Observation may account for Mercury Precession.

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Robittybob1, Jan 2, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Robittybob1

    Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Now the facts as I know them.

    1. The mass of the Sun is reducing all the time.
    2. orbital characteristics of an orbiting satellite can be used to measure the mass of the main object it is orbiting. (using the combining centrifugal force and gravitational attraction formula.)
    3. There was 43" (arc seconds per century) of precession of the perihelion (elliptical orbit) of Mercury that could not be accounted for.

    Issues: I followed a You tube video showing how the theory of relativity was used to account for this 43" /100 years.
    I could not fault the maths, (but I'm not a mathematician) except that there seemed to be some measurements that had a larger error than the degree of the fineness of the figure they were calculating. (opinion)

    And when I drew the diagram of the situation I could see an effect that was not being considered and that was the continual loss of mass of the Sun.
    Now I would like to draw the diagram but at the moment I don't know how.
    Starting at the perihelion (shortest distance to the Sun) and taking a line A-B perpendicular to the major axis (MA) mid point through the Sun.
    From the perihelion to the point of intersection of this other axis X(A-B) you can think of the planet falling toward the Sun (since line A-B goes through the centre of the Sun) and as the planet continues on its eliptical orbit out to the apside (A) furtherest away from the Sun, so during this phase it is gaining GPE (gravitational potential energy) and from there it falls back to Y(A-B) and then to the P (perihelion again), where it has maximum KE (kinetic energy) and minimum GPE.
    Now it could reciprocate indefinitely doing that, but what happens if the mass of the Sun reduces during the orbit? The first falling toward the Sun will produce more impulse in the direction of MA and because of loss of mass in the intervening period A will be slightly precessed as there was less mass of the Sun to slow it down and on and on as Mercury orbits the Sun.

    Conclusion: Precession of Mercury must also take into account the gradual steady loss of mass of the Sun.
     
    Robittybob1, Jan 2, 2012
    #1

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Robittybob1

    Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    Please let me know if any part of that makes no sense please?
     
    Robittybob1, Jan 2, 2012
    #2

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    The entire idea appears wrong.

    The decrease in the mass of the sun is so miniscule that it could not possibly be the cause of the affect. If a change in the mass of the sun was the cause of mercurys precession then that would also be evident on all of the planets too, not just mercury.
     
    origin, Jan 2, 2012
    #3

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Not only that, but mass loss from the sun wouldn't cause precession, it would cause mercury to spiral outwards.
     
    Trippy, Jan 2, 2012
    #4
  8. Robittybob1

    Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    "Mercury is spiralling outward. It must be for the Sun's mass is reducing. OK, so it is a matter of degree. Is it significant or not? That is what I'm going to have to find out."

    What could be making the Sun loose mass?
    1. Nuclear reactions
    2. Solar wind
    3. Coronal mass ejections.

    So it looks lie Coronal mass ejections have been included in the solar wind.

    Now to check what others say about the loss of mass!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2012
    Robittybob1, Jan 2, 2012
    #5
  9. Trippy

    Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Are you able to reword this so that it parses as a sentence in English?

    Solar mass loss through a variety of mechanisms, is insignificant compared to the mass of sun, however, it's anticipated that as the sun grows older, and enters the red giant stage, that the mass loss will increase (I don't recall the exact mechanisms involved off the top of my head). This change is significant enough that there is still some debate as to whether or not the earth will survive the suns red giant phase, because the possibility exists that as a result of this spiralling, the earth might spiral far enough outwards from its present location to survive.
     
    Trippy, Jan 2, 2012
    #6
  10. Robittybob1

    Robittybob1 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,199
    I haven't made a mistake as bad as that for a while. Sorry about that.
    "Mercury is spiralling outward. It must be for the Sun's mass is reducing. OK, so it is a matter of degree. Is it significant or not? That is what I'm going to have to find out."
     
    Robittybob1, Jan 2, 2012
    #7
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page