Agreed, in the note just sent over the minimum velocity at periastron is calculated to be 106.1 kilometres per second, compared with your 106.7 kilometres per second. These are calculated from the Stanford data. The same data give a periastron advance of 17,891 degrees per earth year from the Einstein theory. This is wildly wrong. The observed advance is 4.2 degrees per earth year. The shrinkage is 3.1 mm per orbit from the Cornell astronomy site. There can be no confidence whatsoever in Government funding of ultra expensive experiments to prove a theory that is so easily shown to be wildly wrong. I will certainly look in to the expressions for alpha and epsilon in Cartesian coordinates. Astronomers should switch their efforts to ECE2 theory, which has a vast worldwide following, probably larger than the standard model. Their data are still valuable provided their data reduction methods are correct. Stephen Crothers has shown that the data reduction in LIGOS is very dubious indeed. The standard model is beginning to smell like a week old fish market after a strike.

To: EMyrone@aol.com

Sent: 14/04/2017 11:37:51 GMT Daylight Time

Subj: Parameters for Hulse-Taylor pulsar

I gathered some data for the Hulse Taylor pulsar, mainly from Wikipedia and Stanford. There are differing statements on the periastron and apastron velocities, the other are consistent. I did not consider orbital precession so far.

One site gives for the velocities:

while another site gives:

They seem to refer to different relational points, probably the center of mass and the other binary partner. I did not understand this fully.

When taking the other orbit parameters and using the non-relativistic formula

v squared = mu G (2/r – 1/a)

I obtained

v_min = 106.7 km/s

v_max = 450.7 km/s

So the second set above seems to be the right one for our calculations and I will use

v_min = 110 km/s

v_max = 450 km/s

I will see how the elliptic orbit parameters can be calculated from the numerical solution, probably I will have to check for zero crossings of X and Y. If you have an idea how to determine the eccentricity, semi major axis and semi latus rectum from the orbital functions X(t), Y(t) algorithmically, please let me know.

Horst

Am 13.04.2017 um 15:35 schrieb EMyrone:

I will write up this result in the next note for UFT375.

Hulse-Taylor.pdf

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

This entry was posted on April 14, 2017 at 11:45 am and is filed under asott2. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.