The Sun and Big G Measurements

On August 29, 2018, a scientific team reported a measure of the Universal Gravitational Constant G with the highest precision ever. The team completed three experimental campaigns in the same city over the course of a year. That work provided a complete data set useful analyzing the values of Big G change with the distance to the Sun, as is claimed by the author of this paper.


Introduction
This note is not exactly an independent paper. The original intention was to create a brief communication to show the correlation between the experimental data from two different experimental works. The author apologizes for lack of details on this communication about the Big G issue and recommends that interested readers check the reference for a complete overview on this point.
On August 29 th , 2018, a scientific team reported a measure of the Universal Gravitational Constant, also known as Big G, with the lowest error ever. In this journal, Li et al. [1] announced two new values for Big G using two independent settings. The values for G were determined to be 6.674184(12) × 10 −11 m 3 •kg −1 •s −2 using a technique called TOS and 6.674484(12) × 10 −11 m 3 •kg −1 •s −2 using another technique called AAF. The physical nature of Big G is so goosy that after more than two years of science-art work, Li et al. exceed the precision reported in the work by Gundlach et al. [2] in the year 2000 [6.674215(92) × 10 −11 m 3 •kg −1 •s −2 ] by only ninety parts in a million. Many technological advances have occurred within the last 18 years, but the increment in precision between both studies is not well correlated with those advances. Another intriguing situation appears He wrote "A second possibility is that some unknown physics could explain the scatter in the published values. Although this possibility is, of course, the more exciting, it is also the less likely. Nevertheless, it should not be dismissed lightly".
Moreover, I published papers in 2017 [4] and 2018 [5] covering the Big G issue both theoretically and experimentally. Therein, I mentioned that an unnoticed correlation exists between the best G values reported in the last 30 years and the distance to the Sun. Thirty years is a long period, which made it more difficult to draw a comparison between the studies carried out in so many labs throughout the world. Li

Li et al. [1] Chronological Data
The team of Li et al. failed to report any possible variations of their data by taking into account other variables that might affect the results such as time or the distance from the Sun. Figure 1 included only the AAF data for reasons   Figure 2 included only the 29 G values obtained from the AAF experiments versus a unit-less parameter x correlate with the distance to the Sun. The x is the ratio between the instantaneous distance to the Sun and the average to that distance, also called the Astronomical Unit. Every value from AAF was determined after an average of three days. However, every value from TOS required an average of 132 days. That is an exclusionary condition in this analysis because such a large period hides progressive variations. This lengthy variation, which was not taken into account, can be used to explain why the final G value determined using TOS is closer to the average G recommended by standard government departments.

Mixing Big G Determinations and Its Variations
The pattern in Figure  0.00228 0.00020 6.67218 0.00020 10 m kg s

Conclusion
The average of the available experimental values of Big G can create confidence on its real value only to the third significant figure (6.67). Any researcher look- ing for more precise information about Big G requires considering the experimental variation of its value with the distance to the Sun. This is experimentally justified by all the research conducted since Cavendish. Any art of science work in the modern time ought not aim or attempt to overcome this constraint. Many scholars may disagree with the assertion made in the author's initial hypothesis, but any argument can be brought in future work. In order to assert a different position on the hypothesis future work and research would have to be conducted; however, a six-significant figure on the value of Big G is due by now.

Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.