Bjarne-7

Do you mean me? I’ve never posted under a similar name. And yes, there are many different influences affecting comets — including perturbations (as Sensei suggested), well-known outgassing, and possibly other factors we don’t yet understand. This isn’t necessarily cryptic or secret. By the way, I don’t believe in alien spacecraft, which — once again — is being proposed by a Harvard professor, in this context.

Of course, but this will be taken into account don’t you think ?. When comparing the perihelion distance for Oumuamua, it was 0.25 AU For 3i/Atlas it will be 1.36 AU. Based on that , as well as on the radial in/out direction, - I think it is realistic to expect a declaration in and acceleration out = 5×10⁻7 m/s². Let’s see what will happen. - Maybe nothing.

Right ; Oumuamua was much also closer to the sun, and was moving "straight" out of the solar system, - now lets see whats happening and if there are more big or small surprised out there ?

One would think that when NASA, ESA etc. claim that anomalies have been measured, that they then included the influence of Jupiter and other planetary perturbations (?) Let say: 3i/Atlas first decelerates at a rate of: a1=7×10−8m/s^2 while approaching the Sun, and subsequently accelerates at a rate of a2=5×10−8m/s2 as it moves away from the Sun. This results in a situation where both deceleration and acceleration are present during the trajectory. Such a pattern is characteristic of a significant number of flyby anomalies. Given this dual-phase acceleration profile, one can reasonably exclude planetary perturbations as the primary cause.

distance At 3 AU, accelerations on the order of 10⁻⁹–10⁻¹⁰ m/s² can typically be detected over a year, or around 10⁻⁸ m/s² over time spans of a few months. The value of 2×10⁻⁸ m/s² is clearly detectable over 3 months or longer, but it would be close to the noise threshold if only a 1-month observational arc were available. Let’s say such a deceleration is real — would it inevitably be detected? Not the point Oumuamua was accelerating, some fly by-space-probes was acceleration + deceleration , - would it surprise you if it happened again ?

After one year of such deceleration, 3iAtlas would have lost 10,000 km

Assuming 3i/Atlas is experiencing a deceleration 0,00000002 m/s², would its detection be unavoidable?

I see no problem with the equation F = RM x f F = Force RM = Relativistic Mass f = Factor (Gamma) I agree that this is a relativistic equation. I also agree that I cannot conclude that F/M= acceleration The solution must be that: - F/RM = RA RA = (Relativistic Acceleration) RA is necessary because the acceleration must also follow the consequence of gamma / acceleration is not linear. It can be solved mathematically, but requires a bit of time for me as I don't normally work with math. Gamma, in to my opinion, represents both the transformation of m and t = (m/s) This is the expression of "negative velocity" and only a snapshot where f is the factor for velocity change. Once RA is solved mathematically, the equation F/RM = RA will show the correct acceleration. As I see it Force is a Newtonian force, and not a variable.

Right, and in "relativistic physics" the only challenge is to understand (and express by an equation) that the acceleration is none-linear´, but that this also follows gamma. Plenty of kinematic mysteries require a solution. Regardless if you like it or not the modification I suggest can solve all, in one incredibly simple go. That a theory solves a number of challenges does not mean it is perfect. Many scientists agree that a modification of GR is necessary so that GR and Quantum Mechanics can both go into a higher unity Have you seen the 3 videos I linked to, it illustrates this problem very well Where is the contradiction between quantum physics and Einstein’s gravity? Right here Even if "the curvature of space" is replaced by "elastic space" (included the ruler/meter as an elastic variable), many of GR's consequences will still be exactly the same, - for example gravitational waves, gravitational lensing (etc) . The benefits by such modification, seems to be to be 1000 times greater than the camel it is to swallow such "little" modification. Why do you accuse me of not knowing what the Force is? I can only agree

Try to elaborate on what you mean?

Perception is not the same as (trying to) understand the deeper process that is responsible for the passage of time changing. - And that doesn't explain my question either: How do you explain that you have to use more and more Energy to maintain a certain acceleration and at the same time that there is no resistance to this acceleration? - It is a mathematical contradiction.

So you recognize that you need more and more energy to be able to maintain a certain rate of acceleration? You probably also recognize that energy (which is used for propulsion) is converted to Force, and that it is therefore ultimately Force that provides momentum. ? How do you explain that you have to use more and more Energy to maintain a certain acceleration and at the same time that there is no resistance to this acceleration? - It is a mathematical contradiction. Certainly not something Porsche or Ferrari would agree to. This is mathematically irrelevant... When one does not take into account that the meter ruler, mathematically speaking, must be a relativist variable, - then what the other observer allegedly "sees" is also wrong.

Edit It is a fact that it requires more and more force / energy to be able to maintain a certain acceleration whose purpose is to achieve relativistic speeds. It is also a fact that when the speed approaches c, resistance against speed increment becomes (in the end of the day) total (infinity) I think all mathematicians will agree that this is only possible if a resistance factor follows f (gamma) 1 : 1. There are no evidence showing this mathematical fact only "should be" true while accelerating. It is not me who commits a crime against this logical fact, but on the contrary, it is the current theory of relativity that has disregarded this factum. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not sure if I explained good enought that: - if the resistance factory follows gamma 1 : 1 , (and the unit of the resistance factor = is m/s) , then it is possible to calculate the maximum possible speed matter can reach. At the speed: 299792457.99999999833218000000000000000000 m/s Resistance against motion will be: 299792500.779925245065209740768742770854284 m/s Speed at light is : 299792458.00000000000000000000000000000000 m/s Which mean the resistance and speed of light is (about) the same at the speed shown in the first line above (will not use more time on getting these 2 values to match 100%) but easy possible The equation is: Resistance Factor = 1/sqrt(1-299792457.99999999833218^2/299792458^2) = 299792500.779925245065209740768742770854284 m/s

Yes f = gamma Yes, and as i said serveral times, as long the power of the LHC is ON, there will be no deceleration, because the for of the LHC will prevent that to happen. No, basically the equation have to be understood as a factor showing the stretching both m and s (m/s) , in this case by factor 7062. 7062 m/s is the resistance factor during (the first) 1 second og motion, and therefore only a "snapshot". The "acceleration" is to my option not linear, - and therefore Acc = F/MA is only an approximation. An equation showing the none-linear deceleration must properly be much more advances, - and can certainly be found.. The calculation of the resistance is correct , and can even show how fast it is possible for matter to travel. 1/sqrt(1-299792457.99999999833218^2/299792458^2) = Resistance Factor = 299792500.779925245065209740768742770854284 m/s - Here you can see that the resistance factor is the same as the speed of light. The possibility to calculate that very exactly cant be so bad. The prevailing understanding of the special theory of relativity is far too superficial. It is built on how observers compare objective transformation effects and does not go into the subject of how a deeper underlying process is responsible, for example, how t is stretching at high speeds. Maybe its the whole world that was sticking to a theory that not was "completed"

You never gave me the orbit speed, now I found it for you, and calculated the factor = RM = M x f = F = RM x f = As i wrote insignificant

there are no deceleration, just a required force is necessary to maintain the already obtained speed. F = RM * f RM = relativistic Mass f = relativistic factor

If a galaxy moves exactly at the horizontal Axis relative to DFA, To the explanation above, I would like to add that: A galaxy orbit that moves horizontally relative to the Dark Flow Axis will, (as mentioned above) , no longer be able to be held together because the galaxy loses the controlling and dominating force (DFA). When such a galaxy simultaneously moves towards a Horizontal Absolute Motion Direction (HAMD) (at a relatively high speed), - then the galaxy will towards the HAMD be met with increased horizontal-RR , - and stars orbiting oppesite HAMD will accelerate due to release of HAMD related tension ( RRT) That is, stars that move opposite the HAMD, - are also accelerated opposite the HAMD. The galaxy itself has far too little gravity to be held together. Which therefore means that part of a galaxy can escape and form a new galaxy some distance from the old one. This new (often dwarf) galaxies will later (when the galaxy inclination is changing relative to DFA ) try again to unite with the mother galaxy, and therefore dwarf galaxies are often seen in a dance around their mother galaxy.

What I like to have is: speed and very good if also you or Ghideon can calculate the required to keep an proton (as Ghideon correctly written) in circling the LHC orbit

Are we living on an old moon? Astronomers know that the vast majority of solar systems have planetary orbits that are far more eccentric than in our solar systems. The Planet-9 signature shows us that when the absolute horizontal speed increases considerably, and thus the horizontal RR increases, then the orbits of the planets must also become far more eccentric, and ultimately collide with the Sun. This means that many planets will, depending on the strength of the horizontal RR, fast or slow be forced to collision with their mother-star. - It solves the WASP-18 Mystery, - (The planet that shouldn’t exist) . here When a large gas planet collides with the mother-star, some of its moons may survive by orbiting the star instead (witch the did all the time together with the mother-planet) In other words, this means that Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars once very well were could have been moons that survived the demise of their mother planet. It also solves the mystery of how water was brought to Earth. The answer is that it was not water that was brought here to the "planet" - but the moons of a large gas planet that were brought down here. The moon that we call Earth today was probably reminiscent of Jupiter's ice moon: Europa. This is yet another example of how a simple modification of the reactivity theory ceaselessly solves every cosmic challenge.

The great speed with which we (the solar system) move, as well as the galaxy, galaxy cluster, etc, is moving at - is mostly due to Dark flow. All motion can either decrease or increase the absolute speed of the Solar System. Dark Flow is therefore primarily responsible for movement towards south, but at the same time Dark Flow is responsible for the high speeds we see in all the large orbits (galaxies and galaxy clusters). Therefore, one must expect that both towards the direction of Dark Flow, but also towards the horizontal direction that the Planet-9 signature reveals, - both are directions that increase the absolute speed. The force responsible for the Planet-9 signature is therefore probably not found at all in the direction of the absolute horizontal movement direction, but is ultimately also caused by DFA. This means that the comets that draw the Planet-9 signature will This will force the objects closer to the sun, and on the backside further out in space, and eventually lead to collision with the sun. This also means that there is only 1 horizontal direction in the solar system which, by virtue of RRT, will receive an acceleration contribution of unknown size. The contribution must be considered to be significantly less than DFA, because otherwise we would have seen far more significant anomalies. Any other horizontal direction, than that seen by the planet-9 signature, - (seen from an earth perspective), will properly also cause increasing absolute speed, and hence Relativistic Resistance against movement, to increase, - and thus deceleration (RR). We can test RR and RRT by measuring the passage of time in different seasons (and comparing results) if technically possible. Or we can send probes out in horizontal directions to see if these either either receive accelerate or decelerating contributions, (or are affected neutrally which happens if the RR and RRT contribution is 50/50) - and we can determine if clocks on board the probes either winning or losing time.

DFA and RR will always try to equalize each other, because everything is in the end of the day under DFA’s control. Everything must follow Dark Flow. Any escape will be prevented. If a galaxies inclination deviate just a little from horizontal, - period of motion more or less opposite DFA, will reduce RR (RDFRT) however at the same time DFA will be corresponding exposed. DFA will start to pull back any escape attempt. Therefore stars will reach much more velocity than we is able to account for. Furthermore sidewards RR will prevent starts to escape as well. These process explains what Dark Matter is about, and solves in “one go” all galaxy and clusters kinematic challenges. If a galaxy orbit is aligned with the DF Axis , stars will be a throwing ball between DFA/RR and RDFTR, on that DF-axis. This will force more and more mass into the centre of these galaxies, and gradually these galaxies will collapse and because quasars. This explain and solves the mystery : Spooky Alignment of Quasars Across Billions of Light-years. If these quasars / galaxies is not changing inclination these are sentenced to death. If a galaxy moved exactly at the horizontal Axis, - DFA can not longer hold the galaxy together, the galaxy it self have not enough centripetal force, and as a result a galaxy can spilt , and so called dwarf galaxy are “ejected” . as observed by Arp Halton. Later when the inclination again is changing and DFA again get control, DFA and the remaining mother-galaxy will pull back escaping dwarf-galaxies. This solves a third huge mystery. Mysterious dance of dwarfs may force a cosmic rethink here As one very easy can see Dark Flow and RR is indispensable, so is the new modified theory of relativity. You already have it, I can calculated it for you, but you have to give me the data, and to be able to compare forces, you have to tell me how much force is need to keep the the atom in orbit. So please cooperate. Yes Right The force equation already discussed Bad news, but better late as never I have reach the limit for my math skills, if you really think I can ask a mathematical to look at it. Again remember it's a new law of physic. As far as I know, we have not observed other orbit-anomalies yet, - other than the planet-9 signature being strange. There can be many forces involved. Gravitational forces can be combined, forces due to RR and RRT cannot. That is, combined gravitational forces can influence from a few directions, but RRT contributions occur from many directions. In addition to this, Dark Flow also has a hand in the game. Because there is also movement (more or less) in that direction. We know so little, and must content ourselves with stating that until now we have had no tools whatsoever to solve this mystery. The tools I suggest do not give immediate results. When we do not know directions, these tools are not useful. They are tools that first require relatively large testing investments. The means are there but they are being misused because there is so much unyielding "superstition" in science which is really what prevents us from seeing clearly. No , you have misunderstood this, please read the start of this post, you can see that even though ýou have RDFRT (or RRT) which in fact is acceleration opposite DF, - you also have increased exposed DFA with not will allow any escape attempt. This principle is not limited to Dark Flow, its a universal principle between all gravitational forces and RR / RRT, - so acceleration is prevented, and hence the result in the end of the day most of the time deceleration. Only when an orbit in under a atomic object (and DFA cancelled out) you get significant release of dark flow related tension, with only is revealed in some trajectories, because it is nearly almost confused with centripetal force. The planet-9 signature is real, its is a real mystery, the suggestion so fare I agree, this is nothing but hocus pocus. Of course, you will see many more anomalies in the time to come. We have only discovered a few. All planets have undetected inclinations anomalous (due to DFA). We don't see them, and think the inclination of the planets is by the book. But we will surely become wiser. In a large number of areas, a modification of the theory of relativity brings prediction. Also that the solar system is probably full of comets that do not move in orbits, but up and down on the drak flow axis. And much much more than that. We will also see time dilation anomalies that cannot be explained in the future. Time and time again, you will see that this new simple tool is incredibly effective. What is needed is to test this modification. Indirectly, it is now (soon) happening onboard ISS.

Has anyone been able to work out what the cause of these : - Spooky Alignment of Quasars Across Billions of Light-years

I have to say I really thought about the difference, - must be velocity Yes RR is not limited towards a southern direction, there can be several directions at the same time which increase the absolute velocity. Both (more or less) horizontal and vertical Look above, there it is explained. If you travel towards a direction that reduces the absolute speed, time will go fast (not slower than expected). It requires a lot of time and very high speeds to map this precisely. Hence also expected that time will tick at the same rate at all seasons . Wonder if that could be tested somehow ?? ISS Utilization: ACES (Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space) / PHARAO - eoPortal Right I am only referring to an example where radio does not play a role (1 meter radius) When traveling south, the absolute speed increases, and thus the RR increases, - the result will be deleration towards north, - if there is no counteracting force preventing such deceleration to happen. Conversely, if you travel north, the absolute speed will deteriorate, thus less RR. Considered in isolation, this means increased acceleration towards the same direction (to the north) But at the same time as this happens, the balance between RR and DFA changes, which then means that RR and DFA no longer balance each other. Or you can say DFA is (more or less) exposed, and you will instead decelerate again south (if no counteracting force prevents that to happen. It solves a large number of great mysteries, and is at least something you have to keep in the back of your mind these days when new mysteries pile up, and where they can also be solved in the same fell swoop. For eaample think of the comets (Omyamua, Borisov) that "we" mistakenly belives come from other solar systems - and where a Harvard professor even claims must be sent by aliens. - So somethimes its maybe not so bad to have alternative theories. Its illusionary idea that our have an undiscovered planet and even that our sun is a thief. planet 9 - Google-søgning Insignificant lower speed as expected that easy can be compensated by adding Insignificant more force to the system. I prefer that you give an example, but you must know and state how much energy you expect to need to keep an atom in orbit at nearly the speed c. Then I will for comparison calculate how much (little) comparable importance RR has in the worst possible scenario. The planet Planet-9 "signature" reveals the solar system is affected by "sidewards" (horisontal) absolute motion. But certainly fare weaker as Dark Flow, and properly very weak. - if such motion is true you also have a weak (horisontal) force (similar to DFA) but weaker, - and hence more or less a similar "force-balancing scenario" as explained, above: In other words, this force can be far weaker than the RR force responsible for the Pioneer probe's deceleration. A marked acceleration such as those responsible for the flyby anomalies requires the probes to be under an astronomic object for a period, because during this period they are exposed to Release of Dark Flow related tension, as a result of the astronomic object is cancelling out the influence of DFA. Released of the full potentiel Dark Flow related tension often happens and is very significant .

Also , if possible let me know the force or energy required to keep the a certain mass in orbit at a certain speed. ----------------------------------------------------------- ( red orbit= "planet-9" ) Remember that Reduced RR when moving oppesite Dark Flow - does not mean that an object will accelerate because the DFA will become correspondingly more exposed ("stronger"), - as a function of the RR being reduced. The same principle applies to planet-9, phenomenon, - because also in this case too there is a movement against an absolute direction of movement, which is only possible if this movement also occurs as the result of a force coming from this direction. Please read above how DFA and RR affects objects. I am not sure you quite understand the principles for RR and DFA (etc.) - So you have to ask me a well defined question and also let me know, mass , speed and required energi / force to keep that en orbit... Otherwise we can easy misunderstand each other. RR and DFA will try to balance each other if an orbits in a is aligned with the Dark Flow Axis. (which the RR-force and external gravitational force responsible for planet-9 phenomena,- not is)