Re: The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillating vacuum Frame)

On Nov 8, 10:50 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr.pi.nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 02:37:29 -0800, "LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx"





<LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 7, 11:17 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr.pi.nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 04:52:43 -0800, "LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx"

<LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 6, 9:44 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr.pi.nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:54:20 -0800, "LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx"

<LeoV...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[...]

You might want to figure out how to mathematically express this
anomaly so it can be tested. You might also want to explain why there
is no contradiction with GR.

"Short Period Quasi-Regular Oscillations" of Venus and Mercury of
about 30 days, are described by I.I Shapiro in Radar Astronomy 1968,
page 170-172. see at the end of the file mentioned below.
Examples of QPOs (Quasi Periodic Oscillations) or Orbital
Periodicities of Binaries are supposed to be examples of gravity
influenced LASOF lightspeed anomalies just like Venus and Mercury. see
below articles by: H.Lehmann, (Binary RZ-cas.) and P.G.Ostrov,
(Binary HV 2543).
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-small-anomalies-...

How do you expect to participate on a text based medium when you are
unable to read?

I asked for a reason why GR is wrong. You ignore the question.

I asked for a quantitative prediction based upon your "theory". You
ignore the question.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

GR is not WRONG, exept for: that in the future we have to deal with
several known and calculable anomalies, such as the Venus Mercury
anomaly and other satellite GPS POD ( precise Orbit Determination)
anomalies.

These anomalies do not exist. You are making them up.

Thus only for space positions GPS is showing anomalies, not for ground
based positions..
see aslo my book:
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-small-anomalies-...

I gave you quantitative predictions on Venus and Mercury LASOF radial
distances right?

You threw a number out in the air that is not testable or usable in
any way.





Leo..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I was just preparing an answer in an other setting.

To get more clarity about the key arguments I am using for my LASOF
idea, I searched and found new impressive data.
It is a clear example that GPS signals skimming the earth passing near
or at Higher altitudes, are less related to the earth frame and more
by the Solar frame.
In this case (CHAMP) providing outliers of 200 meters.
A clear example of GPS signal failures for the CHAMP Low Earth
Orbiters at 430 km altitude, is one of the reasons that so called
Kinematic Precise Orbit Determination (POD) by GPS readings is not
possible. Several other ground based systems and complex computer
programs are needed to compensate these errors.
However, if the LASOF idea about gravity (or Mass) related lightspeed
is incorporated in the GPS readings, then these errors are supposed to
vanish for a great deal.
I made a copy with my comment see:
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2006/03/how-small-anomalies-could-influence.html

The information described above was found in "Near real time Precise
orbit determination of low earth satellites etc. pdf page 85, by:Tae-
Suk-Bae 2006. Ohio state university. See:
http://www.ceegs.ohio-state.edu/gsreports/reports/report_481.pdf

Leo Vuyk.


.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast