Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: Juno probe already in trouble, with 13July correction of orbit; spinning out of control?? Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 Lines: 25 Message-ID: References: <78b26000-433c-487d-838e-41ce2ce31b69@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1468332967 1912 192.74.137.71 (12 Jul 2016 14:16:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:16:07 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: nn/6.6.5 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:588890 john writes: >If gravity is LeSagian, >the profile in close will be different. >It will be like driving a car >and suddenly being on ice- any >corrections will have to be >modified accordingly. Otherwise, >you get a feedback that amplifies >each swerve rather than muting it. Yes, and you said that close up gravity would be so different that Juno wouldn't even be able to orbit Jupiter. How did that work out for you? >And with a 50 minute delay?? Oh-oh!! Yes, so that means NASA couldn't detect something wrong and compensate for it. All the programming for dealing with the gravity and getting into orbit had to be preprogrammed long in advance. Kind of like a self-driving car preprogrammed 50 minutes in advance to take a curve at 40 mph due to road friction and curvature but when the car gets there it's all iced up and the car tries to take the curve at 40 mph anyway. As it turned out, you were wrong, no ice, and Juno did fine.