. The four methods will
produce a minimum of 36 values for the sun’s mass, four for each
planet. Of the 36 results, 27 are different. The results of methods 1
and 2 are identical from different formulas.

Method 1 using formula M = 4pi^2*r^3/G*p^2

MER 1,986,990,787,831,150,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN 1,986,913,501,516,980,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR 1,986,534,680,262,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR 1,985,933,590,285,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP 1,990,116,623,617,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT 1,987,127,564,230,440,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA 1,986,638,525,992,780,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP 1,986,698,146,207,950,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU 1,999,277,113,439,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 2 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; v = ((4*pi)/3)*r^3 (sphere
volume)

MER 1,987,288,553,571,870,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN 1,987,211,255,675,760,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR 1,986,832,377,651,520,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR 1,986,231,197,596,680,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP 1,990,414,857,788,270,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT 1,987,425,350,468,140,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA 1,986,936,238,944,380,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP 1,986,995,868,094,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU 1,999,576,720,379,610,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 3 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; v = (4/3)pi*r1*r2*r3
(ellipsoid volume)

MER 1,547,150,779,827,070,000,000,000,000,000
VEN 1,970,304,157,432,980,000,000,000,000,000
EAR 1,945,942,171,226,160,000,000,000,000,000
MAR 1,785,945,874,890,820,000,000,000,000,000
JUP 1,885,248,776,143,060,000,000,000,000,000
SAT 1,862,700,964,929,320,000,000,000,000,000
URA 1,891,880,708,918,830,000,000,000,000,000
NEP 1,994,323,588,106,980,000,000,000,000,000
PLU 1,425,079,319,967,270,000,000,000,000,000

Method 4 same formulas as method 3 but adjusted for eccentricity

MER 1,865,863,840,471,450,000,000,000,000,000
VEN 1,984,096,286,535,010,000,000,000,000,000
EAR 1,979,023,188,137,000,000,000,000,000,000
MAR 1,952,038,841,255,670,000,000,000,000,000
JUP 1,975,740,717,397,930,000,000,000,000,000
SAT 1,967,012,218,965,370,000,000,000,000,000
URA 1,980,799,102,238,020,000,000,000,000,000
NEP 2,012,272,500,399,950,000,000,000,000,000
PLU 1,778,498,991,319,150,000,000,000,000,000

We have 27 different numbers to choose from. But the problem is even
greater. The value of G is not proven. We can use anything for G. The
mass of the sun cannot be determined.

Peter Riedt

Dear Peter Riedt:

On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:
The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The mass of the Sun changes by about 1 part in 10^14 per year. So
it'll be of some importance to know when the various measures were
obtained.

Did you remember to subtract out the masses of the planets further
in? Kepler requires it.

It is well known that G is a very squirrely number, and is usually
only published to 6 sig figs.

And I'd not worry about Pluto's orbit, until we know more about
Tyche...

David A. Smith

On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:
The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

Formulas derived from Kepler’s planetary laws allow us to determine
the masses of bodies in space because there is a direct relationship
between orbiting and orbited bodies. Kepler observed these
relationships for many years in the early 1600’s and expressed them in
three laws following arduous calculations. In the case of the sun, the
formulas will give the mass of the sun with the help of the
gravitational constant G which was obtained first in 1798 by
experiments in a laboratory by Cavendish.

Knowing the orbital periods of planets and their distances from the
sun we can use four methods to calculate the mass of the sun. All
formulas may use pi (3.14), G (6.674E-11), r (mean distance to sun in
m), r1 & r2 (perihelion in m), r3 (aphelion in m), v (volume in m^3)
and p (period in seconds). I have selected nine solar planets for
which these numbers are known.

Kepler’s laws are generally precise but the planets do not conform to
a single pattern of motion. Their orbits are ellipsis with varying
eccentricity. This together with the fact that the value of G has not
been established with accuracy or agreed to by different authorities
means that the mass of the sun cannot be calculated exactly but only
in a range of
1.425E+30 kg (1,425,079,319,967,270quadrillion kg) to *2.012E+30 kg
(2,012,272,500,399,950quadrillion kg) depending on which planet is
selected and what method of calculation is used. The four methods will
produce a minimum of 36 values for the sun’s mass, four for each
planet. Of the 36 results, 27 are different. The results of methods 1
and 2 are identical from different formulas.

Method 1 using formula M = 4pi^2*r^3/G*p^2

MER * * * *1,986,990,787,831,150,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN * * * *1,986,913,501,516,980,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR * * * *1,986,534,680,262,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR * * * *1,985,933,590,285,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP * * * *1,990,116,623,617,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT * * * *1,987,127,564,230,440,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA * * * *1,986,638,525,992,780,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP * * * *1,986,698,146,207,950,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU * * * *1,999,277,113,439,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 2 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; *v = ((4*pi)/3)*r^3 (sphere
volume)

MER * * * *1,987,288,553,571,870,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN * * * *1,987,211,255,675,760,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR * * * *1,986,832,377,651,520,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR * * * *1,986,231,197,596,680,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP * * * *1,990,414,857,788,270,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT * * * *1,987,425,350,468,140,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA * * * *1,986,936,238,944,380,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP * * * *1,986,995,868,094,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU * * * *1,999,576,720,379,610,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 3 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; v = (4/3)pi*r1*r2*r3
(ellipsoid volume)

MER * * * *1,547,150,779,827,070,000,000,000,000,000
VEN * * * *1,970,304,157,432,980,000,000,000,000,000
EAR * * * *1,945,942,171,226,160,000,000,000,000,000
MAR * * * *1,785,945,874,890,820,000,000,000,000,000
JUP * * * *1,885,248,776,143,060,000,000,000,000,000
SAT * * * *1,862,700,964,929,320,000,000,000,000,000
URA * * * *1,891,880,708,918,830,000,000,000,000,000
NEP * * * *1,994,323,588,106,980,000,000,000,000,000
PLU * * * *1,425,079,319,967,270,000,000,000,000,000

Method 4 same formulas as method 3 but adjusted for eccentricity

MER * * * *1,865,863,840,471,450,000,000,000,000,000
VEN * * * *1,984,096,286,535,010,000,000,000,000,000
EAR * * * *1,979,023,188,137,000,000,000,000,000,000
MAR * * * *1,952,038,841,255,670,000,000,000,000,000
JUP * * * *1,975,740,717,397,930,000,000,000,000,000
SAT * * * *1,967,012,218,965,370,000,000,000,000,000
URA * * * *1,980,799,102,238,020,000,000,000,000,000
NEP * * * *2,012,272,500,399,950,000,000,000,000,000
PLU * * * *1,778,498,991,319,150,000,000,000,000,000

We have 27 different numbers to choose from. But the problem is even
greater. The value of G is not proven. We can use anything for G. The
mass of the sun cannot be determined.

Peter Riedt

Even the best peers are guessing at this, and satellite trajectories
continually adjusted to suit. There's still no objective science as
to raw ice coexisting in 1 AU space, and even less objective science
pertaining to ice or water existing/coexisting on our physically dark
moon.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Mar 21, 12:11*am, dlzc wrote:
Dear Peter Riedt:

On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:

The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The mass of the Sun changes by about 1 part in 10^14 per year. *So
it'll be of some importance to know when the various measures were
obtained.

Did you remember to subtract out the masses of the planets further
in? *Kepler requires it.

It is well known that G is a very squirrely number, and is usually
only published to 6 sig figs.

And I'd not worry about Pluto's orbit, until we know more about
Tyche...

David A. Smith

David, the orbital periods and distances of the planets from the sun
would change if the mass of the sun changes significantly due to
loss by radiation but this effect has not been observed.

Peter Riedt

On Mar 21, 2:29*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:





The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

Formulas derived from Kepler’s planetary laws allow us to determine
the masses of bodies in space because there is a direct relationship
between orbiting and orbited bodies. Kepler observed these
relationships for many years in the early 1600’s and expressed them in
three laws following arduous calculations. In the case of the sun, the
formulas will give the mass of the sun with the help of the
gravitational constant G which was obtained first in 1798 by
experiments in a laboratory by Cavendish.

Knowing the orbital periods of planets and their distances from the
sun we can use four methods to calculate the mass of the sun. All
formulas may use pi (3.14), G (6.674E-11), r (mean distance to sun in
m), r1 & r2 (perihelion in m), r3 (aphelion in m), v (volume in m^3)
and p (period in seconds). I have selected nine solar planets for
which these numbers are known.

Kepler’s laws are generally precise but the planets do not conform to
a single pattern of motion. Their orbits are ellipsis with varying
eccentricity. This together with the fact that the value of G has not
been established with accuracy or agreed to by different authorities
means that the mass of the sun cannot be calculated exactly but only
in a range of
1.425E+30 kg (1,425,079,319,967,270quadrillion kg) to *2.012E+30 kg
(2,012,272,500,399,950quadrillion kg) depending on which planet is
selected and what method of calculation is used. The four methods will
produce a minimum of 36 values for the sun’s mass, four for each
planet. Of the 36 results, 27 are different. The results of methods 1
and 2 are identical from different formulas.

Method 1 using formula M = 4pi^2*r^3/G*p^2

MER * * * *1,986,990,787,831,150,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN * * * *1,986,913,501,516,980,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR * * * *1,986,534,680,262,000,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR * * * *1,985,933,590,285,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP * * * *1,990,116,623,617,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT * * * *1,987,127,564,230,440,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA * * * *1,986,638,525,992,780,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP * * * *1,986,698,146,207,950,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU * * * *1,999,277,113,439,190,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 2 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; *v = ((4*pi)/3)*r^3 (sphere
volume)

MER * * * *1,987,288,553,571,870,000,000,000,000,000 kg
VEN * * * *1,987,211,255,675,760,000,000,000,000,000 kg
EAR * * * *1,986,832,377,651,520,000,000,000,000,000 kg
MAR * * * *1,986,231,197,596,680,000,000,000,000,000 kg
JUP * * * *1,990,414,857,788,270,000,000,000,000,000 kg
SAT * * * *1,987,425,350,468,140,000,000,000,000,000 kg
URA * * * *1,986,936,238,944,380,000,000,000,000,000 kg
NEP * * * *1,986,995,868,094,090,000,000,000,000,000 kg
PLU * * * *1,999,576,720,379,610,000,000,000,000,000 kg

Method 3 using formula M = 3pi*v/p^2/G; v = (4/3)pi*r1*r2*r3
(ellipsoid volume)

MER * * * *1,547,150,779,827,070,000,000,000,000,000
VEN * * * *1,970,304,157,432,980,000,000,000,000,000
EAR * * * *1,945,942,171,226,160,000,000,000,000,000
MAR * * * *1,785,945,874,890,820,000,000,000,000,000
JUP * * * *1,885,248,776,143,060,000,000,000,000,000
SAT * * * *1,862,700,964,929,320,000,000,000,000,000
URA * * * *1,891,880,708,918,830,000,000,000,000,000
NEP * * * *1,994,323,588,106,980,000,000,000,000,000
PLU * * * *1,425,079,319,967,270,000,000,000,000,000

Method 4 same formulas as method 3 but adjusted for eccentricity

MER * * * *1,865,863,840,471,450,000,000,000,000,000
VEN * * * *1,984,096,286,535,010,000,000,000,000,000
EAR * * * *1,979,023,188,137,000,000,000,000,000,000
MAR * * * *1,952,038,841,255,670,000,000,000,000,000
JUP * * * *1,975,740,717,397,930,000,000,000,000,000
SAT * * * *1,967,012,218,965,370,000,000,000,000,000
URA * * * *1,980,799,102,238,020,000,000,000,000,000
NEP * * * *2,012,272,500,399,950,000,000,000,000,000
PLU * * * *1,778,498,991,319,150,000,000,000,000,000

We have 27 different numbers to choose from. But the problem is even
greater. The value of G is not proven. We can use anything for G. The
mass of the sun cannot be determined.

Peter Riedt

Even the best peers are guessing at this, and satellite trajectories
continually adjusted to suit. *There's still no objective science as
to raw ice coexisting in 1 AU space, and even less objective science
pertaining to ice or water existing/coexisting on our physically dark
moon.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Brad, agreed.

Dear Peter Riedt:

On Mar 20, 5:01*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:
On Mar 21, 12:11*am, dlzc wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:

The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The mass of the Sun changes by about 1 part in 10^14
per year. *So it'll be of some importance to know when
the various measures were obtained.

Did you remember to subtract out the masses of the
planets further in? *Kepler requires it.

It is well known that G is a very squirrely number, and
is usually only published to 6 sig figs.

And I'd not worry about Pluto's orbit, until we know
more about Tyche...

David, the orbital periods and distances of the planets
from the sun would change if the mass of the sun
changes significantly due to loss by radiation but this
effect has not been observed.

Mass loss due to solar wind has been measured. So you report false
significant figures out beyond 6 or 7, and really should not. As to
"affect on orbits", it should (at least) show / permit a secular
increase in orbital eccentricity.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/lt25548256n76128/

David A. Smith

On Mar 22, 4:54*am, dlzc wrote:
Dear Peter Riedt:

On Mar 20, 5:01*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:





On Mar 21, 12:11*am, dlzc wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:

The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The mass of the Sun changes by about 1 part in 10^14
per year. *So it'll be of some importance to know when
the various measures were obtained.

Did you remember to subtract out the masses of the
planets further in? *Kepler requires it.

It is well known that G is a very squirrely number, and
is usually only published to 6 sig figs.

And I'd not worry about Pluto's orbit, until we know
more about Tyche...

David, the orbital periods and distances of the planets
from the sun would change if the mass of the sun
changes significantly due to loss by radiation but this
effect has not been observed.

Mass loss due to solar wind has been measured. *So you report false
significant figures out beyond 6 or 7, and really should not. *As to
"affect on orbits", it should (at least) show / permit a secular
increase in orbital eccentricity.http://www.springerlink.com/content/lt25548256n76128/

David A. Smith- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

David, is it possible that the mass of the sun will accrete as it
sweeps space? It would compensate lossess due to radiation.

Peter Riedt

Dear Peter Riedt:

On Mar 21, 6:37*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:
On Mar 22, 4:54*am, dlzc wrote:
On Mar 20, 5:01*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:
On Mar 21, 12:11*am, dlzc wrote:
On Mar 19, 7:07*pm, Peter Riedt wrote:

The Mass of the Sun cannot be determined

The mass of the Sun changes by about 1 part in 10^14
per year. *So it'll be of some importance to know when
the various measures were obtained.

Did you remember to subtract out the masses of the
planets further in? *Kepler requires it.

It is well known that G is a very squirrely number, and
is usually only published to 6 sig figs.

And I'd not worry about Pluto's orbit, until we know
more about Tyche...

David, the orbital periods and distances of the planets
from the sun would change if the mass of the sun
changes significantly due to loss by radiation but this
effect has not been observed.

Mass loss due to solar wind has been measured. *So
you report false significant figures out beyond 6 or 7,
and really should not. *As to "affect on orbits", it should
(at least) show / permit a secular increase in orbital
eccentricity.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/lt25548256n76128/

David, is it possible that the mass of the sun will
accrete as it sweeps space? It would compensate
*lossess due to radiation.

No, it is not possible without increasing drag, pressure, and so on.
This would have killed the inner solar system long ago (asteroids,
moons at least). Note that solar wind has been observed reaching as
far as the heliosheath, and yes some "accretion" will start about
here, but drift off with the "galactic wind".

David A. Smith