This is one of the most interesting questions raised by the fleet of unmanned spacecrafts floating around (and outside) the Solar System. In short, the Pioneer probes are not where they should be, and nobody knows why.
The two Pioneers (10 and 11) were launched in late 1972 and early 1973 and are currently two of the most distant man-made objects in existence. Neither of them is active anymore; the last signal from Pioneer 11 arrived in 1995, and from Pioneer 10 in 2003. They are still moving away from us in more or less opposite directions: 10 is heading to Aldebaran, which it should reach in about 2 million years, and 11 will fly by the constellation of Aquila in 4 million years.
Being this far away from us and having travelled for such a long time, they are in an excellent position to show us unexpected news about the way the universe works, and they may have done just that. Their actual position over the last few years was consistently “wrong” when compared to their expected position; the error indicated that they were being subjected to a small force towards the Sun that exceeds what should be expected from gravity and other known effects.
Nobody knows what that force is, of course. It could be something as simple as a gas leak, but it would be definitely strange that this would cause exactly the same amount of force applied in the same direction in both probes (then, again, they are identical; if it’s a design problem or side-effect, it’s not so far fetched as it sounds). It could also be an observational error; old data is being revisited to try to rule this out.
We do have different probes that are as far away as the Pioneers: Voyagers 1 and 2 are still operating and have already left the outer-most planets behind; Voyager 1 is, in fact, farther away from the Sun than any other probe (Pioneer 10 trails it by almost 1 billion kilometres, and Voyager 2 by 3 billion). However, the Voyagers are too different from the Pioneers: their stabilization system is different, and it causes thrusters to fire quite often to keep them pointed in the right direction; these thrusters interfere with the trajectory of the ships and, thus, with the very small effect of this unknown force. Still, they seem to be affected in the same way, although data is not quite conclusive. The probes Galileo and Ulysses, which are stabilised in the same way as the Pioneers, never ventured so far away from the Sun that the effect on them could be conclusively measured.
It is expected that New Horizons, the new mission to Pluto, planned to be launched early next year and to reach Pluto in 2015, could bring some light to this issue; as the Pioneers, it is spin-stabilised and should be affected by the same forces. Whatever the reason for the anomaly turns out to be, and even if it is indeed something quite prosaic, we will certainly learn something new: either about some aspect of space flight that was previously overlooked, or about some new facet of the inner workings of the universe.
7 comments ↓
[...] On the subject of “beyond”, it looks like there is now a modified theory of gravity which incorporates quantum effects and that explains the Pioneer anomaly and does away with the need for dark matter to explain other phenomena. It still needs lots of work, though, so that it is able to explain other things already covered by the accepted theories. Exciting stuff, anyway. — Wilson PermaLink [...]
Dear Sir,
I have now solved the pioneer anomaly and also other 5 cosmological blunders of the last 85 years, see the summary page 8, new Newton law page 1, http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
Regards
Joseph Nduriri ++33(0)6-31-13-61-55
Allais Effect has been solved
1) The pioneer anomaly (hidden matter)
2) The Allais Effect (gravity shield)
3) The galaxy disk shape flatness (no explanation).
4) The spiral form aspiration of matter by the accretion disk (frame dragging, science fiction).
5) The matter bipolar jets trajectory (magneto hydrodynamics theory, incoherent theory since the magnetic field cannot deflect neutral matter = circumstantial theory = confusion).
6) Galaxy rotation curve flatness (dark matter, MOND theory).
7) The source of matter bipolar jets (contradicts event horizon theory, science fiction)
See summary page 9 and page 1 for new Newton law
http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
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.
See
http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
By using the light dynamics, the radiation pressure for any reflective surface can be derived. By using the same approach the light rocket engine thrust equation can be derived.
See light dynamics.PDF http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
Since the gravitomagnetic force component Fg is not radial, it exerts a moment of force on the two-body system. This moment of force is negative during half cycle A and positive during half cycle B. This moment of force induces a negative rate of change of momentum known as torque during half cycle A and positive one during half cycle B. Thus an alternating torque, hence an alternating rate of change of angular momentum of the two-body system. There is no conservation of angular momentum as stated by the Newton law. The positive moment of force is always greater than the negative one. This explains the mercury perihelion advance. For more details see gravitational waves radiation http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
By using relativity, gravity waves have quantitatively been determined during the solar eclipse. The gravity waves are induce at a supersonic speed (1000m/s), they induce gravitomotive force g.m.f. in gases and liquids, thereby creating masse currents which is converted into sound waves; they also induce electromotive force e.m.f. in electric conductors, plasma, ionosphere and metals thereby creating electric currents.
Since the quasi stationary orthodox gravity shield theories do not offer a global and coherent explanation concerning gravity perturbations, can there be a physical science work of more importance than obtaining an understanding of these perturbations and seeking interaction with the remote forces of gravity?
The facts are there, the facts remain the keystone in which the stability of a theory must be tested.
See http://www.gravitomagnetism.com
Joseph Nduriri, Paris, FRANCE
Leave a Comment