A Possible Solution To The Flyby Anomaly‏

C

common_sense_seeker

Bicho Voador & Bicho Sugador
Valued Senior Member
The Puzzle of the Flyby Anomaly
Close planetary flybys are frequently employed as a technique to place spacecraft on extreme solar system trajectories that would otherwise require much larger booster vehicles or may not even be feasible when relying solely on chemical propulsion. The theoretical description of the flybys, referred to as gravity assists, is well established. However, there seems to be a lack of understanding of the physical processes occurring during these dynamical events. Radio-metric tracking data received from a number of spacecraft that experienced an Earth gravity assist indicate the presence of an unexpected energy change that happened during the flyby and cannot be explained by the standard methods of modern astrodynamics. This puzzling behavior of several spacecraft has become known as the flyby anomaly. We present the summary of the recent anomalous observations and discuss possible ways to resolve this puzzle.

A possible solution
The NEAR spacecraft must have a higher percentage of ferrous metals compared to the others to give the greatest increase in energy w.r.t. distance above the surface of the flyby. A supermagnetic effect must be emitted from the Earth which is affecting the craft as they traverse the plane of rotation imo. The explanation for this is from solid metastable metallic hydrogen deposited by comets. More comets were deposited over time along the equatorial regions due to the effect of the Moon. Metallic hydrogen is a state of hydrogen which results when it is sufficiently compressed and undergoes a phase transition; it is an example of degenerate matter. Solid metallic hydrogen is predicted to consist of a crystal lattice of hydrogen nuclei (namely, protons), with a spacing which is significantly smaller than the Bohr radius.
 
Mysterious dark matter may lurk by Earth

To explain the fly-by anomalies, Earth-bound dark matter would have to be concentrated within a radius of about 44,000 miles around Earth, at a much higher density than astronomers have calculated to be typical of the densities in the galaxy.

"The dark matter must be confined well within the moon's orbit and depleted near the Earth's surface," he says.

"This upper bound (based only on the gravitational action of dark matter on the moon, Earth, asteroids, and satellites) is very weak - it allows dark matter densities near Earth that are 200 billion times larger than the galactic halo density," adds Dr Adler.

However, fixing the fly-by anomalies with dark matter creates a new puzzle: how did the dark matter become concentrated near Earth? "A cascade accumulation mechanism is required to reach the needed dark matter density," he explains.

He admits that it could be the flyby anomaly is an artifact but, if it is confirmed to be real, "then new physics will be required, and the scenarios sketched here represent a possibility that merits further exploration."
Click to expand...

I've emailed Dr. Adler with the new idea and can only hope he reads it.
 
Do we really need another thread on the same nonsense?
 
AlexG said:
Do we really need another thread on the same nonsense?
Click to expand...
He's more qualified than you are on the subject. A lot more. Here's another good article which discusses the phenomenon "The Spacecraft Flyby Mystery" - Is Dark Matter the Culprit or is There a New Physics Waiting to be Discovered? Aug 2010

"I am feeling both humble and perplexed by this," said Anderson, who is now working as a retiree. "There is something very strange going on with spacecraft motions. We have no convincing explanation for either the Pioneer anomaly or the flyby anomaly."
Click to expand...

6a00d8341bf7f753ef01310f3b54f8970c-pi
 
common_sense_seeker said:
The Puzzle of the Flyby Anomaly
Close planetary flybys are frequently employed as a technique to place spacecraft on extreme solar system trajectories that would otherwise require much larger booster vehicles or may not even be feasible when relying solely on chemical propulsion. The theoretical description of the flybys, referred to as gravity assists, is well established. However, there seems to be a lack of understanding of the physical processes occurring during these dynamical events. Radio-metric tracking data received from a number of spacecraft that experienced an Earth gravity assist indicate the presence of an unexpected energy change that happened during the flyby and cannot be explained by the standard methods of modern astrodynamics. This puzzling behavior of several spacecraft has become known as the flyby anomaly. We present the summary of the recent anomalous observations and discuss possible ways to resolve this puzzle.

A possible solution
The NEAR spacecraft must have a higher percentage of ferrous metals compared to the others to give the greatest increase in energy w.r.t. distance above the surface of the flyby. A supermagnetic effect must be emitted from the Earth which is affecting the craft as they traverse the plane of rotation imo. The explanation for this is from solid metastable metallic hydrogen deposited by comets. More comets were deposited over time along the equatorial regions due to the effect of the Moon. Metallic hydrogen is a state of hydrogen which results when it is sufficiently compressed and undergoes a phase transition; it is an example of degenerate matter. Solid metallic hydrogen is predicted to consist of a crystal lattice of hydrogen nuclei (namely, protons), with a spacing which is significantly smaller than the Bohr radius.
Click to expand...

imgres
 
Why isn't this in pseudo, given CSS won't provide anything more than arm waving ignorance, no matter how many times he is asked? He isn't interested in honest discussion. Why bother even having pseudo if crap like this is allowed in the main forums?
 
Because moderators aren't online 24 hours a day, for one. Don't expect instant action.
 
Can anyone give a rational explanation of why solid metastable metallic hydrogen emitted from supernovae and deposited by comets can't be the explanation for earthbound dark matter??
 
I guess a good place to start is demonstrating that metallic hydrogen can be metastable. Then we can move on from there.
 
James R said:
Because moderators aren't online 24 hours a day, for one. Don't expect instant action.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I didn't take note of how long it had been posted. However, I had been asking CSS to justify precisely that claim for several days in another thread, all requests of which he ignored and continues to do so.

common_sense_seeker said:
Can anyone give a rational explanation of why solid metastable metallic hydrogen emitted from supernovae and deposited by comets can't be the explanation for earthbound dark matter??
Click to expand...
Can you first demonstrate it has any ability to explain dark matter?

You have utterly failed to grasp how science works. Someone makes a claim and they must provide evidence. Relativity wasn't taken seriously till evidence was presented for it. Antimatter wasn't taken seriously until evidence was presented for it. Nobel Prizes aren't given out until evidence is presented for the predictions.

If your method worked I could just as easily say "Can anyone give a rational explanation why axial neutrinos undergoing phase changes due to weak neutral currents can't explain earthbound dark matter?" or "Can anyone give a rational explanation why soliton fluxes under charge confinement can't explain earthbound dark matter?" or "Can anyone give a rational explanation why invisible elves who steal my socks can't explain earthbound dark matter?".

It's easy to throw out BS buzzwords and delude yourself into thinking you're doing science. That doesn't mean you're doing science. If you don't work out the details then you've not got an explanation. Newtonian gravity predicts the precession of Mercury but it predicts the wrong amount. If you don't do the details, you don't have anything. Hell, if no one calculated the precise behaviour of the Pioneer probe you wouldn't even know there's perhaps an anomaly. Details are everything.

You can't simultaneously say "Look, when you do all the precise calculations your model can't quite get the right answer" and "My explanation has no calculations and I can't make precise predictions but it is valid!". If you don't do the details you have no explanation. Why you don't grasp this I don't know. Do you have a learning disorder or something?
 
common_sense_seeker said:
Can anyone give a rational explanation of why solid metastable metallic hydrogen emitted from supernovae and deposited by comets can't be the explanation for earthbound dark matter??
Click to expand...

Can you give a rational explanation of why it can be an explanation?

It's your claim. The onus is on you to provide at least some evidence or argument in support.

It's like asking "Can anyone give a rational explanation of why superintelligent chickens aren't secretly controlling the world?"
 
James R said:
It's like asking "Can anyone give a rational explanation of why superintelligent chickens aren't secretly controlling the world?"
Click to expand...

Don't get me started on the goddamn chickens! I would hate to derail this fascinating thread.:bugeye:
 
Rhaedas said:
I guess a good place to start is demonstrating that metallic hydrogen can be metastable. Then we can move on from there.
Click to expand...
This 2011 paper seems to be a good reference Liquid Metallic Hydrogen: A Building Block for the Liquid Sun:

Liquid metallic hydrogen provides a compelling material for constructing a condensed matter model of the Sun and the photosphere. Like diamond, metallic hydrogen might have the potential to be a metastable substance requiring high pressures for formation. Once created, it would remain stable even at lower pressures. The metallic form of hydrogen was initially conceived in 1935 by Eugene Wigner and Hillard B. Huntington who indirectly anticipated its elevated critical temperature for liquefaction (Wigner E. and Huntington H. B. On the possibility of a metallic modification of hydrogen. J. Chem. Phys., 1935, v.3, 764–770). At that time, solid metallic hydrogen was hypothesized to exist as a body centered cubic, although a more energetically accessible layered graphite-like lattice was also envisioned. Relative to solar emission, this structural resemblance between graphite and layered metallic hydrogen should not be easily dismissed. In the laboratory, metallic hydrogen remains an elusive material. However, given the extensive observational evidence for a condensed Sun composed primarily of hydrogen, it is appropriate to consider metallic hydrogen as a solar building block. It is anticipated that solar liquid metallic hydrogen should possess at least some layered order. Since layered liquid metallic hydrogen would be essentially incompressible, its invocation as a solar constituent brings into question much of current stellar physics.

The central proof of a liquid state remains the thermal spectrum of the Sun itself. Its proper understanding brings together all the great forces which shaped modern physics. Although other proofs exist for a liquid photosphere, our focus remains solidly on the generation of this light.
Click to expand...
How would LMH behave after a star's supernova for example? Would it be freefloating in space or change it's structure and properties?
 
rpenner said:
Those Details now show that the anomaly was an illusion cause by imprecise modeling.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2507
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info but I'm still aware that other satellites also experience 'acceleration anomalies'. The flyby anomaly is specifically used to accelerated spacecraft if i'm not mistaken. This means that a genuine gravitational anomaly *does* exist imv.

Reread the OP if you don't believe me.
 
rpenner said:
Pioneer Anomaly paper now in print.

http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v108/i24/e241101
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/07/17/pioneer-anomaly-re-explained/

Also -- the Flyby Anomaly doesn't seem very reproducible according to a 2009 test. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

Maybe humans just aren't as good as estimating orbits to sub-millimeter-per-second velocities as we thought?
Click to expand...

This is the same as the paper on arXiv in April right? An example of peer review, process. Submitted to PRL in March and published in June.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top