The Pioneer and the Sun
Abstract
This article explains the Pioneer anomaly, by means of gravity from the Sun.
Background
The two space stations, Pioneer 10 and 11, were moving in radial directions out of our planetary system in two opposite directions. When leaving our planetary system at about 20 AU (astronomical unit equal to the radius of our planet’s orbit) the rockets were turned off. However, communication with Earth was working to about 70 AU. Speed was measured by Doppler effect, and distance was indicated by propagation time. A very small decrease in space station speed was observed by both methods of measurement.
Einstein’s view
Einstein is said to have indicated that potential of gravity, divided by squared light speed, could give a slowing of light speed. This relation gives dc/c=-0.5*10^-9 at 20 AU. We get an effect on frequency due to 2-way Doppler effect as df/f=-10^-9. With carrier frequency equal f=2.3*10^9 Hz we get df=-2.3 Hz at 20 AU. Between 20 and 70 AU we therefore get an increase in frequency of 2.3(1-20/70)=1.6 Hz. This effect can cause an illusion of a decrease of speed in the space station, in agreement to observations.
An alternative view
It is possible that dc/c=0 and instead dc2/c2=-0.5*10^-9. Here c2 is 2-way speed of light and dc2/c2=-v^2/c^2. We can find this relation by supposing that light speed is c+v and c-v. By substituting potential of gravity by ether wind squared we get the same result as Einstein. This version, based on ether wind, was described by this author in 2013 on my personal CNPS page and called The Pioneer Anomaly and the Ether Wind. ( The version available at GSJournal contains an error since the calculations start at 10 AU instead of at 20).
Conclusions
Explaining gravity by the ether wind is one step in the understanding of gravity. However, we have more steps to take, since we do not know much about the ether. The effect from the ether wind is caused by a vector, and not by a scalar and therefore only radial component (to Earth) in light is affected.
To explain the bending of light near our sun we must first realize that coherent light, generated in cavities or detected in telescopes, should be described by a ray model and not by a vector sum. The ray model means that transverse ether wind is irrelevant and light is described as c(1+vl/c), where vl is component in the ether wind parallel to c. The bending of light near our sun can now be described by the gradient in vl. This mechanism is described in earlier articles by this author.
John-Erik Persson
Written by John-Erik Persson
John-Erick,
Looking at gravity from the visual model of an ether wind as a mecanisum provides no new measurable results. The ether winds velocities are derived directly from the same parameters as those used to calculate the gradients in the gravitiy and or acceleration. As such it only mimics what the gravitaional model of curved space-time, as used by Eintstien and for the most part by mainstream, does. As you say both arrive at the same results. Mainstream would have already taken into account any apparrent changes in distance due using the space-time curvature model of gravity.
You might consider that you have agreement with the solution given by mainstream in your argument on the behavior of the Crooke’s radiometer.
“I conclude therefore that Crooke’s radiometer is best explained by recoil from photoelectrons.”
The similar principle as the one you describe in Physics without Paradoxes is being credited for the slowdown in the speed of the satalites.
In this case however the cause for the ejection of thermal photo electrons is the heat from the satalites theselves.
Cornelis
There is a difference between dc/c and dc2/c2. They give the same result for the Pioneer anomaly, but they give different results for light tangential to our sun. The first case affects speed only, but the second case is a vector field radial to our planet.
Crooke’s radiometer is not a thermal effect, but recoil from electrons due to photoelectric effect. This is not in contrast to the other type of radiometer (forgot the name) that demonstrates the difference between a metal surface and glass surface. Electron recoil cannot explain Pioneer anomaly, since the effect should in that case have the opposite sign.
John-Erik
John-Erik
John-Eric
Assuming as you suggest the difference between dc/c and dc2/c2 give the same result for the Pioneer anomaly, at least this argument for existance of an ether wind becomes invalid. It would seem then, since light tangental to the sun is not of concern here, the ether wind model provides no more corrections to the measured anomaly than has otherwises been accounted for. This leaves an error which the verified recoil force, associated with an anisotropic emission of thermal photon radiation, can account for.
Cornelis
I do not know much about thermal radiation, but I find it hard to believe on recoil from thermal radiation. Can you explain how it is possible in this cold environment? To me it looks more like that the effect from Sun mass on light speed has not been considered. Should not the recoil be higher on the warmer side instead?
John-Erik
John-Erik
I do not know much about thermal radiation either but I do not discount it because I do not know its details. From what I can tell those who do understand more of the parameters effecting the probes have taken many of the effects that cause acceleration and deceleration into account. They inclued solar wind and photoelectric recoil and space-time curvature and most likely many other of the parameters that are not explicitly mentioned. The effect of the Suns mass on light would most certainly be the same as those effects caused by the gradient in space-time reponsible for gravity. What you present above is more a list of paramaters you do not have details on and so do not account for them in your guess.
Cornelis
You have not understood it correctly. It is not mimic of gravity force. It is a change of light speed due to matter meaning that light speed is constant. Either c must be a variable or it must be c+v and c-v, due to an ether wind.
John-Erik
John-Erik
The ether wind model holds little value for my purposes as I am primarily interested in models that can have a physical existence. I consider the ether wind to be a mathematical vector field of velocities. With vector magnitude and direction based only on the local acceleration given to mass at any give location in field.
Perhaps mimic is not the word you prefer but it is certainly an analogy.
Cornelis
To explain gravity as the bending of nothing is absurd. It has no physical existence at all. Do you really believe in action at a distance? Gravity must be explained by something that can transfer a force, like on ether wind. To explain gravity the ether must exist and have mass. If so ether also has a state of motion. Ether wind has effect on light speed only in one direction along the ether wind.
John-Erik
John-Eric
So we agree with Einstein.
“Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. “
So no I do not “really” support action at a distance and never have.
I have always advocated a unified solution that defines the mechanism of gravity without violating any known laws of physics.
I theorize no distance between parts because I consider no parts to exist. All forms of energy including matter are analogous to dynamic tension gradients in a continuum.
“But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media”
The properties of the continuum support the transfer of tension (force) with time (inertia) but mass is not fundamental. Gravity and mass emerge from the integration and interaction of well defined dynamic tension geometries within this continuum.
Because the ether is not “consisting of parts which may be tracked through time” “the idea of motion may not be applied to it.”
All,
It is good that the topic of Pioneer 10/11 anomalies is still at the table, and that the ‘official’ explanation of the heat of the nuclear reactor facing the Earth/Solar-barycenter was ‘hitting’ into and pushing the dish-antenna (in violation of conservation of linear momentum.
The consideration involving the v-c and v+c velocities in EM-signal propagation would rather be related to the option of the Ritz’s emission compared with the STR-elativistic theory, than to the effects of “Aether-wind”. On those grounds I had made an attempt to propose the explanation, and while the very close dynamics to the one available at the NASA website had been reconstructed, the factor of 10^-6 was inadvertently left out in my simulation (something that I had realized after the paper was rejected – on account of the problem already having been solved – from the IEEE Tr. on Aerospace Systems and Electronics; available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277309757_Explanation_of_the_Pioneer_Anomaly )
While the Aetherodynamcs (in particular elaborated by V. Atsukovsky, thus far only in Russian) might provide the ultimate basis for “everything”, including the aspects of “Aether-wind”, in my recent elaboration of the concept of Thermo-Gravitational Oscillator ( https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285587999_Towards_a_General_Theory_of_Orbital_Motion_the_Thermo-Gravitational_Oscillator ) as a mechanism of natural orbital systems I have used the Pioneer anomaly as (at the time being, a qualitative) corroboration for the plausibility of considering heat as an anti-gravitational phenomenon/mechanism. The prediction would be that the satellite vehicles which may have the nuclear generator on the opposite side would exhibit the ‘anomalous’ acceleration in the opposite direction from the Pioneers’ ones … In this regard, and as criticism of Newtonian theories of Gravity and Orbital Motion I would draw your attention to my CNPS-2016 meeting paper (video record of presentation at https://youtu.be/CxSpaT8Nyn8 ).
Slobodan
Yes, I have also in 2013 regarded the changes in light speed due to distance from the Sun. Vertical light speed near Earth is c+-7.9km/s and radial to the Sun we get c+-30/(Rau^1/2)km/s. I have used that in my calculation of The Pioneer and the Ether Wind available at my personal GSJournal page. The change in 2-way light speed becomes thereby dc2/c2=-(10^-8)/Rau. NASA uses constant light speed and that is wrong. The change in carrier frequency between Rau (range in astronomical units) equal to 20 and equal to 70 becomes 1.6Hz.
Regards from
John-Erik