It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pioneer gravitational anomolies

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:16 PM
link   
It seems that we may have to rethink Einsteins theory on gravity. John Anderson, a physicist working for the Jet propulsion Laboratory, has been studying the pioneer spacecraft as they race out of our solar system and what he has found is quite interesting. It seems that these crafts seem to be slowing down instead of staying at the same pace. Something is affecting them, so much so, that they are now about 248,000 miles behind where they should be. Could it be dark matter impeding there path or invisible dimensions of space pulling at the space craft? Pretty interesting read as this is one of the first anomalies to go against what Einstein and Newton preached.

story.news.yahoo.com.../latimests/gravitymayloseitspull




posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   
Don't be prematur. Just because unexpected drag has occured doesn't mean the theory of gravity is wrong, it just may need a lil tweaking as all theories enevitably do. It could be from somthing much more prosaic, allthough since I'm dead tired right now can't really think of any right now, will post if I think of any b4 bed. Don't jump to conclusions.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 08:25 AM
link   
odds are the ships are hitting a layer of gas not thick by any means but enough to cause drag.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 09:27 AM
link   
We also know verry little about the area directly outsied of the solarsystem such as teh Ort cousd and Kuiper belt. We also do not know the extent of Sol's gravitonal pull out there and effects. Another thig is they reported solar energy that far out which was thoguht to be impossible. This is alot in space we don't understand. Just to find one thing that fits and throw it in is not exactly a great Idea it could be thousands of thing. We just dont have alot of knowldge in the area,



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 11:13 AM
link   
I have heard before, of possible (*edit, i guess proven
) particles (subatomic, called neutrinos) that make up the space out there. Whoever stated this said that there has to be some sort of physical medium for any sort of matter to travel across. Its logical in a sense, such that if there was really nothing there, then how does it even exist? It wouldnt, that area would cease to exist, and and if its not there, you cant go there
. This is what I figure to be going on, drag caused by these 'neutrinos'.

Also if you have read some ancient astrologers/astronomers and mathemeticians, they would theorize about some sort of 'ether' that makes up the fabric of space. They were right about a lot of things, maybe this too?

Heres some stuff on neutrinos from older posts and some sites:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
this last one is from a banned member, but some of the info later in the thread seem to be viable.

www.ps.uci.edu...



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
And since void causes matter to clamp together, the Pioneer spacecraft slows down the it goes into the interstellar space.

This also explains the accelerating expansion of the universe.



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Also note - they have not done the full orbital element calcs for the outer planets. The probes have to be run through a series of calcs with the gravitation effects of all the bodies in the solar system. It's a harry calc and it's iterative and has to be stopped at some point by humans. I think they've only done out to Saturn so far as the JPL kids have to do this when they launch stuff and even then, they have to do course corrections as it's never quite right.

Also consider all the small bodies (asteroids, comets, etc.) out there - they also have gravitational effects so it may be error in calcs as well as other possible effects - dust or other crud causing drag - space is not actually empty, just close to it and we may be off in our measurement of all of that stuff - density of H may be thicker out there and while it may not effect the planets, it could effect a small probe.... We also have to rely on orbit data to calculate mass and if that is off just a bit that could cause the error as well....

Jury is still out on this one....



posted on Dec, 29 2004 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Particles, beginnings of the Oort cloud? They have already been researching this phenomena...



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 04:17 AM
link   
As this article says, gravity is stronger the closer two bodies are together. But why should gravity depend on the distance, if the mass of two bodies does not change?

There are two solutions to that problem:

1) gravity is made out of particles that are washed away the further they travel.
2) gravity is not a pull by mass but a push by void.



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
As this article says, gravity is stronger the closer two bodies are together. But why should gravity depend on the distance, if the mass of two bodies does not change?

There are two solutions to that problem:

1) gravity is made out of particles that are washed away the further they travel.
2) gravity is not a pull by mass but a push by void.



I read Youre second point, and then I think about neutrinos, etc... Gravity is the pushing of mass by void? But there really is no void, the "empty space" is filled with particles the size of electrons, called neutrinos.. my links above will show this, and they are massive (they have mass). But its so tiny that the force of gravity between them must not be as powerful (but there still is and that may be a push of sorts) as the mass we are more familiar with (elements, etc.). My thoughts

Regarding this statement: (but there still is and that may be a push of sorts)-- It is more like.. there is gravity everywhere and always. All the mass (whether its a planet, a rock, an atom, or a neutrino) is interacting with itself always... gravity is like glue for the fabric of all mass in the universe?

[edit on 30-12-2004 by shanerz]



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Indeed, the 'void' is not void at all. Not only is it filled with neutrinos, but it is also filled with an immense amount of particles popping in and out of the universe at each point in time.

But the neutrinos you mention are very few per cubic meter, and it is still not proven conclusively that neutrinos have mass.

The void must be made out of something that we perceive it as void, but to an outside observer it would be obvious what is the cause of gravity. Unfortunately, we are on the inside, so we can't really tell what's going on.



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Seams everone is missing the most important thing with this.If the probe has slowed down so much that its now 250,000 miles from where it should be will it still be able to excape the solersystems gravity or just go into a longg orbit. If it doesent excape the solersystems gravity then mans attempt at sending a probe out of our system has FALED . The earths one true time capsel that would have lasted BILLIONS of years easted in a never ending orbit around the outer edge of the solersystem .What a waste .
Please someone tell me that NASA has said it will still excape the soler system.



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 06:46 PM
link   

To be sure, the anomaly was small, just 8 X 10--8 centimeters/second2. That amounted to about 8,000 miles a year, a tiny fraction of the 219 million miles the spacecraft covered annually. The anomaly is about 10 billion times weaker than the Earth's gravity.


Yes, Simcity, the probes still have enough velocity to escape the solar system. 248,000 miles is nothing compared to the distance already travelled.



posted on Dec, 30 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Some interesting ideas were expressed the last time this came up as a thread on ATS:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp

But the neutrinos you mention are very few per cubic meter, and it is still not proven conclusively that neutrinos have mass.



I beg to differ.... These following passage was taken from:
www.ps.uci.edu...

1985 - A Russian team reports measurement, for the first time, of a non-zero neutrino mass. The mass is extremely small (10,000 times less than the mass of the electron), but subsequent attempts to independently reproduce the measurement do not succeed.

As well this gives some reference:
www.ps.uci.edu...


*edit...Oh and that 248,000 is nothing compared to where they are trying to get to either
(wasn't it a star on Orion or something?)




[edit on 31-12-2004 by shanerz]



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Neutrinos don't just sit there - they are zipping along at c or close to it - ouch one just went thru me - damn, I hate when that happens....

Yes - probes have more than enough speed to escape solar system - gravity is a distance/mass thing and probes are small mass and moving fast and far out from Sun so little effect. If they stopped - yes, they would take up a Sun centered orbit but they are a bookin....



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by shanerz

Originally posted by masterp

But the neutrinos you mention are very few per cubic meter, and it is still not proven conclusively that neutrinos have mass.



I beg to differ.... These following passage was taken from:
www.ps.uci.edu...

1985 - A Russian team reports measurement, for the first time, of a non-zero neutrino mass. The mass is extremely small (10,000 times less than the mass of the electron), but subsequent attempts to independently reproduce the measurement do not succeed.

As well this gives some reference:
www.ps.uci.edu...


*edit...Oh and that 248,000 is nothing compared to where they are trying to get to either
(wasn't it a star on Orion or something?)




[edit on 31-12-2004 by shanerz]


I don't disagree with what you are saying...but it is still not proven conclusively that neutrinos are 100% what we think they are. In other words, neutrino theory is still in its infancy, it has not become mainstream knowledge yet, it has not entered mainstream physics books, so we can't tell if neutrinos have to do something with gravity or not.



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 05:57 AM
link   
Isnt the probe near or aroung the termination shock zone where there is very little gravity and a lot of radiation solar and plasma storms could that be slowing it down.



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Ah i see masterp..
but if there are these neutrinos, wouldnt by theory (since the are a massive particle) they have to propagate some sort of gravitational properties? (and as i understand it we dont really know what gravity is either, rather we just have models to demonstrate the effects of it)

www.thefinaltheory.com... - new book on which this discussion may be already solved



posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Knowing nothing about physics, i would guess that the atoms hitting the spacecraft are accelerating faster than usual due to lack of friction and hitting it, cumulatively slowing it down.

Just a guess.

That said, scientists are always finding stuff that contradicts current theories. Its amazing how many people take what they say for granted as fact.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join