January 20th, 2008
A Possible Answer to Flyby Anomalies.
Written by Ian O'Neill
"Strange things are happening to our robotic space explorers. Also
known as the "Pioneer effect" (the unexpected and sudden alterations
to Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 trajectories measured as they continue
their journey into the outer solar system), similar anomalies are
being seen in flybys by modern space probes. Earth flybys by Galileo,
Rosetta, NEAR and Cassini have all experienced a sudden boost in
speed. After cancelling out all possible explanations, including
leakage of fuel and velocity measurement error, a new study suggests
the answer may lie in a bizarre characteristic of universal physics..."
http://www.universetoday.com/2008/01...yby-anomolies/

Some years ago I speculated something like this might be observed on
close Earth flybys, but I thought the satellite motions would undergo
turbulence (aside from the atmospheric effects) because of the effects
of the quantum vacuum:

Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
From: "Robert Clark" rcl
Date: 1997/09/28
Subject: A test for 'Sakharov gravity'?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...ea19e65168e22/

I called it "Sakharov gravity" because Sakharov speculated the effects
of gravity might be due to the "quantum vacuum". If you're *really*
interested you can read about it in the general relativity textbook
"Gravitation", by Wheeler, Misner, and Thorne. (You have to be really
interested because the book is a massive tome.)
To get a better idea on this would be to look at very low flybys
conducted close to the Moon with very accurate radar rangers placed on
the Moon's surface to look for deviations in the velocities.


Bob Clark

On Jan 26, 9:53*am, Robert Clark wrote:
January 20th, 2008
A Possible Answer to Flyby Anomalies.
Written by Ian O'Neill
"Strange things are happening to our robotic space explorers. Also
known as the "Pioneer effect" (the unexpected and sudden alterations
to Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 trajectories measured as they continue
their journey into the outer solar system), similar anomalies are
being seen in flybys by modern space probes. Earth flybys by Galileo,
Rosetta, NEAR and Cassini have all experienced a sudden boost in
speed. After cancelling out all possible explanations, including
leakage of fuel and velocity measurement error, a new study suggests
the answer may lie in a bizarre characteristic of universal physics..."http://www.universetoday.com/2008/01/20/a-possible-answer-to-flyby-an...

Some years ago I speculated something like this might be observed on
close Earth flybys, but I thought the satellite motions would undergo
turbulence (aside from the atmospheric effects) because of the effects
of the quantum vacuum:

Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
From: "Robert Clark" rcl
Date: 1997/09/28
Subject: A test for 'Sakharov gravity'?http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...hread/4bfea19e...

I called it "Sakharov gravity" because Sakharov speculated the effects
of gravity might be due to the "quantum vacuum". If you're *really*
interested you can read about it in the general relativity textbook
"Gravitation", by Wheeler, Misner, and Thorne. (You have to be really
interested because the book is a massive tome.)
To get a better idea on this would be to look at very low flybys
conducted close to the Moon with very accurate radar rangers placed on
the Moon's surface to look for deviations in the velocities.

* *Bob Clark

Far more credible explanations exist related to basic concepts of
classical mechanics.

Harry C.

On Jan 26, 10:53 am, Robert Clark wrote:
January 20th, 2008
A Possible Answer to Flyby Anomalies.
Written by Ian O'Neill
"Strange things are happening to our robotic space explorers. Also
known as the "Pioneer effect" (the unexpected and sudden alterations
to Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 trajectories measured as they continue
their journey into the outer solar system), similar anomalies are
being seen in flybys by modern space probes. Earth flybys by Galileo,
Rosetta, NEAR and Cassini have all experienced a sudden boost in
speed. After cancelling out all possible explanations, including
leakage of fuel and velocity measurement error, a new study suggests
the answer may lie in a bizarre characteristic of universal physics..."http://www.universetoday.com/2008/01/20/a-possible-answer-to-flyby-an...

Some years ago I speculated something like this might be observed on
close Earth flybys, but I thought the satellite motions would undergo
turbulence (aside from the atmospheric effects) because of the effects
of the quantum vacuum:

Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity
From: "Robert Clark" rcl
Date: 1997/09/28
Subject: A test for 'Sakharov gravity'?http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...hread/4bfea19e...

I called it "Sakharov gravity" because Sakharov speculated the effects
of gravity might be due to the "quantum vacuum". If you're *really*
interested you can read about it in the general relativity textbook
"Gravitation", by Wheeler, Misner, and Thorne. (You have to be really
interested because the book is a massive tome.)
To get a better idea on this would be to look at very low flybys
conducted close to the Moon with very accurate radar rangers placed on
the Moon's surface to look for deviations in the velocities.

Bob Clark

This report suggests the thermal radiation in the vacuum can effect
the timing of atomic clocks:

Aug 11, 2006
Atomic clocks feel the heat.
"Temperature is not something that most people take into account when
trying to find out what time it is -- unless your watch has frozen or
melted that is. But in the ultra-precise world of atomic timekeeping,
which governs navigation technology such as the global positioning
system, the temperature is vital."
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/25595

If this is so, then we might expect as well some effect based on the
energy content of the quantum vacuum.

I was also intrigued to see that one of the scientists involved in
these latest satellite observations suggested the cause might be
related to the Earth's rotation:

NASA Baffled by Unexplained Force Acting on Space Probes.
By Charles Q. Choi
Special to SPACE.com
posted: 29 February 2008
11:17 am ET
"For instance, the NEAR mission approached Earth at about latitude 20
south and receded from the planet at about latitude 72 south. The
spacecraft then seemed to fly 13 millimeters per second faster than
expected. While this is just one-millionth of that probe's total
velocity, the precision of the velocity measurements was 0.1
millimeters per second, carried out as they were using radio waves
bounced off the craft. This suggests the anomaly seen is real -- and
one needing an explanation.
"The fact this effect seems most evident with flybys most asymmetrical
with respect to Earth's equator "suggests that the anomaly is related
to Earth's rotation," Anderson said."
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...t-anomaly.html

I also speculated such an effect might seen be due to rotation in a
discussion of variable speed of light theories:

Newsgroups: sci.physics.research, sci.physics.relativity
From: (Robert Clark)
Date: 4 Sep 2003 00:27:45 -0400
Local: Thurs, Sep 4 2003 12:27 am
Subject: VSL (Variable Speed of Light) Relativity
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...06273d8ae2cfa5

Also found these references after a Google groups search:

Sakharov's induced gravity: a modern perspective.
"Sakharov's 1967 notion of 'induced gravity' is currently enjoying a
significant resurgence. The basic idea, originally presented in a very
brief 3-page paper with a total of 4 formulas, is that gravity is not
``fundamental'' in the sense of particle physics. Instead it was
argued that gravity (general relativity) emerges from quantum field
theory in roughly the same sense that hydrodynamics or continuum
elasticity theory emerges from molecular physics. In this article I
will translate the key ideas into modern language, and explain the
various versions of Sakharov's idea currently on the market."
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0204062

Towards a new test of general relativity?
23 March 2006
"Scientists funded by the European Space Agency believe they may have
measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the
first time in a laboratory. Under certain special conditions the
effect is much larger than expected from general relativity and could
help physicists to make a significant step towards the long-sought-
after quantum theory of gravity."
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html


Bob Clark

On Mar 1, 7:47 am, Robert Clark wrote:

[...]

Also found these references after a Google groups search:

Sakharov's induced gravity: a modern perspective.
"Sakharov's 1967 notion of 'induced gravity' is currently enjoying a
significant resurgence. The basic idea, originally presented in a very
brief 3-page paper with a total of 4 formulas, is that gravity is not
``fundamental'' in the sense of particle physics. Instead it was
argued that gravity (general relativity) emerges from quantum field
theory in roughly the same sense that hydrodynamics or continuum
elasticity theory emerges from molecular physics. In this article I
will translate the key ideas into modern language, and explain the
various versions of Sakharov's idea currently on the market."http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0204062

Since when is there a term proportional to the square of the curvature
scalar in the Einstein-Hilbert action? I question the "standard
Lagrangian" phrasing when things like that are slipped in.

Interesting paper, but I wish I knew more about QFT and its'
associated formalism to grok what is being discussed.


Towards a new test of general relativity?
23 March 2006
"Scientists funded by the European Space Agency believe they may have
measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the
first time in a laboratory. Under certain special conditions the
effect is much larger than expected from general relativity and could
help physicists to make a significant step towards the long-sought-
after quantum theory of gravity."http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html

Bob Clark

Soo so SO sick of that **** popping up. The results haven't been
replicated by someone /other/ than Tajmar, and his observations never
survived editorial review. The results are bunk and need to be
recognized as such.