Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- From: srp <srp2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 16:27:59 GMT
FrediFizzx a écrit :
"John C. Polasek" <jpolasek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8jqd4217kd6a7mqj48484sngq9md1sknnr@xxxxxxxxxx
On 19 Apr 2006 18:31:34 -0700, "Mark" <makolber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
I'd like to ask some basic radio engineering questions about the
Pioneer Anomaly. I'm not asking about the physics or relativity,
just
some basic radio engineering questions about how the anomaly is
observed and what are the limitations of the measurement.
I am not asking about possible causes of the anomaly.
I assume the basic parameter that is being measured is the carrier
frequency of the radio transmission from Pioneer?
Lets assume the designed transmitter carrier frequency is 1.23000 GHz
for example.
The "expected" spacecraft velocity is known, lets call it 10 miles
per second or 36,000 miles per hour just for example.
The Doppler shift for this velocity can be calculated as about
-66.0293224 kHz so the carrier frequency is expected to arrive as
1.22993397... GHz.
Putting it another way, every 1 MPH corresponds to about 1.8 Hz
change
in the received carrier frequency or about 1.5E-9. parts.
What is the accuracy of the frequency standard used on the Pioneer?
Let me assume it is a Rubidium standard and let me assume that the
accuracy is on the order of 1E-12. I will also assume the accuracy
of
the Earth based measurement is not a limitation. So the system error
is on the order of 1E-12 or about 0.001 MPH or 0.0045 m/s.
Is this basically correct?
What is the magnitude of the Pioneer anomaly compared to these
numbers?
thanks
Mark
The Doppler radar was at 2.292 Ghz, velocity was m/l constant at 12
km/s, range up to 70AU or 10x10^9 km. The anomaly was what was
residual after the model accounted for all gravities from the solar
system and velocities.
The beat frequency anomaly rate (increase) was 1.5 Hz in 7.5 years,
which they reliably detected. They did this by phase lock methods,
with a phase slippage of about 1 cycle/1.2 hours.
At 70 AU the fictitious slip velocity amounted to 3e-5 m/s vs 12000
m/s coasting velocity.
Clock instability is not in it. In fact most of the time with a round
trip of 10 to 20 hours for the signal, it was received by another
station on the other side of the earth.
I have the solution to this problem, but can't post it to the arXiv
without an endorser. There are no "peers". 17 papers and not one yet
came close. My earlier paper was in error.
John Polasek
http://www.dualspace.net
Why do you need for it to be on arXiv? You have it on your web site.
You will never find an endorser until you show how your theory can
reproduce GR. Show that GR is emergent from your concepts and you will
be "in". Automatically.
There is a big problem with such a requirement. If GR simply _can't_
be adapted to account for the anomaly, this means that a theory
that would satisfy the anomaly plus all other observed phenomena accounted for by GR could simply not be spread through formal
channels.
So John, like all other researchers out of the fold, has no choice
but to try spreading it otherwise.
André Michaud
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- From: FrediFizzx
- Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- References:
- Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- From: Mark
- Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- From: John C . Polasek
- Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- From: FrediFizzx
- Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- Prev by Date: Re: We are, a mass extinction event.
- Next by Date: Re: August: The Moon in Gamma Rays
- Previous by thread: Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- Next by thread: Re: Pioneer anomaly engineering questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
