Re: Pioneer 10 test of light speed

r9ns_at_verizon.net
Date: 01/09/05 

Date: 9 Jan 2005 06:34:57 -0800

George Dishman wrote:
> Hi Ralph, Happy New Year.
>
> Have you received my email reply to your message?

No but I did look at your spread*** based on a program like mine
that
extracts relevant items from the radiometric data. Very good but your
idea that the cause of changes in the received frequency are not sound
because these changes could have been caused by changes in the freqency
transmitted from earth due to changes in the earth transmitter which
items you have omitted in your spread***. The transmitter frequencies
at different sites are different and the transmitter frequencies at
routinely readjusted over time at the same site. This may also explain
the pattern you saw in 1988 data.
Also you do not show clearly that the 1987 data for Oct 6 and 7 has
the same pattern as that you showed in the inaccessible data for 1988.
Dont show the graphs but show the list of received frequencies at the
two different sites like you did for 1988.(These are apparently
different now - site 12 LA is mentioned in place of Canberra or Madrid)
Also, I wish you would look at
http://mysite.verizon.net/r9ns/trj071087.xls as a way of obtaining the
true position and velocity of the craft and help derive the formula for
the subsequent craft velocity and subsequent position.
The problem is to change by trial and error the given coordinates of
craft position and velocity so as to produce a closer fit between the
predicted and observed received frequency at that instant. Then to
produce the subsequent velocity based on this previous changed given
velocity and the acceleration of the craft toward the sun from the
previous changed given position so as to maintain this closer fit.

> I'll some answers below that are appropriate for the
> group.
>
>
> <r9ns@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:1104952926.467448.84830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > 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.
>
> In the period from 3rd to 9th October 1987 that includes
> the 6th and 7th that you analyse in your ***, I cannot
> see a single transmission from the receive site, and all
> those from the transmit site are about 11h 30m earlier
> than the corresponding reception. I cannot see any
> transmission during a reception.
>
> > 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????
>
> What I have said repeatedly is that you use the JPL
> figures when you should be deriving them using your
> own theory. I have also posted the equation for the
> frequency which, if you differentiate twice, will
> eliminate most of the unknowns. I am happy to show
> you how to change the forulae and why but I can't do
> it if you snip what I type every time.
>
> > > 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 *** is the link after the last graph.
> http://www.georgedishman.f2s.com/Ralph/index.htm
>
> > 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.
>
> It contains the Doppler counter values but you need to
> add the 1MHz offset, multiply by 48 (or was it 96?) and
> add the exciter value to get the sky frequency. You said
> the file was unreadable so i've given you something that
> reads the ATDF format.
>
> > But perhaps the pattern you
> > found in 1988 does not occur in 1987???
>
> The October period seems to have only transmissions from
> antenna 12 which are received at antenna 63.
>
> >> 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.
>
> At the beginning and end of the reception around midnight
> of the 6th, the receive frequency was changing at one rate.
> In the middle, the frequency jumped to a new value and the
> rate of change then roughly doubled. That tells me that the
> lesser rate was that due to the receive site motion in one-
> way mode. The higher rate was the sum of that rate with that
> due to the doppler caused by the motion of the transmit site
> while the craft was locked on to the uplink. After about
> 2 hours, there is another jump and the receive frequency
> returns to the original curve, telling me the uplink had been
> switched off and the craft reverted to the on-board oscillator
>
> >> 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.
>
> The reception started at 21:42 on the 6th and ended at 02:27
> on the 7th. It was in three way mode from 23:17 on the 6th
> until 01:20 on the 7th.
>
> From Horizons, the light travel time was 345.6 minutes that
> night.
>
> There is a corresponding transmission from 11:33 to 13:47 on
> the 6th from site 12.
>
> Allowing for the sweep at the start of the transmission, these
> times exactly match the transitions in the downlink behaviour.
>
> George

Quantcast