Pioneer Effect

[romulan_invader]

borman says this:<br />"<br />However, its is important to note that the generation of gravity waves according to General Relativity happens at all scales. From a hand-held spinning dumb-bell to clusters of galaxies orbiting in a supercluster, all these events must also produce gravity waves. It is not just a property of neutron binaries. The sum of all these waves constitutes our present gravity wave background. For example, Jupiter makes a low frequency gravity wave, one cycle per 12 years. Its orbit also decays but it is not measurable within the life of the sun. "<br /><br />i say this:<br />You talk like a gravity wave is a real wave. This is not true. It cannot be seen by any tool. Wave of gravity means to you that the gravity is like a milk. Or water. Or "something." Gravity is like milk? Or is like EM force? EM force is in a wave. And is gravity this wave? <br /><br />I don't think so! You are a funny man!

 

[romulan_invader]

Haha yes i am romulan invader! that is a funny idea! <br /><br />

 

[nojocujo]

I realy don't think that gravity waves would be the cause of the anomaly. We would have detected an event to which we coulld ascribe a force changing the gravitational potential in a nearby region of spacetme. <br />A MOND TEVES effect might cause ths. I don't feel that MOND TEVES fully addresses the pioneer anomaly. I really think that Einsteins Tensor is unfinished. It needs to address spacetime in the absence or near absence of matter defining spacetime with elasticity and conserving the energy of the elasticity on a branelike field. This alone would attribute inflationary/deflationary characteristics to GR. The modified tensor should predict both the pioneer anomaly and MOND as well as gravitational lensing. There might be issues with current theory relating to redshifts. This being caused by the elasticity of spacetime....Imagine two points tethered by a rubber band but the rubber band is attached to a fishing reel and the reel spin (stretching the band) correlates to the gravitational energy density of the two points and the distance between those two points assuming there is no intervening spacetime containiing matter.

 

[romulan_invader]

Borman it seem most things in a post with you like a MOND and Dark Matter and a Gravity Wave ALL are fake. Cannot detect with ANY way. THis is a funny way i think so! <br /><br />You say Einstein have a thoery like GR with Gravity Wave like you think is true. So IF Einstenin say "JUMP VERY HIGH" you will do this for Einstein? You are a funny person!

 

[nojocujo]

I just don't see a gravitationalwave functioning with the pioneer anomaly. I think that Bekenstein is still defining TeVeS. I think that some data supportng dark energy might be skewed. <br />I say this because supernova have been shown to accelerate its' excretia to relativistic speeds (say 10%) and the total mass ( assume 10% rest). What would the change in the mass of the excretia due to the relativistic acceleration? To what extent would the gravitational potential change and would the gravitational wave immediately redshift light created as a result of the supernova within a gravitaionalwave bubble?

 

[vandivx]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>borman: One similarity between light waves and gravity waves is their speed. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />has that been established (that they are propagating at the same speed) in some definitive way or are there still some doubts or uncertainties as to that, I mean in physics establishment<br /><br />my view is that they are the same (c) but nonetheless I would like to keep mind open to the posibility that force of gravitation might be transmited way faster than light<br /><br />if it is faster by quite a bit, that might help understand why gravitational waves haven't been detected yet in some direct fashion since that should make them harder to detect if gravity acted way faster than EM field, that's my guess anyway<br /><br />vanDivX <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[romulan_invader]

I think a gravit wave and dark matter are like same thing of a fake idea. Nobody know or see any of these. Is only a idea and very not a believable idea i think so. <br /><br />

 

[nojocujo]

The arguements about supernovae, even if partially valid, do not hurt the robustness of the evidence supporting Dark Energy.<br /><br />I think that the arguments regarding supernova are supremely valid. I have been arguing that point and have been banned from some sites related to my passion regarding the supernova data supporting dark energy. I was a kook several years ago. I am still a kook. Give Bekenstein a chance..... again... I think his next revision if he does one will win him the nobel prize. data is out there supporting dark energy independent of the supernova data.....agreed...but be patient......Einstein left a few blanks to fill in. Lets fill in those blanks..... Borman you have a good head......USE IT! You quote stuff that makes my head hurt..... Like the MECO which supposedly can't have a schwartzchild radius because it has a magnetic field. I say why can't a magnetic field lie extant to the schwartzchild radius. I know that current physics says it can't but for the life of me I can't figger why. Imagine a star with a schwartzchild radius within the physical parameters of the star and just because it grows and becomes more massive and the schwartzchild radius enlarges and the magnetic field is going to all of the sudden shrink where before with mass it was extending itself. IT CAN'T be right. A MECO will sti have a schwartzchild radius in addition to a magnetic field which may be extant to the schwartzchild radius. Dark energy is big money right now......Huge money! The Emporer's New Clothes also was big money.... That was one of the points of the story. <br />I work for a living so give me time to get to the WMAP, Quasar counts and ISW.<br /><br />Jacob may be up to version 5 but he has the guts to stand there alone and also is very intuitive and I think will surprise you with version 6 if he does one.

 

[nojocujo]

But now we cross into speculative territory when we ask if a gravity lens can alter in any way the potential of gravity due to gravity waves. The rubber mat is not only bent by the suns mass but the whole mat is constantly in vibration due to the gravity wave background. So the question is whether the gravity waves that permeate the mat have any concern at all whether the mat they are traveling in is bent by a mass concentration or not? If the warping of space-time by a large mass can never affect gravity waves or gravity waves can not influence the large scale bending of space, then a gravity lens can only magnify light but not gravity. <br /><br />The portion of a gravity wave that passed through the outer portion of the well would be lensed and would concievably be magnifying gravity and light.

 

[nojocujo]

As for MOND and TeVeS:<br />MOND backed into what had been observed for galactic rotation which did not conform to Newtonian gravity. <br />The observed discrepancy for galactic rotation as well as the pioneer anomaly should be predictable through the Einstein Tensor in GR. Once predictable it should give you your ratio of CDM based on observed data. The Tensor has to descibe spacetime in the absence of a well. Hopefully Bekenstein will see this and if he does.... Nobel Prize for both?

 

[nojocujo]

The arguements about supernovae, even if partially valid, do not hurt the robustness of the evidence supporting Dark Energy. <br /><br />Are there papers that partially validate the arguments about supernova? If so do you have the links?

 

[bonzelite]

<i>in my opinion</i> the Pioneer Anomaly is not predictable through GR. forget it. has nothing to do with it. the Pioneer event is anomalous because the theories of gravity are incorrect. if a prize of any calibre is awared to anyone that connects GR with the Pioneer Anomaly, then it's a sham and a travesty. <br />

 

[nojocujo]

I think that TeVeS if left unchanged will crash and burn. But Bekenstein has the pieces of the puzzle. Will he reconcile inflation/deflation with GR? I think he might! <br />As far as the Weyl Tensor....I see no additional elasticity increase relative to spacetime as the gravitational potiential energy decreases. I have been chewed out after making that statement with the admonishtion that there needs to be a conservation of energy and elasticity would require an energy input and it would therefore have to allow an extraction of that same energy..

 

[bonzelite]

<font color="yellow"><br />If the Pioneer Anomaly is indicative of new physics rather than a systematic, then theory needs to include an explanation for it. It has already been determined that established first order and established higher order effects from GR can not account for the Pioneer Anomaly. The lensing of gravity waves is not an established effect. If it does become established, then there is an opportunity for GR to explain the effect. </font><br /><br />right. we agree. i basically said that without your added borman-esque manner of eloquence. i'm not mocking you, i'm giving you props.

 

[nduriri]

I have now solved the pioneer anomaly and also other 5 cosmological<br />blunders of the last 85 years,<br /><br />1) The pioneer anomaly (hidden matter, not serious)<br /><br />2) The galaxy disk shape flatness (no explanation).<br /><br />3) The spiral form aspiration of matter by the accretion disk (frame<br />dragging, science fiction).<br /><br />4) The matter bipolar jets trajectory (hydrodynamic theory, incoherent<br />theory since the magnetic field cannot deflect neutral matter).<br /><br />5) Galaxy rotation curve flatness (dark matter, not serious).<br /><br />6) The source of matter bipolar jets (contradicts event horizon theory,<br />science fiction)<br />See the summary-of-gravitomagnetism page 8 and NEW NEWTON LAW in<br />www.gravitomagnetism.com

 

[bonzelite]

are you personally assuming gravity waves even exist? it sounds as if you do. correct me if am mistaken. <br /><br />if gravity waves exist, this assumes particulate matter being impinged upon by gravity, as if the gravity itself were a material thing propagating through a medium. so you are saying that "spacetime" is this "medium?" similar to the aether? gravity, in my opinion, is an effect and not an actual "thing." <br /><br />as well, do you personally seriously take into account "dark matter?" you seriously believe in that? to the extent that you figure it in to a hypothesis?<br /><br />and you truly believe that all of our traditional ideas for gravity itself are sound and seamless and just need to be explored just a wee bit further and then ---eureka--- the pioneer anolmaly is explained? <br /><br /> <br /><br />

 

[nduriri]

thanks I will correct the sense and spelling mastakes

 

[nduriri]

1) If the Sun started to vibrate, surely we would feel the effect = gravitational waves.<br />2) The trouble with the advocates of dark matter is that they do not give any clearly defined approach to be verified, we should avoid attributing everything to dark matter, we should try and forward a falsifiable approach, we should stay in science.

 

[nduriri]

I think the people who read your note were disappointed by your remarks about me being french, the nationality is not important in science, please we are doing science but not politics.<br />Frame dragging is science fiction, the space is never curved, when astronomers saw spiral galaxies, the thought the space was curved but in reality, it's the trajectory of the matter that is curved by the gravitomagnetic field, if you watch the path of an electron in a magnetic field, U will not say that the space is curvrd. Frame dragging is very misleading. When astromers noticed the galaxy’s rotation curve flatness they say it’s dark matter. They have no explanation for galaxy disk shape. When the say the bipolar jets, the say it’s magneto hydrodynamics but it is still the gravitomagnetic field build by a rotating black hole. The just insist in ignoring the gravitomagnetic field but they as stuck in their circumstantial theories. Have a lot a my approach, I have not proposed any theory, the gravitomagnetic field is due to the slight modification of the gravity field component orthogonal to the movement. It’s simple and clear.

 

[nduriri]

You seam to be an advocate of dark matter and everytime some one proposes something else U do personal attacks (last time U were talking about me saying that my language is french-is it important in a scientific debate?) such a comment is not science, we should avoid being fanatics, U will not force people to agree with U by using personal attacks and agressive terms. Since U seam to be very well informed why don't U propose a falsifiable theory in dark matter instead of alwaws opposing people. We need people who contribute but we don't need "exterminators" of new ideas. We are fed-up of semantic debates, I'm expecting U to propose a falsifiable dark matter theory otherwise the terms . . . ‘dark matter’, ‘dark energy,’ ‘frame dragging,’ ‘event horizon,’ and ‘gravity collapse,’ serve mainly as expressions of your ignorance.

 

[nduriri]

The GR is 100 years old? The old guards cannot explain the following cosmological blunders by using the GR<br />1) The pioneer anomaly (hidden matter)<br /><br />2) The galaxy disk shape flatness (no explanation).<br /><br />3) The spiral form aspiration of matter by the accretion disk (frame dragging, science fiction).<br /><br />4) The matter bipolar jets trajectory (magneto hydrodynamics theory, incoherent theory since the magnetic field cannot deflect neutral matter = circumstantial theory = confusion).<br /><br />5) Galaxy rotation curve flatness (dark matter, MOND theory).<br /><br />6) The source of matter bipolar jets (contradicts event horizon theory, science fiction)<br />Are the old guards stuck? Why all this strident silence? The old guards are now reaching the end of the tunnel of the GR and things are falling apart. The old guards have been hammerig the GR looking for the least spark of hope in order to illiminate the GR endless tunnel but there has been no spark of hope. They have invested so much in the tunnel of GR that the are not ready to turn back. The old guards are lost in their idology of sticking to a tool that they do not master.<br />ALL ABOUT GRAVITOMAGNETISM www.gravitomagnetism.com

 

[nduriri]

Was the constant of cosmology the only blunder that Einstein has ever had in his search for gravitomagnetism or is it an iceberg of the biggest blunder on Einstein equation of gravity? Why did astronomers gather circumstantial evidence that massive bodies attract light without taking into account the diffraction of light by matter (the Sun for example)? Is science an ideology, a dogma or a huge business? Are some scientists merchants of science fiction? How does it come that the old guards of relativity have not yet presented a global, coherent and falsifiable gravitomagnetism theory and at the same time continue considering themselves as experts in relativity? Are they the old guards of an immovable past or are they experts in freezing science progress? The old guards are spending huge amounts of tax payers’ money, do they know what they are looking for or are they just speculating on what might be measured? The old guards have not yet developed a falsifiable gravitomagnetism theory, how do we expect them to analyse the data? What went wrong with the mission? Is the data crashed? Should the tax payers ask the old guards to give an account on the money spent in space research? Why are the old guards scared about testing the linear vector gravity with the available data or by simulation? What is behind all this strident silence? Are the old guards of relativity stuck? Time will tell.<br /><br />See<br /><br />www.gravitomagnetism.com

 

[nduriri]

Allais Effect has been solved<br /><br />1) The pioneer anomaly (hidden matter)<br />2) The Allais Effect (gravity shield)<br />3) The galaxy disk shape flatness (no explanation).<br />4) The spiral form aspiration of matter by the accretion disk (frame dragging, science fiction).<br />5) The matter bipolar jets trajectory (magneto hydrodynamics theory, incoherent theory since the magnetic field cannot deflect neutral matter = circumstantial theory = confusion).<br />6) Galaxy rotation curve flatness (dark matter, MOND theory).<br />7) The source of matter bipolar jets (contradicts event horizon theory, science fiction)<br />See summary page 9 and page 1 for new Newton law<br />www.gravitomagnetism.com<br />

 

[nduriri]

I have explained why the planets in the solar system are prograde, see page 10 of summary www.gravitomagnetism.com

 

[nduriri]

You same to have multi pseudo names where you keep on tracking people who don't agree with you. Why do you use multi pseudos? what's bebind all this? <br />www.gravitomagnetism.com