Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"The Spacecraft Flyby Mystery" - Is Dark Matter the Culprit or is There a New Physics ...
Daily Galaxy ^ | 8/3/10 | Casey Kazan

Posted on 08/03/2010 12:48:20 PM PDT by LibWhacker

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: Scythian

know how things work


41 posted on 08/03/2010 3:06:48 PM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
ridiculous
42 posted on 08/03/2010 3:09:23 PM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
A similar story, by the otherwise nutcase Richard Hoagland:

'otherwise'? That story is total crap too. He predicates the entire convoluted logic train on claiming the solid boosters could not have been more efficient than expected when they certainly could have. As with most nutjobbery he does not bother offer real logic to counter that one premise and instead piles his arguments on other areas to distract the reader from that lacking. There is absolutely nothing at that link to disprove the supposition that the rocket's engines worked better than expected. He simply said that could not have been it and goes on to gush over unrelated half truths and nonsense.
43 posted on 08/03/2010 3:10:20 PM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

“They explain and predict the orbits of artificial down to centimeters per day, or very small fractions of a millimeter per second, in the order of 0.005 mm/sec.”

I don’t doubt this is true, but how come police radar guns can only measure speed +/- a couple of MPH? Call me easily impressed, but I’m just amazed they can figure out the speed of a spaceship a bazillion miles away with that kind of accuracy.


44 posted on 08/03/2010 3:18:44 PM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Neanderthal

“The global warming guys didn’t need to wait 15 years, or to confirm anything.”

Why waste 15 precious years when the answer has been pre-determined. Didn’t you hear? We’re DOOMED unless we start following Al Gore’s prescriptions yesterday.


45 posted on 08/03/2010 3:21:26 PM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; bvw; callisto; ckilmer; dandelion; ganeshpuri89; gobucks; KevinDavis; Las Vegas Dave; ...
Thanks LibWhacker!
the craft changes its trajectory by harnessing the enormous gravitational pull of a planet... an unexpected side-effect: it seems to produce a change in speed that no one, since it was first discovered in the early 1990's, can account for... while the acceleration is tiny and has no significant effect on NASA missions... no explanation based on conventional physics and understanding has been found. The effect is so persistent that it could indicate some physics not considered in previous attempts to explain the motions of bodies in the universe. In 1998, for example, NASA's NEAR Shoemaker spacecraft had its speed boosted by an additional 13.5 millimetres per second. There are many examples of this, but no explanation -- which raises the tantalizing possibility that it could be a sign that a whole new branch of physics is waiting to be discovered. Mysteriously, four spacecraft that flew past the Earth have each displayed unexpected anomalies in their motions.
It's almost as if physical reality doesn't conform to 17th century ideas, egad!

· String Theory Ping List ·
Sorry we re open
· Join · Bookmark · Topics · Google ·
· View or Post in 'blog · post a topic · subscribe ·


46 posted on 08/03/2010 3:39:50 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrC

The cops probably could do it — if NASA built them $10 million scientific-quality handmade custom radar guns that were continuously calibrated.


47 posted on 08/03/2010 3:54:52 PM PDT by LibWhacker (America awake!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Ya, I could spell check it, agreed, but I use IE instead of firefox, just can’t break the habit ...


48 posted on 08/03/2010 5:30:11 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DrC

Police radar cost about $1000, are hand held and have observation intervals of a couple seconds and produce reasonable real-time estimates. They are subject other sources of error, included unmodeled target accelerations and effects due to the target motion not being aligned with the radar line of sight.

Satellite orbits are developed using many thousands of independent observations by multimillion dollar sensors positioned all over the globe, processed off line using large computers and sophisticated algorithms. They really are not comparable.


49 posted on 08/03/2010 5:30:34 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The naked casuistry of the high priests of Warmism would make a Jesuit blush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I wonder because times slows down the faster you go I wonder if that extra 13mm per second in not seen from the space craft perspective
50 posted on 08/03/2010 5:32:10 PM PDT by tophat9000 (.............................. BP + BO = BS ...........................Formula for a disaster...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

It’s the on-board gyros that are probably causing the slight acceleration. They impart their own torsion field as they spin.


51 posted on 08/03/2010 5:50:47 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ
With Hoagland it's always about the Hyperdimensional Physics.
52 posted on 08/03/2010 5:57:24 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

“Satellite orbits are developed using many thousands of independent observations by multimillion dollar sensors positioned all over the globe, processed off line using large computers and sophisticated algorithms.”

So I infer it is triangulation to the Nth degree that permits such precision?

Memo to Self: do not let Barack Obama know about this capability, else he will direct GPS satellites to catch speeders all across America and use the revenue from fines to help bankroll the growing welfare state.


53 posted on 08/03/2010 6:11:39 PM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine
Or interaction between the onboard gyro torsion field and the Earth's (or other planet's) torsion field.

From the article:

The five other flybys involved flights whose incoming and outgoing trajectories were asymmetrical with each other in terms of their orientation with Earth's equator, which "suggests that the anomaly is related to Earth's rotation," Anderson told the Times Online. As to whether these new anomalies are linked with the Pioneer anomaly, "I would be very surprised if we have discovered two independent spacecraft anomalies," Anderson told SPACE.com. "I suspect they are connected, but I really do not know."

54 posted on 08/03/2010 6:30:14 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Is it me or do these astrophysicists sound as dumb as a box of rocks? I guess they never received the memo on torsion fields or how the rotating bodies like planets and gyros might interact with one another.


55 posted on 08/03/2010 6:40:26 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: DrC

Orbits are determined by the method of least squares. The technique was developed by Lagrange and Gauss in the late 18th Century for determination of the orbits of comets and asteroids (and it can be applied to planets as well).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_squares

If you read the wiki article, in the application of non linear least squares, the numerical values of the partial derives are your “model”, gravity, drag, radiation pressure, etc. The problem is that they work soooo well for satellites and well but not quite as well for space craft in grazing orbits. Since the partial derives are the model, the “laws of physics” the problem is to figure out a set of partial derives that work for satellites and grazing orbits. Merely fitting parameters by adding convenient terms is unsatisfactory because the numbers fit a theoretical model, and fudging means abandoning a well accepted and proven model.

Orbit determination is the classical non-linear least squares problem. I actually “taught myself” the method from the book by White, Mueller and Bates on a plane ride from Boston to Anchorage.

http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Astrodynamics-Roger-R-Bate/dp/0486600610

It is really quite easy to apply with modern computers.


56 posted on 08/03/2010 6:55:49 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The naked casuistry of the high priests of Warmism would make a Jesuit blush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
In five of the six flybys, the scientists have confirmed anomalies.
If it happens all the time -- or nearly all the time-- it's not an "anomaly" anymore.
57 posted on 08/04/2010 3:55:11 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson