Pioneer Anomalous Acceleration – answering Ned Wright’s misrepresentation

[NW: Anderson etal [gr-qc/0104064] have announced an anomalous acceleration of the Pioneer spacecraft toward the Sun.]

The anomalous acceleration is defined as a calculated from the excess redshift corrective term, which fact defines its direction. More explicitly: on the top of a larger redshift observed the introduced in the model corrective term as a constant acceleration results in the error to become random around zero, or it eliminates the systematic errors found in the excess redshift.

[NW: This acceleration is not seen in the planets and would be easily detectable. The acceleration of Neptune toward the Sun is 6*10-4 cm/sec2 while the anomalous acceleration is 8*10-8 cm/sec2. The increased acceleration would lead to an increased orbital velocity with dv/v = 0.5*da/a = 0.7*10-4, which would shorten the orbital period by the same fraction, and lead to a mistake in the distance of Neptune of dD/D = (2/3)*dP/P = 4*10-5. But when the Voyagers went past Neptune Doppler ranging established that the distance determined from the orbital period was correct to parts per million: Anderson etal (1995, ApJ, 448, 885) give -2 +/- 1.8 ppm for da/a compared to the 133 ppm this anomalous acceleration would produce.]

A typical Ned Wright diversion: the reported anomalous apparent acceleration has no connection whatsoever to the real mechanics, since it is clearly derived exclusively from the excess redshift, excess relative to the supported by the signal travel time real relative velocity caused redshift. The definition in the report is:

2*a_P*t/c = Dnu/nu_0 where a_p is the anomalous acceleration, t is the two way signal travel time, Dnu is the excess frequency shift and nu_0 is the reference frequency.

[NW: Aladar Stolmar claims that the anomalous acceleration of the Pioneer 10 and 11 is due to a tired light explanation of the Hubble law. If this were true the redshift produced would be 

v = cz = HD

and the time derivative of this effect would be 

a = dv/dt = cdz/dt = d[HD]/dt = Hv]
 

Interesting deduction! As it could be seen in the report – see above – the redshift indeed expressed as:

Z = v/c = 2*a_P*t/c = Dnu/nu_0 = HD/c – where D=c*t and t is the two way signal travel time.

Which results – as in the report it was mentioned – a_P = H*c/2 (the division by two was missed in the report, should be corrected!). Here Ned overruled the definition of anomalous apparent acceleration by the authors!

 

[NW: The Pioneer 10 is moving outward at v = 12.24 km/sec and H = 1/[15 Gyr] so the redshift changes by cdz/dt = 2.6*10-12 cm/sec2. The observed value is a = -8*10-8 cm/sec2. Thus Stolmar is wrong by a factor of -(c/v) or 4.5 orders of magnitude and the wrong sign.]

Note that so far not a single word from my real deduction – which is indeed available. Also, see the draft below.

[NW: Note that the gravitational redshift effect on the clocks has no effect on this measurement because the data are from two-way Doppler ranging. In any case the Pioneers do not carry clocks that are good enough to measure this effect.

The two-way ranging doubles the size of the frequency shift produced by any cosmological effect, but it also doubles the frequency shift produced by an acceleration. Thus the ratio of anomalous acceleration to H is just as computed above.

The anomalous acceleration implies a thrust on the spacecraft that corresponds to the force produced by a desk lamp: a "photon rocket" with a power of just 60 watts. The radioactive thermoelectric generators [RTGs] on the Pioneers produce 2000 watts of thermal power. Most of this is radiated as waste heat. If this were radiated slightly anisotropicly, with 1030 W going outward and 970 W going inward, the whole anomalous acceleration would be explained. The radiator fins have been exposed to space for many years, with one side always in sunlight and the other side always in shadow. I think that a difference in the emissivity of the radiator fins of this magnitude is quite possible. No tests were done on the spacecraft to measure this anisotropy before launch, and there is no way to retrieve them for a calibration measurement.

Therefore this extraordinary claim is not supported by extraordinary evidence and should be treated with caution. ]

The above smoke blowing could be contributed to the realization that indeed the discovery of Hubble redshift in the Pioneer Doppler data marks the end of the big bang hoax. It – understandably – hurts one of the most prominent proponent, Ned.

                                

Pioneer anomalous acceleration – tired light caused Hubble redshift

The new physical principle to cause the tired light is an exchange between the transfer medium and the photons. The photon transfers part of its energy to the medium, in exchange for which the medium transfers the photon. The same background substance is being deformed by the massive, gravitating bodies. It is proposed here that the two effects are equal for an exact frequency photon, which behaves as a photon and as a massive, gravitating body at the same time. To the background substance a r0 (virtual mass, virtual photon) density is assigned and the mass of the mass-equivalent photon is defined in proportion to an electron’s rest-mass.

The tired light concept is represented by a decay-analogy photon energy half-life constant Hd (Hubble wavelength-doubling time constant) and by an exponential decay law:

                                                                                                                              (1)

                                                                                                                                 (2)

                                                                  (3)

                                                                                                       (4)

The only undefined parameters in the above equations (1 – frequency change in time of photon’s travel, 2 – Hubble redshift vs. distance law, 3 – mass-equivalent photon’s conservation power or gravitational field maintenance power, and 4 – mass-equivalent photon’s energy) are the background substance density r0 and the Hd Hubble wavelength-doubling time constant we are trying to define. We can look for help in the nuclear physics, where it is a known fact that above a certain mass (A = ~27) the average density of nuclei is constant, or the radius of nuclei could be calculated as R = 1.42 A1/3 fm. It is rightfully expected that the onset of this constant density is a sign of necessity to increase the volume with the increase of mass in order to incorporate more elements of the background substance needed to produce the elements of the nuclei, measured as mass.

However the basic substance density and the nuclear density could be related only on the basis that both are constructed of the same elements: the basic substance from spontaneous collision events, the nucleus type objects (everything) from collision patterns. It leads to a new representation of matter structure.

All the objects are nothing else but the progressions, chains of collision events between the elements of an underlying background substance. Two preceding collision events through the change of directions of the colliding elements of substance can cause a collision. This serves for means of self-support for the regular collision pattern systems, and hence these are the bodies (photons, particles) observed.

The self-preservation of the system of collisions requires that prior collisions provide at least part of the colliding elements. Therefore a minimum of two collisions can only produce a system. It is the number of elements in a photon, also in the mass-equivalent photon. It is the multiplier 2 in equation (4).

The larger regular collision systems are overlapping shells of nets having collisions at each intersection. The number of collisions in a shell ordered from inside out and located at s position is equal to:

                                                                                             (5)

And a closed object with s shells total will contain N collision elements, calculated as:

                                                     (6)

One could see that for the s = 1 in Equation (6) the result is 27 elements, which was used to divide the electron rest-mass in equation (4) to get the mass-equivalent for one collision event. The nuclei start at shell s = 6 with neutron and proton, when between the centre and the outer shell a regular pattern of hexagon – the s = 1 polygon – can be inscribed. This representation expects the mass-ratio of stable smallest nuclei and the electron to be close to the ratio of element numbers, calculated from equation (6) for s = 6 and for s = 1. Which is found to be true, and reveals some very interesting details.

A comparison of element numbers based on the electron rest-mass results in 13 extra chains over the filled s = 6 object in the neutron (fig. 1), each containing 96 collisions, or 13 chains of shell number 5. The proton, on the other hand, shows 12 chains and 27 extra elements, or the number of elements in an electron returned as excess elements at the first nuclei, characterized with the same unit of charge as the electron.

The corresponding atomic mass numbers for the shell closings can be represented as:

                                                                                                                                    (7)

The closing elements of shells are: s  = 6 neutron and proton or H1, s = 7 He4 or a-particle, s = 8 is O16 and s = 9 are Zn64 and Ni64.

Figure 1 Neutron view from the side, showing every fifth surface chains only

While Equation (6) correctly describes the number of elements inside the object there is a regular excess amount of elements on the surface, there are some extras even over a square of the chains’ elements (3*2s)2. (This results almost two additional chains, than the calculated number of elements on the surface according to Equation (6).) In light of this finding, the onset of regular nuclear matter density is thought to have a relation to this number of elements on the surface, forming a boundary layer between the nuclear type object and the basis. The indicated A = 27 is slightly more than the 3/16 of shell s = 9, which would be at A = 25. It could be shown that if two of surface elements are created from the background substance, then the regular pattern assures that all the elements of the boundary layer are produced from that two. Therefore, the multiplication factor is – equal to the half number of elements in the boundary layer – following from that regular location on the shell s = 9, where is the regularity of the observed constant density starts:

                                                                                                                       (8)

On the Figure 1 the real shape of a nucleus is represented by the neutron’s shape, constructed of collision event nets. It has two hats cut-off at about the 75% of radius and the volume included:

                                               (9)

                           (10)

                                                                                           (11)

After combining and rearranging the equations, we obtain for the Hubble wavelength-doubling constant, which could also be called photon energy half-life about 4.2 billion years:

                                                                          (12)

According to this new tired-light theory, the connection between average nuclear density and photon energy half-life constants is exact and involves other known fundamental constants. It allows a very simple way to falsify it: refine the already measured values of nuclear radius or average nuclear density and the Hubble constant. If the following equation (13) would be found in error more then the measurement’s tolerances, then the above representation of the matter’s structure has to be discarded.

                                     (13)

The photon half-life constant could be compared to the traditional Hubble constant after we define the tired light caused Hubble redshift law for small distances, light-times. The first test of this new finding and the validity of our representation will be done in the following comparison to the Pioneer anomaly and to the results of Key Project.

From a photon energy loss cause of Hubble redshift view-point one would expect to see the redshift observed in the Doppler data of a distant spacecraft to be a sum of the two causes: the Doppler cause and the distance cause.

                                                                                                           (14)

Figure 2 Pioneer 10 Doppler residuals: observed Doppler velocity minus modeled Doppler velocity, represented in frequency Hz, (lower then expected and lowering with distance pitch or excess redshift) with Hd=4.234 Gyr (aqua line) Hubble redshift  

The anomalous part of the Pioneer Doppler observation [1] can be the Hubble redshift, (taking the t approaches 0 limit of Equation (2)):

                                                                                  (15)

This results in exact correlations of the observed anomalous acceleration to the Hubble constant in the conventional representation, and to the Hubble wavelength doubling time constant in the new photon energy loss representation:

                                                                                                             (16)

Figure 3 The limited dataset illustrates the fit of theoretical Hd value. The variable ARESID is the difference of observed Doppler velocity and the modeled Doppler velocity, cumulative for the light times (in frequency Hz, lower then expected pitch or excess redshift, before recalculation into Doppler velocities)

From the theoretical photon half-life value an anomalous acceleration of aP=7.787x10-10 m/s2 and a conventional Hubble constant Ho=161.8 km/s/Mpc was calculated.

Figure 4 Hubble constants from Key Project. The red line shows the Hd=4.234 Gyr corresponding Ho=162 km/s/Mpc conventional value

The report [2] indicates a traditional Hubble constant Ho = 72 +/-8 km/s/Mpc value, which is less then half of the result of present theoretical evaluation and of the Pioneer 10 values. Figure 4 contains the summary figure of the Final Results [2] with the indication of a linear approximation for the theoretical Hd.

In summary, a conclusion can be drawn that the thirty years old small and distant Pioneer 10 spacecraft provided evidence of a fundamental property of matter overlooked before: the photons lose their energy in a regular manner. The values observed fit well with theoretical evaluation introduced here. An exact correlation of average nuclear matter density and Hubble wavelength doubling time constant is presented to allow easy falsification of the proposed here theory by performing more precise measurements of these values.

The author aware of the fact that the introduced here theory is a variation of the so-called “tired light” theories of Zwicky (1929) [3]; Hubble & Tolman(1935) [4]; Hubble (1936) [5]; Maric et al. (1977) [6]; Chow (1977) [7]; La Violette (1986) [8] which were all brushed aside in favour of the big bang theory. It was possible because all lacked a testable new physical principle to explain the observed effect and there were other observations introduced allegedly supporting the big bang theory. The most commonly used observation based arguments to support the superiority of big bang theory over the tired light theory are:

Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation – is a sign of the decoupling of EM radiation from the matter after the big bang. – The new understanding of photon energy loss expects such radiation to come from the distant regions of the Universe and carry information about the average star and interstellar material density.

The observed abundances of chemical elements could be explained only on the basis of big bang nucleosynthesis. – The collision structure of nuclei requires regularities to develop and define the abundances, which are in excellent agreement with the observed.

Lately a statistical distance function regularity in the type Ia supernovae decay time curve width – alleged time dilation – also introduced [9] to argue the existence of the alleged recessive motion, remnant of the big bang origin. – The new physics does not allow for such regularities to develop, representing the infinite Universe as eternal and uniform. The reported results could be contributed to the simple fact that more powerful wider decay curve supernovae were more likely to detect and observe with the increase of the distance.

The acceptance of the tired light cause of Hubble redshift results in the reinstatement of Universe’s eternal and infinite quality. The modified to exponential Hubble law will require some re-evaluations and the investigated global, redshift based features in the views of distant galaxies, the alleged evolutionary characteristics will disappear and a homogeneous, constant on large-scale picture will be realised.

Finally, the proposed Hubble wavelength doubling time constant could be easily measured directly. A similar to the Pioneer set-up passive transponder system or a series of mirrors and laser set-up with considerable time of signal travel will do.

References:

1                    Anderson et al., Study of the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11 - LA-UR-00-5654 http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0104064

2                    Freedman W. L. et al., Final Results from the Hubble Space Telescope Key Project to Measure the Hubble Constant  http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0012376

3                    Zwicky, F. 1929, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 15, 773

4                    Hubble E. and Tolman R.C., Two methods of investigating the nature of nebular red-shift – Bibcode: 1935ApJ....82..302H

5                    Hubble E., Effects of Red Shifts on the Distribution of Nebulae Bibcode: 1936ApJ....84..517H

6                    Maric, Z., Moles, M., and Vigier, J. P. 1977, Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 18, 269

7                    Chow, T. L. 1981, Lett. Nuovo Cimento, 32, 351

8                    La Violette, P. A. 1986, ApJ, 301, 544

9                    Goldhaber et al., Timescale Stretch Parameterization of Type Ia Supernova B-band Light Curves – astro-ph/0104382

 

The author wishes to express his gratitude to the authors of the Pioneer study and especially to Slava G. Turyshev for providing the unpublished Doppler residual figure and samples of data, making possible the verification and re-evaluation of observations and efforts reported. Also thanks to Wendy Freedman for allowing the use of the summary graph of their report.