[Does the flyby anomaly empirically confirm M-theory and the Rañada-Milgrom effect?] - A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum
A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum
Does the flyby anomaly empirically confirm M-theory and the Rañada-Milgrom effect?(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: David Brown
According to Wikipedia, “The flyby anomaly is an unexpected energy increase during Earth-flybys of spacecraft. This anomaly has been observed as a shift in the S-Band and X-Band Doppler and the ranging data. Taken together it causes a significant unaccounted velocity increase of over 13 mm/sec during flybys.”
What might the flyby anomaly have to do with the physical interpretation of M-theory? Define modified general relativity theory (GRT) with the Rañada-Milgrom effect to be the heuristic model obtained by replacing the -1/2 in the standard form of Einstein’s field equations by -1/2 + dark-matter-compensation-constant, where this constant might be approximately sqrt(15) * 10**-5, based upon the Rañada effect for the Pioneer anomaly. (See the posting “Dark matter: why should Rañada and Milgrom win the Nobel prize?” at nks forum applied nks.)
The slingshot effect in orbital mechanics uses the orbital angular momentum from a large body like a planet to increase the orbital velocity of a small body like a spacecraft.
Consider a particle or flyby spacecraft given an energy increase or decrease by the orbital angular momentum of a planet. Let us think of the excess acceleration as a red shift rather than a blue shift (i.e. multiply the torque by -1 if necessary). What does modified GRT with the Rañada-Milgrom real-or-apparent effect predict?
d(excess-redshifted-particle-momentum)/dt = dark-matter-compensation-constant * Einsteinian-gravitational-torque —> (approximately)
excess-redshifted-particle-velocity = (dark-matter-compensation-constant) * (Einsteinian-gravitational-torque/average-relativistic-particle-mass) —> (approximately)
excess-redshifted-particle-velocity = (Einsteinian-particle-velocity/c) * (Einsteinian-gravitational-torque/average-relativistic-particle-mass)
At this point, if we look at equations for the slingshot effect and the Anderson-Campbell-Ekelund-Ellis-Jordan (ACEEJ) ∆V/V equation, then we see that the hypothesis of the dark-matter-compensation-constant might be approximately confirmed.
http://www.dur.ac.uk/bob.johnson/SL/ The Slingshot Effect, Durham University
http://virgo.lal.in2p3.fr/NPAC/rela.../anderson_2.pdf ACEEJ ∆V/V equation from “Anomalous Orbital-Energy Changes Observed during Spacecraft Flybys of Earth” (March 7, 2008)
The reasoning for the last equation in the preceding argument is that the Rañada-Milgrom effect should “bend the particle path” according to the dark-matter-compensation-constant * (the Einsteinian bending of light). If the Rañada-Milgrom effect is actually due to dark matter in the form of neutralinos, axions, or other dark matter particles, then the surprising bending would be due to undetected dark matter. According to Milgrom’s ideas, the dark-matter-compensation-constant would be wrongly named and the name should be “discrepancy-in-GRT-constant”, or some such name, Have astrophysicists and astronomers failed to realize the overwhelming importance of Milgrom’s work on Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND)?
Do those theoretical physicists who believe that dark matter and dark energy can be explained without M-theory GRIEVOUSLY UNDERESTIMATE the mathematical difficulty of unifying gravitation and quantum field theory? Are such superstring theorists as Ashoke Sen, Chris Hull, Paul Townsend, Michael Duff, John Schwarz, Joseph Polchinski, Edward Witten, Nathan Seiberg, Juan Maldacena, and Hirosi Ooguri our best hope for understanding dark matter, dark energy, and the detailed mechanisms of the big bang?
What does M-theory have to do with NKS Chapter 9? Both M-theory and NKS Chapter 9 attempt to unite physics at a new level of logical coherence. Can developments of NKS Chapter 9 eventually yield all of quantum theory?
What I’m trying to do had better reproduce the Standard Model of physics or it’s simply wrong. … what I’m doing may actually have considerable resonance with what’s been done in string theory. But that’s a complicated math thing that I don’t yet know how it’s going to work out. — Stephen Wolfram, TED talk, filmed Feb. 2010, (quotation from about 18 min 20 sec into the talk)
THREE BIG QUESTIONS: Does the flyby anomaly prove the existence of dark matter correlated with planet Earth’s gravitational field? Does the flyby anomaly prove that planet Earth’s gravitational waves have angular momentum? Does M-theory predict quantum gravitational waves of dark matter that are far stronger than the gravitational waves predicted by standard general relativity theory?
Forum Sponsored by Wolfram Research
© 2004-2013 Wolfram Research, Inc. | Powered by vBulletin 2.3.0 © 2000-2002 Jelsoft Enterprises, Ltd. |
vB Easy Archive Final - Created by Xenon and modified/released by SkuZZy from the Job Openings