Re: Pioneer anomaly
- From: Ralph Hartley <hartley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 19:55:23 +0000 (UTC)
John Baez wrote:
> Charles Cagle <skybolt99@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>If towards the sun why isn't any one suggesting
>>simple gravitational anisotropy related to the sun ...that more mass
>>might be lying along the solar equator than is believed?
>
> I don't see how that would explain it. The motion of *planets*
> is known quite accurately and fits the usual solar model and
> Newtonian laws of gravity quite well. The motion of the Pioneer
> and Ulysses spacecraft may not. So, one needs to find things that
> the Pioneer and Ulysses spacecraft have in common that are different
> from planets, which might explain this effect.
>
> 1. They are much lighter, hence more susceptible to the effect of
> small forces.
>
> 2. They are manmade entities, hence affected by a variety of similar
> small forces (solar wind, radio transmissions, possible outgassing, etc.)
>
> 3. They are moving quite rapidly away from the Sun.
4. The pioneer spacecraft (but not Ulysses) are much farther from the sun.
> Another key piece of the puzzle: the Viking mission to Mars did
> *not* detect the Pioneer anomaly, and it would have had an acceleration
> of this magnitude (roughly 10^{-9} meters/second^2 towards the Sun)
> been present, since its radio tracking was accurate to about 12
> meters.
A spherical shell of mass would have no effect on the planets inside,
and would not be detectable by Viking either (nor by Ulysses, oh well).
A hollow shell would raise more questions than I am prepared to even ask
right now, but I wouldn't leave it off the list of possibilities unless
someone has a really convincing argument against it.
Even a solid sphere with a radius >=70AU may not be ruled out (at least
not according to http://www.ph.unimelb.edu.au/~foot/pioneer.html). It
would have much more effect on objects at a greater distance
(acceleration proportional to R). A solid sphere only raises one
question, but that is a big one: where the hell is all this stuff, and
why can't we see it? OK, that's two questions :-)
Ralph Hartley
.
- References:
- Re: Pioneer anomaly
- From: Charles Cagle
- Re: Pioneer anomaly
- From: John Baez
- Re: Pioneer anomaly
- Prev by Date: Re: How active is research on other quantum gravity theories than
- Next by Date: Re: What is the history of relativity theory? (continuation of Poincare thread)
- Previous by thread: Re: Pioneer anomaly
- Next by thread: Re: Pioneer anomaly
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|