The Pioneer Anomaly: Still a Mystery

[xelasnave]

My problem with push gravity was I did not find out that Le Sage had come up with the idea back in 1745...up to that point I thought it was my original idea and that it was my duty to humanity to push the idea.

I do like the push concept and am confident it will replace all current "pull" models... so confident in fact that I have ceased pushing the push gravity concept and am happy to wait until everyone else catches up with the game.

Although it was soul crushing to find my idea was not new but in fact very old it did not destroy my determination to find out how gravity works... in that journey I have learn t a great deal about the current bank of knowledge which I see as a good thing. But I am convinced humans know little about gravity and as far as I can tell there is no mechanical explanation...we have gravitons as candidates but to date they are little more than speculation...
Anyways the more I think about how a field must work I can not see that a field can operate other than via a push system ..look at a magnetic filed for example clearly push at work...
BUT lets be clear it is an idea it is not science as all point out ...and when you think about what I am working on it is no less than a theory of everything...now just coming up with a very limited hypothesis on a theory of everything would take many volumes... how could you limit a hypothesis on everything to a couple of lines...so given the complexity etc I see no reason to take it all so seriously and find reasons why it can not work or reasons why it could work but to appreciate that we do not understand gravity...for all our science we know nothing really...GR says nothing about how the gravity field is built...what is it made from...a field I believe is a flow of particles and I think that is reasonable and the accepted way of understanding a field... so how does a gravity field actually work...and I realize we can only chat but so far in all the years I have been on about this no one has offerred a machinery..what particles are exchanged ? how is the message of gravity communicated betweern objects?GR says we should see it as a bending of space..whatever..but how is it bent what particles come into play..if there is a graviton how will it work.... and the hardest question for me is...if a black hole has almost infinite gravity how can it release a messenger particle to tell the rest of the universe of its being??? if a photon can not escape how will our graviton escape? and even if we merely speculate upon this aspect I can not think of a better to[pic for a chat...with or without beer.
I know as scientists all are no happy to speculate and that is good but where else can you start? Observation you say... well observe the pioneer..they are not doing what we expect..we need to fit the science to that specific observation not fit the "science" with the observation...at the moment it seems like its the pioneer at fault as they are not doing what out sums dictate...maybe the sums need review is my point and to answer that one we must ask more of our understanding of gravity.

alex

[bojan]

No worries, Alex :-)

Here, next round is mine.. in a form of citation from the website Carl mentioned earlier:

Partly in consideration of Le Sage's theory, Pierre-Simon Laplace undertook to determine the necessary speed of gravity in order to be consistent with astronomical observations. He calculated that the speed must be “at least a hundred millions of times greater than that of light”, in order to avoid unacceptably large inequalities due to aberration effects in the lunar motion.[19] This was taken by most researchers, including Laplace, as support for the Newtonian concept of instantaneous action at a distance, and to indicate the implausibility of any model such as Le Sage's. Laplace also argued that to maintain mass-proportionality the upper limit for earth's molecular surface area is at the most the ten-millionth of earth surface. To Le Sage's disappointment, Laplace never directly mentioned Le Sage's theory in his works.

The discussion about this was going on in this forum earlier this year.. with conclusion that "speed of gravity" MUST be instantaneous (or at least c*10^10, so pussitrons must move with this speed), otherwise the planet's orbits wouldn't be stable..
So here you go.

[CraigS]

G'Day Alex;

I was wondering what had happened to you ???
The other Alex has been presenting his hypotheses for a couple of weeks and I was starting to wonder what had happened to yours.
Then Mr Pressure came along .. and now you're back !

You know what, you're all talking about very similar things. You're all also 'pushing' your own ideas. And I'm always left with the same old question ... WHY ? .... why is it so important for all you guys to see us eating your ideas ?? I don't see a need to push mine, so why with you ?

It would seem to be a far better usage of time for you to dedicate your efforts on getting on with you own website so that we can all log on and read about your push gravity ideas. This would reduce emotional outbursts which seem to emanate from thought provoking threads getting bogged down in conversations which serve to support only one person's ideas.

I apologise if I'm sounding a bit 'agitated', (I'm not, really), but I just don't understand why its so important for us to get your ideas !

Cheers

[xelasnave]

Thank you very much for that Bojan.

AS to the speed of gravity it is my understanding that a gravity field propagates at C (the speed limit for all matter which not much matter can get near)... Is my understanding correct?


Alex

[bojan]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Thank you very much for that Bojan.

AS to the speed of gravity it is my understanding that a gravity field propagates at C (the speed limit for all matter which not much matter can get near)... Is my understanding correct?


Alex

No..

The *change* in gravity field is propagating at c.
For example, the merger of two black holes would produce such a transient, that would reach us in time required for signal to travel the distance at c.

The gravity field itself is "following" the object as it is attached to it since the beginning.. . interacting with fields of all other objects in space. And it is infinitely large, of course.. as far as gravity is reaching .. fading away with distance as described by inverse square law.
If this were not the case, the Solar system wouldn't exist..

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by CraigS

G'Day Alex;

I was wondering what had happened to you ???
The other Alex has been presenting his hypotheses for a couple of weeks and I was starting to wonder what had happened to yours.
Then Mr Pressure came along .. and now you're back !

You know what, you're all talking about very similar things. You're all also 'pushing' your own ideas. And I'm always left with the same old question ... WHY ? .... why is it so important for all you guys to see us eating your ideas ?? I don't see a need to push mine, so why with you ?

It would seem to be a far better usage of time for you to dedicate your efforts on getting on with you own website so that we can all log on and read about your push gravity ideas. This would reduce emotional outbursts which seem to emanate from thought provoking threads getting bogged down in conversations which serve to support only one person's ideas.

I apologise if I'm sounding a bit 'agitated', (I'm not, really), but I just don't understand why its so important for us to get your ideas !

Cheers

Hi Craig I dont follow the other Alex's ideas mainly because it seems there is a personality thing going on and I cant be bothered trying to figure who is winning.

I dont know Mr Pressure and have not read any of his posts.

I dont spend much time on the net these days because I dont have a computer on my boat..where I spend most days... unfortunately for you guys this is the only site I visit and try to participate.

I am sorry that you group me with others I dont wish to be grouped with but given you see them the same as me I must ask probably the same question you ask...limited to ...why I do what I do?

Gravity is a very interesting subject and I like thinking about it and unfortunately as it interests me I mistakenly think it is a matter that interests others. I realize however it is what it is..boring.
I am not trying to push my ideas but test them..and so I ask folk about gravity and stuff where gravity appears the key player.

Unfortunately I dont care what other folk think about me or my ideas and I guess I expect others will regard my comments for what they are... chat.

I guess why I post comes from a desire to converse and learn...my style probably does not seem that way but that is my specific answer to your question.

I had a web site which Ron (a member here) built but I was over gravity by the time he built it and I never really got into the running of the site or decent participation in the site.

I have given up on the push gravity as an interest really and now devote my time to sailing and repairing my boat for the big trip....but I admit I cant help myself if gravity comes up to chat about it.

I apologize for my manner given it has caused you the concerns you expressed.
In my own way I try and promote thought and discussion not to promote my ideas but to find out others thoughts... dam it I already know what I think... my interest is in what others think about gravity and do they form similar questions that present in my mind.

I can understand that you could feel agitated if you see me as merely pushing my ideas but remember this... I will argue my point to see if it can stand and not to convince others my view is paramount...again the fact you have raised your concerns means I will address them with respect for how you feel.
I thank you for politely saying I present as a pain in the neck and respect you for your frankness...
Have a great day.

alex

[xelasnave]

To Craig...I tried to read Mr Pressures post but it seems to be off limits and from that I gather it must have been over the top.]

To Bojan
Thanks for taking the time to explain it the way you did.
alex

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

To Craig...I tried to read Mr Pressures post but it seems to be off limits and from that I gather it must have been over the top.]

To Bojan
Thanks for taking the time to explain it the way you did.
alex

To put it this way, Alex, if your ideas were in orbit at about the Moon's distance, his were so far away not even the Hubble would be able to see them!!!!

[CraigS]

To Alex;

Cheers .. I apologise if it seemed like I was picking on you ... the conversation with Bojan, I found interesting. Thanks to both of you. You have as much right to discuss your ideas as me, or anyone. (I wish my message hadn't landed in the middle of it ..).

I feel that out of respect for the initiators of threads, we should all attempt to stay within the general confines of its topic. If the discussion drifts off, (of which I'm also guilty of letting happen), we should probably initiate another thread to discuss the new topic .. eg: 'Push Gravity' or whatever ... its then up to the individual as to whether or not they wish to participate.

I was truly hoping we could bury the Pioneer Anomaly thread .. once and for all !! (And that's coming from the person who launched it !!).

Best Regards and good to hear from you again.

Cheers

[renormalised (Carl)]

Don't worry Craig, there's a Klingon Bird of Prey about to fry the Pioneers with their disruptors

[multiweb (Marc)]

Here's a thought: why not create a quack section next to the astronomy science and Carl can be a mod and move threads were they belong?

[renormalised (Carl)]

An interesting idea, but I don't think it'll work

No one would bother to post there!!!!.

[astroron (Ron)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Here's a thought: why not create a quack section next to the astronomy science and Carl can be a mod and move threads were they belong?

Who is going to write the terms of refrence
Isn't that a against the freedom of expression.
If you don't like it , Don't read it

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by astroron

Who is going to write the terms of refrence
Isn't that a against the freedom of expression.

Nah... just grouping the quackin' into one spot.

Originally Posted by astroron

If you don't like it , Don't read it

I don't - It's harder and harder to skip all those paragraphs though to filter the interesting stuff.

[Mr. Pressure]

There is no gravity at all.

Sun exploding and energywaves who have also nature of neutriinos.

Also neutriinos exploding and emit energywaves and with that energy, neutriinos pushing expanding planets far away from sun, same way what they expanding.

Neutriinos, and that energy what neutriinos emit, dont interactive with pioneerprobes nucleus of atoms thats much what with gasplanets and with gasplanets moons nucleus of atoms.

This explain pioneerprobes problem.

Pioneer- probes*

An unexplained acceleration towards the sun has been observed with the Pioneer-sounders. If it would be observed that the sounders have the same kind of unexplained acceleration away from the sun, it would similar to the expanding of space in a Big Bang-theory. Apparently the space is assumed to expand somewhere far away from us (?).

Maybe in the universe according to my theory there is nothing unexplainable in the acceleration of the Pioneer-sounders. Maybe the energysea opening from the sun does not push so strongly the sounders away from the sun the
farther the sounders are from the sun.

This means that the space itself does not expand or curve. The energy concentrations expand and open up energywaves in a space that does not expand or curve.

.

[xelasnave]

Hi Mr Pressure

I have tried to understand the point you are making however I can not grasp what you mean.

I suspect English is not your first language and part of the difficulty may be found there.

What do you mean when you say there is no gravity?
Is this your way of saying it is in a different form to what we currently think of it or that there is no force at all....

Are you saying it is a pressure from the flow of sub atomic particles and that the flow makes less pressure outside the solar system?

I am sorry I can not understand your point but I encourage you to bear with me as I would like to hear your view.

alex

[Mr. Pressure]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Hi Mr Pressure

I have tried to understand the point you are making however I can not grasp what you mean.

I suspect English is not your first language and part of the difficulty may be found there.

What do you mean when you say there is no gravity?
Is this your way of saying it is in a different form to what we currently think of it or that there is no force at all....

Are you saying it is a pressure from the flow of sub atomic particles and that the flow makes less pressure outside the solar system?

I am sorry I can not understand your point but I encourage you to bear with me as I would like to hear your view.

alex

Check out me youtube videos

No gravity

http://www.youtube.com/user/Etimespa.../1/eFPYHdllHa4

Bending light

http://www.youtube.com/user/Etimespa.../2/e805oRZNU9U

How universe working

http://www.youtube.com/user/Etimespa.../0/RGbdPc4M87A

My forums, where is some better english

http://onesimpleprinciple.com/forum/...794c1d6c02b074

Thank you

.

[Mr. Pressure]

This text is old one. I have some new and better with my motherlangues.

Black holes*

The Interaction / The Black Holes

How do the orbs interact with each other?

They open up energywaves, by which they interact with each other.

The less the orb has exterior surface, the less it interacts with other pieces. Also the density of energy matters as well.

In a energy concentration there can be a lot of energy, although it would have just a little exterior surface in relation to other orbs.

The denser the energy in an orb is, the less it has exterior surface in relation to the quantity of energy.

The less exterior surface, the slower the energy opens up away from the orb and the less it interacts with other orbs.

The denser the energy of a piece is, the more efficient it stops to itself for example the neutrinos coming from the stars and also the less there comes neutrinos away from the piece.

There woun´t come any neutrinos of the stars from the direction of a black hole, because they stop themselves to a black hole.

However, towards the black hole there move neutrinos all the time and they expand and open up energywaves, while transfering their kinetic energy with them to the orbs.

From the pieces that move near the black hole loose more neutrinos from the side that it away from the black hole. This is how a certain exterior pressure is formed around the black hole.

The closer to the black hole the piece is, the less energybundles come from backside of the black holes and the stronger the exterior pressure is.

When one understands that all the energy concentrations expand and open up energywaves that have the nature of expanding energyconcentration, one can undestand that the black hole does not draw other pieces towards itself. It devours all the other pieces, because it expands and pushes pieces that locate nearby away from itself slower than the pieces and the black hole itsel do expand.

However, some of the black holes are in a way in a diet. They push the gas that locates nearby away from themselves faster than they expand.

Someone may wonder, why the black hole finally begins to reject the pieces that approach the black hole faster than the black hole and the piece themselves expand. It is based on a fact, that allthough the black hole opens up slowly its energy, do these dense energywaves have large energic particles, which also transfer their kinetic energy with energywaves opening up from themselves towards the expanding atomcores of other orbs.

The modern physics does not understand these large energic particles. According to my theory, the speed of these large energic particles has accelerated just because of the fact, that they also do expand and open up energywaves by which they can make the large energic particles in front of them to speed up all the time.Their speed accelerates slower than the speed of the photons. Correspondingly their speed slows down slower than the photons speed when they move for example towards the sun. The speed of a ship accelerates slower than the speed of a boat. The speed of the ship also slows down slower than the speed of a boat.

This way it is easy to understand how the expanding star that pushes itself away from the expanding black hole explodes a lot of its energy towards the black hole. Those opening and expanding energybudles that come from the expanding black hole make the expanding atoms of a star explode faster than normally. It achieves an illusion that the black hole absorbs with some kind of gravitation from a star the mass of a star towards itself.

In fact, the energy coming from the black hole makes the expanding star to explode its energy much stronger than normally. With this energy that explodes towards the black hole it pushes itself away from the expanding black hole in a curved orbit.

.

[xelasnave]

Thank you for such a detailed reply you have an interesting view.
alex

[renormalised (Carl)]

Can we put this topic to bed, now. It's been discussed almost till the cows come home!!!!