Pioneer anomaly not gravitational

[bcrowell]

Would that be:
The kinematic origin of the cosmological redshift
Emory F. Bunn and David W. Hogg
American Journal of Physics -- August 2009 -- Volume 77, Issue 8, pp. 688-694
Issue Date: August 2009

I don't think the Bunn and Hogg paper is crackpot material. They argue for an unusual interpretation of the cosmological expansion, but there's nothing actually incorrect about it. It's just a matter of taste which interpretation you prefer. For more on this topic, see http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch08/ch08.html#Section8.2 (subsection 8.2.5).

 

[FreeThinking]

I don't think the Bunn and Hogg paper is crackpot material...

Sorry 'bout that. I found a link to the article in an earlier post and deleted my post, but obviously not before you replied. I do appreciate your efforts anyway. Having had a script to AJP long ago, I would be very surprised if anything published in it was really "crackpot", which is why I wanted to know exactly which article it was.

Thanks.

 

[HarryWertM]

Have the simplest aspects of GR been considered in regard to the Pioneer Anomaly? EG: clocks [& radio oscillators] run faster in lower gravity fields; photons are blue shifted when approaching gravity fields [like the Sun]; lengths change; etc.?

 

[Jonathan Scott]

Have the simplest aspects of GR been considered in regard to the Pioneer Anomaly? EG: clocks [& radio oscillators] run faster in lower gravity fields; photons are blue shifted when approaching gravity fields [like the Sun]; lengths change; etc.?

The analysis has gone WAY beyond the simplest aspects of GR, which is always taken into account in the coordinate system used to describe this sort of trajectory accurately within the solar system. The paper referenced in the original post rules out a whole class of gravity theories, of which Newtonian and GR are just special cases.