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.

 

NASA discovers brand new force of nature

page: 11
58
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
this is merely an idea, but i always had this feeling we could not leave the solar system, ever, almost as if we are trapped here.
Perhaps our universe is alive, and conformed to what people thought the universe was (big and huge) when really it could be smaller then we thought, perhaps we are its thoughts in some way, but that is very illogical if i do say so myself.

It could be E.T's keeping us from spreading away from earth, we are a bacterial infection to this planet, logical action would be required to prevent futher infection of other colonizible worlds, we are inferiour and a danger to oursevles, would you like something like that get to other planets?

There could be many things causing it, being pulled to the sun and it isn't gravity? thats why i stated my first idea, it is merely a foolish concept to begin with, but it was something i had wondered since i was a child.

I do hope we understand this force, because i am very interseted, and delighted to know we are learning something new everyday, that is why i love the universe, always willing to throw more at us.
I do hope we will one day explore it and probe its secrets




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by CynicalM
 


Hmm...brand new? I vaguely remember learning something of a force called "gravitational pull" back the the 4th grade. Perhaps they are one in the same?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


This is definitely a recordable theorum!...

If I may I'd like to expound upon this idea with an addendum to it in that the Heliosphere may indeed be a less densly packed space for these satellite objects to travel within than - lets say - the boundary of the heliopause, where it is dynamically energized and thus I'd say a viable source of electron attachment, creating denser elements that in turn are being attracted by our sun's gravitational sink on an inbound journey.

These positively charged elements therefore are attaching themselves elementally to these satellites, which possess a negative charge, causing them to increase in mass and as such cause drag.

The longer these satellite objects contnue this process, eventually the inverted constant thus converts it's energies in the opposite vector, reversing the relatively weak propulsion they originally had and in turn creating a more dynamic propulsion back towards the sun.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   
I knew it, so there finally going to let out the terrible secret, that the solar system is only an illusion, that nothing really exists beyond the kyber belt. And everything folks see through long range telescopes is simply what folks think they see. Its all an illusion. Course if you think of it that way, then all the other stuff supposedly in the VAST universe is also an illusion. Course that would make one of the reasons why weve never heard anything from other stars close or far off if they don't really exist. So folks your first proof from good old NASA. This is it, there arn't anymore worlds to visit cause humans haven't thoughts haven't reached out that far yet. The rest is all an illusion...

Yeah right...
Oh well it was a funny idea...
Could it be chinese laterns? Or maybe..
I know its the swamp gas syndrome..yeah.


Nasa's simply telling fokes there clueless....

But didn't WE here at ATS already know that...

woot..



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
not sure if this has been mentioned already...but is it possible that this is the weak force on a large scale?



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by tauristercus

Seems like a very vague description and explanation.

Are they inferring that the space probes are in fact slowing down gradually and that their forward velocity is decreasing ? And if they've discounted gravity as one of the possible explanations, then are they again saying indirectly that whatever this unknown force may be, that it's origin is the sun due to the statement

... being steadily pulled towards the sun


It doesn't have to be the Sun, stellar objects could be orbiting around a twin failed star and this would explain why at a certain distance there is an increase in velocity of ALL objects which orbit the Sun.

This is not new. I have posted in the past a couple of threads which show research about this.

For example.


Nasa scientists are searching for an invisible 'Death Star' that circles the Sun, which catapults potentially catastrophic comets at the Earth.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I posted that in this thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In that same thread you can find this.


Evidence Mounts For Companion Star To Our Sun
by Staff Writers
Newport Beach CA (SPX) Apr 25, 2006
The Binary Research Institute (BRI) has found that orbital characteristics of the recently discovered planetoid, Sedna, demonstrate the possibility that our sun might be part of a binary star system. A binary star system consists of two stars gravitationally bound orbiting a common center of mass.

Once thought to be highly unusual, such systems are now considered to be common in the Milky Way galaxy.

Walter Cruttenden at BRI, Professor Richard Muller at UC Berkeley, Dr. Daniel Whitmire of the University of Louisiana, amongst several others, have long speculated on the possibility that our sun might have an as yet undiscovered companion. Most of the evidence has been statistical rather than physical.

The recent discovery of Sedna, a small planet like object first detected by Cal Tech astronomer Dr. Michael Brown, provides what could be indirect physical evidence of a solar companion. Matching the recent findings by Dr. Brown, showing that Sedna moves in a highly unusual elliptical orbit, Cruttenden has determined that Sedna moves in resonance with previously published orbital data for a hypothetical companion star.

In the May 2006 issue of Discover, Dr. Brown stated: "Sedna shouldnt be there. Theres no way to put Sedna where it is. It never comes close enough to be affected by the sun, but it never goes far enough away from the sun to be affected by other stars... Sedna is stuck, frozen in place; there's no way to move it, basically there's no way to put it there – unless it formed there. But it's in a very elliptical orbit like that. It simply can't be there. There's no possible way - except it is. So how, then?"

"I'm thinking it was placed there in the earliest history of the solar system. I'm thinking it could have gotten there if there used to be stars a lot closer than they are now and those stars affected Sedna on the outer part of its orbit and then later on moved away. So I call Sedna a fossil record of the earliest solar system. Eventually, when other fossil records are found, Sedna will help tell us how the sun formed and the number of stars that were close to the sun when it formed."

www.spacedaily.com...


Then there is.



Anomalies in the Solar System
Dittus, Hansjoerg
37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. Held 13-20 July 2008, in Montréal, Canada., p.717
Several observations show unexplained phenomena in our solar system. These observations are e.g. the Pioneer Anomaly, an unexplained constant acceleration of the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft, the Flyby Anomaly, an unexplained increase of the velocity of a series of spacecraft after Earth gravity assists, the recently reported increase of the Astronomical Unit defined by the distance of the planets from the Sun by approximately 10 m per century, the quadrupole and octupole anomaly which describes the correlation of the low l contributions of the Cosmic Microwave Background to the orientation of the Solar system. Lacking any explanation until now, these phenomena are still investigated intensively. In my talk I will discuss the present status of those investigations and the attempts to find reasonable explantions.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

Another source explaining a bit more about the secular increase in AU, and which still states it cannot be explained by our current knowledge.


Secular increase of the astronomical unit and perihelion precessions as tests of the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati multi-dimensional braneworld scenario
Lorenzo Iorio JCAP09(2005)006 doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/006


PDF (313 KB) | HTML | References | Articles citing this article



Lorenzo Iorio
Viale Unità di Italia 68, 70125, Bari, Italy
E-mail: lorenzo.iorio@libero.it
Abstract. An unexpected secular increase of the astronomical unit, the length scale of the Solar System, has recently been reported by three different research groups (Krasinsky and Brumberg, Pitjeva, Standish). The latest JPL measurements amount to 7 ± 2 m cy−1. At present, there are no explanations able to accommodate such an observed phenomenon, either in the realm of classical physics or in the usual four-dimensional framework of the Einsteinian general relativity. The Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati braneworld scenario, which is a multi-dimensional model of gravity aimed at providing an explanation of the observed cosmic acceleration without dark energy, predicts, among other things, a perihelion secular shift, due to Lue and Starkman, of 5 × 10−4 arcsec cy−1 for all the planets of the Solar System. It yields a variation of about 6 m cy−1 for the Earth–Sun distance which is compatible with the observed rate of change for the astronomical unit. The recently measured corrections to the secular motions of the perihelia of the inner planets of the Solar System are in agreement with the predicted value of the Lue–Starkman effect for Mercury, Mars and, at a slightly worse level, the Earth.

www.iop.org...

Evidence that whatever this is seems to also be affecting comets, and they are arriving earlier than they are supposed to.


6 The increase of the Astronomical Unit

6.1 The observation

From the analysis of radiometric measurements of distances between the Earth and the major planets including observations from Martian orbiters and landers from 1961 to 2003 a secular increase of the Astronomical Unit of approximately 10 m/cy has been reported (36) (see also the article (37) and the discussion therein).

6.2 Search for explanation

Time–dependent gravitational constant and velocity of light This increase cannot be explained by a time–dependent gravitational constant G because the ˙ G/G needed is larger than the restrictions obtained from LLR.

It has also been speculated that a time–dependent change in the velocity of light can be responsible for this effect. Indeed, if the speed of light becomes smaller, than ranging will simulate a drift of distances. However, a inspection of Kepler’s third law
T2 4π2
a3 = GM⊙

(17)
12

shows that, if one replaces the distance a by a ranging time a = ct, then effectively the quotient G/c3 appears. Only this combination of the gravitational constant and the speed of light governs the ratio between the orbit time, in our case the orbit time of the Earth. Consequently, a time–dependent speed of light is equivalent to a time–dependent gravitational constant. Since the latter has been ruled out to be possibly responsible for an increase of the Astronomical Unit, also a time–dependent speed of light has to be ruled out.

Cosmic expansion The influence of cosmic expansion by many orders of magnitude too small, see Sec.9.2. Neither the modification of the gravitational field of the Sun nor the drag of the planetary orbits due to the expansion is big enough to explain this drift.

Clock drift An increase of ranged distances might also be due to a drift of the time scale of the form t → t + αt2 for α > 0. This is of the same form as the time drift needed to account for the Pioneer anomaly. From Kepler’s third law one may ask which α is suitable in order to simulate the increase of the Astronomical Unit. One obtains α ≈ 3 · 10−20 s−1 what is astonishing close to the clock drift needed for a clock drift simulation of the pioneer anomaly, see Eq.(16) and below.
7 The quadrupole and octupule anomaly Recently an anomalous behavior of the low–l contributions to the cosmic microwave background has been reported. It has been shown that (i) there exists an alignment between the quadrupole and octupole with > 99.87% C.L. [38], and (ii) that the quadrupole and octupole are aligned to Solar system ecliptic to > 99% C.L. [39]. No correlation with the galactic plane has been found.

The reason for this is totally unclear. One may speculate that an unknown gravitational field within the Solar system slightly redirects the incoming cosmic microwave radiation (in the similar way as a motion with a certain velocity with respect to the rest frame of the cosmological background redirects the cosmic background radiation and leads to modifications of the dipole and quadrupole parts). Such a redirection should be more pronounced for low–l components of the radiation. It should be possible to calculate the gravitational field needed for such a redirection and then to compare that with the observational data of the Solar system and the other observed anomalies.

..........................
8.2 Other anomalies?
There is one further observation which status is rather unclear bit which perhaps may fit into the other observations. This is the observation of the return time of comets: Comets usually come back a few days before they are expected when applying ordinary equations of motion. The delay usually is assigned to the outgassing of these objects. In fact, the delay is used for an estimate of the strength of this outgassing. On the other hand, it has been calculated in (44) that the assumption that starting with 20 AU there is an additional acceleration of the order of the Pioneer anomaly also leads to the effect that comets come back a few days earlier. It is not clear whether this is a serious indications but a further study of the trajectories of comets certainly is worthwhile.

arxiv.org...

The acceleration starts at about 20 AU, and it affects comets, and all objects orbiting the Sun.

The evidence seems to point to "additional acceleration" is caused by a companion star to our Sun, a failed star.




edit on 20-9-2010 by ElectricUniverse because: errors



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Heyyo_yoyo
 


well you have an elequent way of speaking/typing you are a profound thinker and i like your insight into this discusion
are you an engineer of sorts?
do you suscribe to the electric universe theory?

xploder

ps star for you



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Guido the Killer Pimp
Hmm...interesting.

I'm thinking that it can't be any "force" from the Sun itself. If such a force existed, and could act on probes far outside our own solar system, then it would be more noticable than gravity within the solar system. I think it far more likely that the probes have encountered a patch of dark matter. Dark matter (correct me if I'm wrong) is hypothetically heavier than normal matter, and would thus slow the probes forward motion. Almost like if you were running at full speed, and suddenly hit a thigh-deep pool of water. Still an amazing possability though, as we have yet to actually discover Dark Matter.


Dark matter is supposed to be just that---dark (meaning not directly detectable by telescopes---meaning not coupling electromagnetically to anything we know). Generally it is hypothesized to gravitate the same way as everything else---i.e. Einsteinian general relatviity. The structure of theoretical physics seems to be consistent with this--detailed particle interactions can be hairy, but everything we know about appears to work with GR, so it was assumed dark matter is some other weird hairy particle but it should also gravitate the ordinary way. But we don't know what it is we can't say for sure.

The difficult issue is how to explain why the hypothesized dark matter appears to be influencing the pioneer probes and not the large-mass outer planets. Unexpected dark matter should affect everything, asteroids/comets/pluto/etc.

The Pioneer anomaly has been a well-known open issue since at least 1998.

Still the most likely explanation is a weird unmodeled but conventional effect. Nevertheless some good scientists have been working very hard to figure all of these out and the effect remains. We need a dedicated deep-space planetary experiment to check this. It would be very hard to get funding since the expected science return (small chance of finding one thing out which is unusual and important but no other insight) is small compared to other missions, where you're guaranteed to find tons of interesting new science (but less potentially revolutionary).



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
To answer this question we need to understand how voyager and pioneer measure their relative speed to the sun. But what i have been thinking is that this phenomenom isn't a new force at all its just a problem with our measuring devices.

I believe that when a particle (or spacecraft for that matter) isolates itself from other particles that it loses its inertia and in its local area of space the speed of light may actually increase. So if this was correct and the pioneer sent back a radio signal it would reach Earth a little sooner then expected, now we on Earth would assume this is because pioneer is closer to us than expected and we assume it decelerated when in actuality it is moving at its predicted speed but the light is reaching us sooner than expected.

Also i found an interesting website talking about red shift from that distance and other effects on light that can screw up measurements www.newtonphysics.on.ca...


edit on 20-9-2010 by epsilon69 because: added a link and more info



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Interesting thread CynicalM. Could it be that these specific artificial satellites that mankind puts into deep space will become future comets? If so, then are some of the other comets we see evidence of past advanced civilizations? Will these deep space artificial satellites pick up speed just as comets do when they close in on the Sun, and soon take on their own orbits around the Sun for eons to come?

Or... could it be that all that we see within our solar system is actually contained within a cell, just like any other cell that we see, except on a much grander scale? If so, the escape velocity of our cell, or our solar system (similar to the escape velocity of our Earth) could be much greater than the speed of the deep space artificial satellites that mankind sends into space. Which means that the deep space artificial satellites that mankind sends into deep space will fall back to the center of our solar system (the Sun) just as any other object would fall back to the Earth that could not pass the escape velocity of the Earth.

If this is so, then this means that NASA has not really found a new force, it means that NASA has found a new barrier which acts with a force that is already known to exist around Stars, Planets and Moons.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


star to you for bringing this imformation to this thread
it took a while to read and understand it but you really added to the topic


xploder



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
I think this might be explained by Nassim Haramein's theory that every stars has a black hole in their center. He also believes that planets could as well. This is what keeps the crust together. Who knows. Interesting that NASA is stumped.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Assuming that the a build up of dust on the spacecraft is a reasonable explanation for the supposed Pioneer anomaly then here is an interesting idea that I recently read on another forum:

First, a quote from the article positing the accretion theory


After millions of years of accretion, these spacecraft will become larger and larger in time, while slowing down. Pioneer spacecraft will become the nucleus of asteroids flying away from the solar system with the interstellar dust.


Accordingly,


It's pretty cool to think that in a few million years, there will be an asteroid out there in space which has a nuclear powered spacecraft at its core.


Another poster wondered what this theory would mean for Von Neumann probes, assuming they exist somewhere in the cosmos.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


all I can say is ...humbling. profoundly humbling. Thank you so much for sharing this, Sinter



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by CynicalM
 


My imagination is coming up with a few seemingly logical ideas but my first mental instinct was to think "I wonder what Phage will say."

Does that happen to anyone else?


I'm going to go ahead and suggest that gravity from an extrasolar source that we can't see for some reason could be effecting them. That's my best guess for now, at least.


Yes. On matters of NASA of course Phage
is a wealth of information.
In fact, I was just scrolling through the thread quickly to locate his post here before I say anything.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 


No, there is a measurable added acceleration which cannot be explained by our current models, and that is because our current models don't take into account the real possibility that our Solar System is binary, and has a failed companion star which is the one causing this increased acceleration.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:02 PM
link   
not much of a mystery..

These crafts have been flying for 40 yrs...being sling-shotted from a planets orbit.

Perhaps they are now lacking the energy to escape the solar system.

Gravity always wins in the end.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by wrathchild
 


not much of a mystery?
they are proposing a space craft piggy back on another mission to study this
i dont think that nasa would worry if there was no mystery

xploder



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Also guys, be more resourceful.

This is called the Pioneer Anomaly which has been known for almost 2 decades.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I can think of two possible explainations that would not involve a new force being discovered.

1. A meteorite or comet with a large center of gravity passed in the wake of the probes, altering their course back toward earth.

2. All the scientists have to go on with respect to the direction the probes are traveling is the telemetry data being sent back to earth, right? Perhaps over the distances of space, data corruption is occurring or sensors on the probe are malfunctioning, giving scientists a false sense of the direction the probe is heading.

It just seems like a bit of a stretch that a new "force" was discovered.



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join