Perihelion Advance

The planets orbit the Sun not in a circular path but slightly elliptically. Not only are the orbits elliptical but the elliptical paths rotate. This phenomenon is known as precession. The farthest point Mercury gets from the Sun (shown by the outer hatched circle) is called the aphelion of its orbit and the closest Mercury ever gets to the Sun (inner hatched circle) is called its perihelion. It is this point that gives rise to the term Perihelion Advance. The ellipse highlights the path Mercury takes whilst moving between perihelion and aphelion and which is equal to one Mercurial year. The more ellipsoid this path, the more eccentric the orbit is said to be.

Perihelion Advance is measured in arc seconds. That is, a circle is divided into 360 degrees, and each degree is then divided into 60 arc minutes, and each arc minute is divided into 60 arc seconds. After taking into consideration the perturbations due to other planets, convention accepts there are 43 arc seconds that remain unexplained over a period of 100 Earth years. This is the part of Mercury's Perihelion Advance that still keeps the astrophysicist in deliberation.

The animation below is not to scale. It takes 60x60x360/43 = 30,140 Earth centuries for Mercury's perihelion to advance one full circle. (One ellipse = one Mercurial year = 0.24 Earth years).

The Perihelion Advance of Mercury is perhaps the most discussed of all in the solar system, in part due to its high eccentricity and visibility. Whilst the other inner planets, Mars, Earth, and Venus, are more predictable, Mercury has defied a satisfactory equational description for several centuries. German school teacher, Paul Gerber, first devised an equation that ploted mercury's eccentric orbit and used 18 years later by Einstein used in 1898. Hoever, the equation lacked a mechanism. It is possibel hover to evolve Geber's eqaution from Carezani's Pico-Graviton Mechanism Pico-Graviton absorption-mass increase.

The Pico-Graviton mechanism explains perihelion advance of planets whilst answering several other questions. It has long been asked why the planets move in elliptical and not circular orbits? This is easily understood if the satellite’s mass is increasing. A mass increase will make an otherwise circular orbit go askew. But how does this mechanism explain the advance of the perihelion? Strictly speaking, it might not, but it is consistent with Newton’s equation for circular orbits. We know that the distance (r) between the centres of the two celestial bodies and the gravitational constant G, are for practical purposes constant. Newton’s equation, therefore, tells us that if the planet's mass increases, the satellites velocity must also increase (see fig.3). And if it’s velocity increases, its perihelion must advance.

But why doesn’t the increase in mass increase the centrifugal force and sling-shot the satellite into space? It is worth noting that this can be asked of other paradigms; the Pico-Graviton mechanism offers an explanation. As the mass of the satellite increases not only does its centrifugal force but also its capacity to absorb gravitons (see fig.4). The result is an increase in radiation pressure from centripetally acting gravitons. And similarly, as the mass of the Star increases, so too does its capacity to absorb gravitons. The result is a reduction in radiation pressure from centrifugally acting gravitons. This understanding explains how celestial bodies maintain an orbit while increasing both velocity and density. And this is what is borne out in binary star systems.

V = sqrt GM/r

General Relativity somewhat famously fails to plot the periastron of DI Herculis (0.65 deg/cent ). It calculates a particularly inaccurate 768% of the observed value. Carezani’s mechanism calculates an accuracy of 63% of the systems periastron. And this could be improved upon if the magnitude of tidal forces were known. Subtracting them from the observed precession takes it closer the Pico-Graviton figure, whereas General Relativity is left more inaccurate . In the case of binary star system PSR J1518+4904. General Relativity calculates 142% of the system’s observed periastron (0.011 Deg/cent). Carezani calculates, 57% . This makes GR ostensibly 15% more accurate. However, after subtracting tidal forces, the Pico-Graviton figure moves loser to the 100% mark and GR moves away.

The Pico-Graviton mechanism explains all celestial orbits; why the planets go around the stars, why moons orbit planets and why the international space station keeps falling around the Earth. It is because not only does the graviton push but also because its absorption is making matter heavier.

Whilst AD still awaits proof of the Pico-Graviton, its postulation gives the scientific community the means to analise and calculate celestial phenomena otherwise impossible, such as the Allais Anomaly, the Receding Moon, the Pioneer Anomoly , and precession of binary star systems. See also Universal Gravitation .

FC