Mauro Lacy wrote: > Mauro Lacy wrote: > >>> Jack Smith wrote: >>> ... >>> I would note ... that the phase seems slightly off from >>> sun's distance. So we can say there is an annual cycle, >>> but it might be cosmic rays, gravitational potential or >>> perhaps temperature or other environmental variable. >>> >>> >> velocity? If I'm not mistaken, velocity is always a little bit "off >> phased" in relation to distance in an orbit. >> >> > > No, total velocity and radial distance are mostly in phase, exceptuating > some minor alterations in the velocity at times. > And the phase difference looks too big(in the range of weeks, or even > months? The graphic is not very clear) to be accounted for by simple > orbital dynamics. > Hi, I've plotted the different vectorial components of the velocity vector, and distance to the Sun on the same graph, and curiously enough, the "y component" of the velocity vector (and probably of the distance vector, although I've not plotted it) seems to be in phase with the change in decay rates. Here is the graph:
http://maurol.com.ar/decay_rates/velocity_distance.png The different plots are: red: radial distance (normalized) green: total velocity(normalized) blue, magenta, cyan: Vx, Vy, Vz As you can see, the magenta line seems to nicely match the Brookhaven decay data. This can be no more than a coincidence, and more analysis is clearly necessary. This "Vy component" is the velocity (also an equivalent displacement, although I prefer to talk about velocities) perpendicular to the major axis of the Sun-Earth ellipse, because the "x component" is aligned with the perihelion-aphelion axis. I'll now try to produce a graph on the same scale as the bnl graph, to superpose them and see how close the match really is. Best regards, Mauro
