Schneibster wrote:I will point out there's no mention of a "flyby" effect on Gravity Probe B. And all it did was "flyby" the Earth for its entire lifetime.
You forgot adjust John Deer cap
Somebody needs burn cream
What part of \ v = \sqrt{\frac{GM} {r}\ } vice r={{h^2}\over{\mu}}{{1}\over{1+e\cos\theta}} did you not understand.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Dude, you are making a comment to a self-proclaimed universal expert that actually has little to no depth. And what depth there is is supported primarily by google and wikipedia, in a previously verified hollow thin shell construct.
The technical term is "Troll" if I am not mistaken.
Why waste your time?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
paperburn1 wrote:I don,t think the red faces were in NASA, more like the press hopping on the bandwagon of (your wrong). I think NASA take on the situation was "That's odd, what did we forget in our spacecraft trajectory model"
Don't we have someone here with an inside track on that....Maui?
They worked on it from 1994 to 2012. They had already attempted to work out the radiation pressure but made a calculation error.
They solved it with models.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Schneibster wrote:I will point out there's no mention of a "flyby" effect on Gravity Probe B. And all it did was "flyby" the Earth for its entire lifetime.
Go study the difference between hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic trajectories.
And this has what, again, to do with the Juno spacecraft resetting into "Safe" mode?
And have you ever heard of the equivalence principle? You are claiming we can violate it.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
paperburn1 wrote:You forgot adjust John Deer cap
Somebody needs burn cream
What part of \ v = \sqrt{\frac{GM} {r}\ } vice r={{h^2}\over{\mu}}{{1}\over{1+e\cos\theta}} did you not understand.
What part of the equivalence principle did you not understand?
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Seriously, guys, if a hyperbolic orbit is somehow "different" and "special" then that violates General Relativity. Specifically the equivalence principle. The reason I'm mentioning Gravity Probe B is that it investigated the equivalence principle, along with frame dragging and time dilation, and found that everything agreed with General Relativity to some pretty impressive degree.
So, again, how exactly is a hyperbolic orbit "different," according to you? Because Einstein says you're full of crap.
Just what you'd expect from a bunch of meshbacks.
You also appear to need reminding that all orbits are conic sections. And the reason is because of the geometry of space, which is what General Relativity calculates.
G[μν] + g[μν]Λ = (8πG/c⁴)T[μν]
Maybe you forgot.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
BTW I have a calculator that does orbital mechanics. TI-85. Nobody uses them much anymore; computers are too powerful, and it's too much easier to write programs for them.
And BTW I'm also a comet watcher which means I have to convert orbital elements into RA-Dec predictions. For my location, of course; comets and asteroids come close enough there's parallax depending on your location on the Earth.
If your plan was to baffle me with math you're in for a really nasty surprise.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Speaking of which, what are the orbital elements for Juno?
You guys are talking about it so much, you must know.
Or are you lying again?
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Still waiting for those orbital elements, children.
What, does real math scare you? How about some hyperbolic trig?
Tell me, do you know what a "rapidity" is?
After all, this is the simple stuff, just Special Relativity, not full-blown General Relativity. Just a little four-dimensional spatio-temporal geometry. You know, like in Lorentz boosts, if you use hyperbolic geometry instead of algebra, so that gamma is replaced by two hyperbolic trig functions, cosh(φ) and sinh(φ), just as when you rotate an object in 3 dimensions, but with hyperbolic trig functions instead of ordinary trig functions because time is hyperbolic, not circular, and requires hyperbolic trig, not circular trig, or even spherical trig.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
It's so amusing watching you children deny relativity.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Oh, and as far as the Juno spacecraft helping quantify the anomaly, it at least will show whether the anomaly is consistently occurring or not, but 1) they probably can't analyze the data yet because of the government shutdown, and 2) they probably didn't get full spectrum data from it because of the going into Safe Mode while it was in radio shadow. So I doubt we'll know anything until at minimum after the end of the shutdown, and likely whatever we get will be truncated due to the reset to Safe Mode. If we're lucky we'll find out what caused the reset.
We need a directorate of science, and we need it to be voted on only by scientists. You don't get to vote on reality. Get over it. Elected officials that deny the findings of the Science Directorate are subject to immediate impeachment for incompetence.
Too bad I have them on ignore.
They sure look like a Troll Tantrum.
Giggle.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
