Is it possible that the current mystery of the 100,000 year ice age cycle, Milankovitch Cycle Problems (the biggest factor in earth's climate), is connected to the mystery of fitting the current theory of gravity with quantum mechanics? Is it possible that the solution to the Pioneer Gravity Anomaly could also be the solution to the ice ages, due to a forthcoming revelation in how gravity really works? This article Extreme change in Equivalence Principle? suggests that it is possible. I mention this because apart from changes in solar radiation, which is not enough to account for the ice age cycle, gravitational radiation is the only other contender.
Could Ice Age Problem Be Linked To Pioneer Gravity Anomaly?
- Thread starter common_sense_seeker
- Start date
Come on, does no-one have a opinion on this idea? Too outlandish for yah?
No, it's just that anything is "possible", so asking about it, even if it's so outlandish as to be totally stupid, it's still possible.
The moon could really be made of cheese.
The universe could actually be a closed loop where light actually goes round and round, not straight.
It's possible that my dick is long enough to reach the moon if I get excited enough!
Oh, wait .....what is NOT possible ...for common_sense_seeker to stop making all these silly-assed threads without thinking about them a little first.
Baron Max
It's a serious suggestion which I've worked out from a lifetime's experience in trying to solve science mysteries, believe or not. I'm just hoping that someone googles the same connection and sees that I've thought of it already and leaves a post, that's all. 
The first big problem is that at this point there is no actual proof that the pioneer anomaly is actually a genuine anomaly.
The anomaly shows a seasonal variation that they have yet to identify, and they don't even know precisely what direction the acceleration is in (Sunward, Earthward, or opposing the direction of motion - they're three different possibilities, with very different implications).
The anomaly shows a seasonal variation that they have yet to identify, and they don't even know precisely what direction the acceleration is in (Sunward, Earthward, or opposing the direction of motion - they're three different possibilities, with very different implications).
I agree that the pioneer gravity anomaly is not directly attributed to a gravity problem, but when the possibility is combined with the ice age mystery, then a plausible pattern emerges. If this is explored in detail, then one can find that the idea fits the facts extraordinarily well. A prediction can even be made; that the pioneer craft are experiencing an increase in the sun's gravitational field as they approach the plane of angular momentum of the solar system (approx equal to the orbit of Jupiter). How amazing would it be if this was found to be true in the not-too-distant future? Would I get any recognition for the proposal? Probably not.
'Origin of the 100 kyr Glacial Cycle: eccentricity or orbital inclination?'
Last edited:
I've checked with Slava Turyshev and found that the Pioneers are NOT accelerated towards the invariable plane. The ice age connection with a low-entropy-density-innercore (LEDI) explanation still stands though and corresponds to the latest findings of satellite galaxies w.r.t 'dark matter': Time For A New Theory Of Gravitation? Satellite Galaxies Challenge Newtonian Model.I agree that the pioneer gravity anomaly is not directly attributed to a gravity problem, but when the possibility is combined with the ice age mystery, then a plausible pattern emerges. If this is explored in detail, then one can find that the idea fits the facts extraordinarily well. A prediction can even be made; that the pioneer craft are experiencing an increase in the sun's gravitational field as they approach the plane of angular momentum of the solar system (approx equal to the orbit of Jupiter). How amazing would it be if this was found to be true in the not-too-distant future? Would I get any recognition for the proposal? Probably not.
'Origin of the 100 kyr Glacial Cycle: eccentricity or orbital inclination?'
Having fun arguing with yourself?I've checked with Slava Turyshev and found that the Pioneers are NOT accelerated towards the invariable plane.I agree that the pioneer gravity anomaly is not directly attributed to a gravity problem, but when the possibility is combined with the ice age mystery, then a plausible pattern emerges. If this is explored in detail, then one can find that the idea fits the facts extraordinarily well. A prediction can even be made; that the pioneer craft are experiencing an increase in the sun's gravitational field as they approach the plane of angular momentum of the solar system (approx equal to the orbit of Jupiter). How amazing would it be if this was found to be true in the not-too-distant future? Would I get any recognition for the proposal? Probably not.
'Origin of the 100 kyr Glacial Cycle: eccentricity or orbital inclination?'
The paper cited in post #8 has nothing to do with the Pioneer Anomaly. There is no need to invoke some ad hoc modification to gravity to explain variations in the Earth's orbit or its axial tilt. All that is needed is good old Newtonian gravity. There is no need to invoke general relativity, let alone some exotic theory, to explain these variations. The general relativistic and Newtonian descriptions of Earth's orbit differ very little. The relativistic precession of the Earth's orbit is 3.8 arc seconds per century, or about 1 degree per 100,000 years.
In the original post you posted a link to a New Scientist article on the Pioneer Anomaly. Do you google for articles on the Pioneer Anomaly but then fail to read the stuff you found? In this case, it might have been instructive to at least have read the title of the article: "Exotic cause of 'Pioneer anomaly' in doubt."
D H; the question of the Pioneer anomaly is still in the air and is stated in the Science Illustrated sept/oct 09 issue. BTW I've re-thought the 'eccentricity or inclination' paper and realised that the 100,000 year cycle most likely originates from the sun's LEDI, or low-entropy-density-innercore, oscillating up and down at this frequency. The plane of angular momentum of the solar system (approx eual to the orbit of Jupiter) could be time-lagged to this motion, hence the Pioneer anomaly could be due to the LEDI directional gravity phenomenon after all!
'Most likely'? Most likely originates from something you just made up which has no experimental evidence, you have no model for other than about 10 lines of wordy waffling and even that you haven't got evidence for, you simply say 'could' a number of times. The motion could be time lagged. It could originate from that. So it could originate from a possible time lag, which you haven't confirmed, from a phenomena in the core of the Sun which you have no evidence for and which you've got no observation data about and which you have never described or analysed.
btw, I forgot to mention that I emailed the new findings to Slava, as he requested..
Science Illustrated is not a technical journal.
More nonsense from common_sense_seeker. Do you even think for one second that your thoughts might just be pure nonsense? Do you even think for a second that maybe there is no mystery here at all? Do try to live up to your user name. Seek some sense.
The time variations in the Earth's orbital elements are well explained by existing theories. They have nothing to do with the Pioneer anomaly.
The reason for the 100,000 year glacial cycle, the biggest influence on the earth's climate by far, has not been resolved by solar incidence alone. It's a big mystery still, with a lot of work that is ongoing to answer this big question.
I think that the equivalnce principle is broken w.r.t a low-entropy-innercore theory which also has the potential to have a non-uniform gravitational field. But I don't think that these changes affect the motion of the Pioneers.
It links in with these two pieces of work though: Einstein's Theory 'Improved'? (2006) and General Relativity or Newtonian Tidal Effects?. The author of the last investigation was a former pilot and F-16 simulator for the Navy btw about the author.
What possible relevance does this have? Do pilots need to know general relativity to fly a plane? No. They don't even need to know aerodynamics, which is relevant to the design of planes but not particularly to the method by which they are flown.
Even people who design planes don't know any relativity, because its irrelevant to their work. I know a fair few people who have professorships, DSc's, FREng and even an OBE for their work in fluid mechanics and aerospace and none of them knew what a 'metric' was when I explained to them the work I do.
I really do wonder how the logic part of your brain operates. Please explain to me why being a former pilot makes him an expert in general relativity, I'm dying to know the convoluted connections your reasoning has made between those two things.
I've got a new picture of the gravity field originating from a fractal spiral structure of matter, hence the gravitons (a quantum theory) move in fractally-irregular patterns. This could explain Mercury's precession imo.