Jerry Wayne Decker wrote:
> Hi Folks!
>
> Could this be PUSH gravity? The pressure of aether/zpe from
> surrounding space pushing into the larger mass of the sun and each of
> the planets
>
> This most interesting article was sent in by Jon Jacob;
> ======================
> >From the Albuquerque Journal, September 26, 1998
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Friday, September 25, 1998
>
> Scientists Tackling a Weighty Issue
> A study by researchers at LANL and NASA may pull apart Newton and
> Einstein's theories of gravity
>
> By John Fleck
> Journal Staff Writer
>
> A mysterious force apparently tugging on three NASA spacecraft could
> mean Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton and their theories of gravity are
> wrong. It's more likely, scientists say, that something's wrong with
> the calculations of the spacecraft's orbits.
>
> But after 18 years of trying unsuccessfully to find such an error, the
> scientists involved have begun to suggest that our understanding of
> gravity -- one of the most hallowed of scientific principles -- might
> need a
> bit of tinkering.
>
> Scientists think they understand the basics of gravity well -- so
> well, that when they launch a spacecraft, they should be able to
> predict its path with great precision.
>
> But the ordinary laws of gravity don't seem to apply quite the way
> they should to three NASA craft now winging through the solar system.
>
> It's as if a slight extra force, not accounted for by current
> theories, is tugging the craft toward the sun.
>
> The scientists, led by researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory
> and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, believe there must be a
> conventional
> explanation.
>
> But unable to find it, they've begun to climb gingerly out onto a
> scientific limb. Next month, they will publish a paper suggesting the
> possibility that "new physics" might be at work.
>
> The paper has already survived evaluation by two anonymous reviewers
> for the prestigious journal Physical Review Letters, and it's being
> rushed into
> press unusually quickly.
>
> But scientists tend to be a careful bunch when challenging
> well-established theories, and this group is no exception. The
> conversations are peppered
> with caveats about the possibility of some "systematic effect" at
> work-- a conventional explanation they have overlooked.
>
> "If I had to bet the mortgage, I'd say it's a systematic effect we
> haven't found out yet," said Los Alamos physicist Michael Nieto, one
> of the paper's authors.
>
> But after years of testing explanations with no success, Nieto said
> he'd be willing to bet at least a quarter in a slot machine that "new
> physics" are at work here.
>
> Scientists can't begin to say what that new physics might be.
>
> "We just couldn't think of anything else" to explain the phenomenon,
> said John D. Anderson of the National Aeronautics and Space
> Administration's
> Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who led the study.
>
> Our understanding of gravity dates to the 1600s, when Newton theorized
> that all bodies, like the sun and Earth, attract one another.
>
> The bigger the body, the stronger the force, which is why gravity
> pulls us down on Earth, but not toward each other.
>
> It's what holds Earth in orbit around the sun, and Newton offered a
> mathematical account of its strength.
>
> Newton's calculations held up for more than 200 years, offering
> scientists a precise way of calculating the orbits of the planets
> around the sun.
>
> In the early 20th century, the theory was modified slightly by
> Einstein's theory of general relativity, and has withstood repeated
> tests since.
>
> But the JPL scientist has been vexed for the last 18 years because the
> orbits of some of his spacecraft didn't seem to fit the theories of
> gravity.
>
> He began noticing it in 1980 in data being collected by JPL on the
> lab's Pioneer 10 spacecraft, then making a long, looping orbit out
> through our solar system. It was not speeding away quite as fast as
> expected. He thought it was just an error in the data, but the
> problem got worse as similar anomalies showed up in data from two more
> spacecraft, Pioneer
> 11 and Ulysses.
>
> "I kept looking for things and trying to explain it and failing," he
> said in a telephone interview this week.
>
> The effect is so tiny, it's as if the tug on an apple falling from
> Newton's tree was one-10 billionth stronger than it should have been,
> Nieto said.
>
> But if it's real, the effect is important enough to throw off the
> theory of gravity in the same way that tiny discrepancies in the orbit
> of the planet Mercury laid the groundwork for Einstein's theory of
> general relativity.
>
> Anderson and Nieto began working together on the problem five years ago.
>
> he unexpected sunward tug on the craft doesn't seem to be explained by
> gas leaking from spacecraft fuel tanks, they said, or heat from
> radioactive batteries.
>
> They've looked for errors in the clocks used when the data are
> collected and in the software used to analyze it.
>
> Publication opens the question to other scientists.
>
> News of the study, percolating through the physics community, has
> raised eyebrows, but no one has found any obvious flaws.
>
> _________________________________________________________
> DO YOU YAHOO!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave keelynet
> WWW based join and leave forms and KeelyNet list archives
> are at http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------