John C. Polasek wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 21:48:18 GMT, (Andr? Michaud)
wrote:

(Carlos L) wrote in message ...
Although I am aware that there are many authors that claim to have
explained the anomaly using orthodox Physics I nevertheless ask again
for comments to my non-orthodox explanation that received no comments
when I posted it (except the typical barking from Uncle Al that I
always ignore). This is the URL:

oogle.com

Spud

Best regards
Carlos L.

I had a look.

Here is my comment. It is pretty well established without any
doubt that the speed of light of photons is invariant in vacuum
and completely independant of the velocity of the source, which
is precisely why Doppler ranging can be used at all.

As for the doppler data, if it were not to be trusted in this case,
this would make this case the only one on record where Doppler data
would be found not to be totally precise.

To my knowledge, all cases where verification by other means could
be used, the precision cannot be questioned.

When orthodox theories can't explain some phenomenon, it is common
practice to distrust and finally discard the data as being tainted.

Nothin new under the Sun.

André Michaud

[Mod. note: quoted text trimmed -- mjh]
I have the explanation for the Pioneer 10 anomaly as Ch. 13 of my Dual
Space book. It requires a new law of gravity and new physics.
Relativity has no chance of dealing with it. It can't be explained in
a few sentences. It needs the whole Dual Space theory. It's real
alright.

Hi John

Yes. We talked about your book in some other thread, and you seemed
interested in an exchange. I sent my home address in a message to
your e-mail handle (the one mentioned on top of this post) as per
your instructions and then fell into wait mode and eventually forgot
about the matter.

Is your e-mail address mentioned here valid?

André Michaud