INTRODUCTION

1. Lunar Orbit Anomaly and GM=tc3 CosmologyL. Riofrio, University of Houston, Clear Lake, TexasEuropean Planetary Science Conference, Madrid 23-28 September 2012 INTRODUCTION Studies of the Moon, with thanks to Johnson Space Center, have quantified a large anomaly in lunar orbital evolution. The Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment (LLRE) has reported the Moon receding at an anomalously high rate. Independent experiments agree on a lower rate. A cosmology where Speed of light c is related to age of the Universe t by GM=tc3 has been suggested to predict the redshifts of Type Ia supernovae. Today a surprising prediction about light may be tested by independent experiments, including the lunar anomaly. HOT YOUNG SUN Astrophysical models predict that, other factors being equal, the early Sun would have only 75% of its present luminosity. When power P is related to temperature T by the Stefan-Boltzmann Law P ∝ T4, Earth’s temperature would have been only 93 % of its present value. Today’s temperature is approximately 283K, so in the past it would have been only 263K. Earth's surface would have been frozen solid, making evolution of life unlikely. Geology shows evidence of sediments and liquid water at 4 Gyr. Paleontology dates the earliest organisms at least 3.4 Gyr. Evidence from Martian meteorites also show conditions suitable for liquid water and life. Conflict of hypothesis with observations is the Faint Young Sun paradox.12 A higher concentration of carbon dioxide has been suggested, but geological evidence does not support this inference. Studies of iron carbonates 3 show that Earth had at most 20% the required amount of CO2. With evidence that Mars also had warm temperatures, it is unlikely that CO2 would custom-heat both planets. A solution may be in the speed of light. The Sun converts fuel to energy according to E=mc2. Billions of years ago, solar luminosity may have been higher than once thought. Fig. 1: Solar luminosity vs, age. Earth is estimated to be 4.6 billion years and the Universe 13.7 billion years old, 1.5 times its age at the time of Earth's formation. Energy E=mc2 is adjusted by (1.5)2/3 = 1.31 times initial estimate. If we start with an estimate of 76 %, solar luminosity was almost exactly today’s value. The "paradox" leads to precise fit (upper line) with GM=tc3 model. 1) Sagan and Mullen, Science, 177, 52-56 (1972) 2) Lang, Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Sun, 2001 3) Rye, Kuo, Holland, Nature 378, 603-605 (1995) LUNAR ORBIT ANOMALY LLRE measures the Moon’s distance at 384,402 km and reports a lunar recession rate of 3.82 ±.07 cm/yr, anomalously high. Geology and paleontology can also tell how the Moon’s distance has changed. Bills and Ray (1999) have compiled estimates of lunar orbital distance based on fossilised tidal sediments: Mansfield, the most recent sediment, indicates the Moon receding 2.9 ± 0.6 cm/yr. The older Elatina datum also shows a lower recession rate than LLRE. Accurate orbital data may come from historical eclipses. If the narrow track of total eclipse has been reported over an observatory, it provides an accurate measure of rotation rate. Observations spanning 2700 yr9 show a change in Length of Day (LOD) of 1.70 ±.05 msec/cyr, corresponding to a rate 2.82 ± .08 cm/yr. Detailed numerical simulation takes into account the depth and changing location of Earth ocean basins, and today predicts 2.91 cm/yr.10 LLRE differs by over 12δ. If c slows, time for light to return would increase yearly, making the Moon appear to recede faster as measured by LLRE. GM=tc3 predicts an apparent increase of 0.935 cm/yr, precisely accounting for the 12δanomaly. Multiple tests, including the Moon, indicate that c may be slowing today. CONCLUSION: A changing speed of light has been a subject of wonder since at least 1874and the First Lord Kelvin,more recently by Pettit, Moffatt, Albrecht and Maguiejo. Multiple experiments involving the Sun, Moon and supernovae, when viewed together may indicate a “c change” in physics. In Planck units GM=tc3 may be simply expressed as M = R = t. 7) Bills and Ray, Geophysical Research Letters, 1999 8) Williams, G. E., Reviews of Geophysics, 2000 9) Stephenson and Morrison, Phil. Trans. R. Soc., 1995 10) Poliakow SUPERNOVA DATA Fig. 2: Magnitude vs. redshift for Type Ia supernovae. Higher redshifts mysteriously curve upward, leading to speculation about acceleration and repulsive energies89. Theory’s predicted curve (black) matches supernova data precisely. Low redshifts increase linearly, but starting near redshift of 0.1 the graph curves upward. 4 Courtesy Supernova Cosmology Project. 4) Riofrio, L.,Beyond Einstein, Stanford, 2004, 5) Perlmutter et al., Astrophysical Journal, 1999 6) Riess et al., Astronomical Journal, 1998