Is the Pioneer Anomaly Evidence of Slower Movement Than Physics Predicts?

AI Thread Summary
The Pioneer anomaly refers to the unexpected slowing of the Pioneer probes, which lose about 5,000 meters per year compared to predictions based on physics. Some suggest this discrepancy may be due to unaccounted relativistic effects, where time dilation at high speeds could influence measurements. Historical experiments, such as those by Hafele and Keating, demonstrate how time can be affected by both speed and gravitational potential, supporting the idea that relativistic factors may play a role. The discussion also addresses misconceptions about friction in space, clarifying that it is not a contributing factor to the anomaly. Overall, the Pioneer anomaly raises questions about our understanding of physics rather than indicating a fundamental flaw in existing laws.
PhantomOeo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
If you look up the pioneer anomaly you will find out that over vast distances they are slightly off in there mesurements on where the probes should be, in that they lose 5,000 meters a year. This means they are going slower than physics says they should.

While I am not a physicist (I would like to be) I think this anomaly is not breaking the laws of physics as they claim or having to change laws about gravity. Now they say they are moving slower than expected now this can make sense if they are not accounting for the relativity of time. The faster you go the slower you seem to age... or possibly even move. Now while this is unnoticable on earth, when you are dealing with something that is going in one path for years at a time at high velocities it could impact the speed of which the object (pioneer probes) are moving. The same as a watch

A quote from wikipedia on this affect, although in reverse where the gravitational change was greater than the velocital change.
Hafele and Keating, in 1971, flew caesium atomic clocks east and west around the Earth in commercial airliners, to compare the elapsed time against that of a clock that remained at the US Naval Observatory. Two opposite effects came into play. The clocks were expected to age more quickly (show a larger elapsed time) than the reference clock, since they were in a higher (weaker) gravitational potential for most of the trip (c.f. Pound, Rebka). But also, contrastingly, the moving clocks were expected to age more slowly because of the speed of their travel. The gravitational effect was the larger, and the clocks suffered a net gain in elapsed time. To within experimental error, the net gain was consistent with the difference between the predicted gravitational gain and the predicted velocity time loss. In 2005, the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom reported their limited replication of this experiment.[1] The NPL experiment differed from the original in that the caesium clocks were sent on a shorter trip (London–Washington D.C. return), but the clocks were more accurate. The reported results are within 4% of the predictions of relativity.

Now with this in mind you have to realize that even if this doesn't seem to affect it enough think about this. What happens if you launch a plane from a faster plane the plane that is launched will start slowing down due to friction (which there is little of in space) could that be part of it.

If I am wrong I understand but please try to explain in simple terms why i am wrong.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Hi PhantomOeo welcome to these Forums but why start a new thread when there is another one currently running?

You will find a discussion about your questions there and in the links from that thread. I can assure you that "friction" is not the cause!

Garth
 
Last edited:
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top