Re: Pioneer 10 test of light speed

r9ns_at_verizon.net
Date: 01/05/05 

Date: 5 Jan 2005 11:22:06 -0800

George,
It is interesting that in 30 years minute by minute of data from
Pioneer 10 that there are no instances of two or three way quality
received receptions at any site unless there was transmission at the
same time from that reception site.

If we were not so brainwashed to believe that the speed of light
extrapolates beyond a second this would be a red flag to suggest that
maybe the speed of light does not extrapolate to distances beyond a
second.

> The reception on the 6th/7th illustrates this quite
> nicely and I've put some graphs here:

> http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Ralph/index.htm

We are way beyond these graphs which are not the least bit helpful.
Look at good instances in your spreadsheets or mine of 87 receiver
frequencies and transmitter frequencies minute by minute etc which can
reveal the trajectory of the craft according to the nearly
instantaneous model or the conventional model.
http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns/071087.xls
The explanation is in the spacecraftdoppler.doc file.
You said before that you did not think the formulas used here were
correct but you did not say how they should be changed or why????
Happy New Year to you.

http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns/index

> George Dishman wrote:

>> The reception on the 6th/7th illustrates this quite
>> nicely and I've put some graphs here:

>> http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Ralph/index.htm

You said:

>> I also have some doubts about your data from1988 because what is
>> available on the web it is not in a form that can be read.

I have spent several hours writing a spread*** that
lets you read any section of any file in the ATDF format
so that is no longer an excuse.

Where is the spread***. All I see are graphs. The spread***
should include the Receiver frequency for Oct 6 and 7 in 1987 like the
list you showed for the same dates in 1988. But perhaps the pattern you
found in 1988 does not occur in 1987???

> ... The differences between the observed and predicted
> frequencies using the nearly instantaneous model are calculated
> according to the method shown in
> http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns/trj071087.xls

>> Why am I dubious about your claims? Markwardt hid the fact that
>> radiation was always being sent from the craft during this period
and
>> had documented radiation received at some site where there was no
>> transmission from the earth at the same time but would not show such
>> documentation; ..

> It is interesting that in 30 years minute by minute of data from
> Pioneer 10 that there are no instances of two or three way quality
> received receptions at any site unless there was transmission at the
> same time from that reception site.

You don't get it do you? The received frequency jumped
to a new value while the site's exciter frequency stayed
the same. That's because it was being used as the
reference for the counters, the site wasn't transmitting.

Why do you think the site was not transmitting? The received
frequencies are always changing while the transmission frequency
derived from the exciter frequency stays the same after an initial
period of instability.

> If we were not so brainwashed to believe that the speed of light
> extrapolates beyond a second this would be a red flag to suggest that
> maybe the speed of light does not extrapolate to distances beyond a
> second.

I warned you to be careful and note the difference in the
X scales.

What are you trying to say George? Spell it out.

Quantcast