I've tried to come up with a prediction, but after reading about how much work has gone into 'recalibrating after the fact', I fear preconceptions of what the final data should look like can creep into the final numbers.

There is no question additional unanticipated massaging is necessary - the 'perfect' gyroscopes proved to have slightly viscous moments, and the pre-release paper titles indicate they had a harder-than-expected time determining the exact position of calibration stars. (Some of this subtended from using single quasars as absolute standards, a practice suspended in precision astrometrics.)

So the data reduction reported in the Gravity probe B status reports appears to be based upon sound physics. What remains to be seen is whether or not the 'GR signal' can be isolated from other sources of noise, and whether or not these can be legitimately assigned physical causality.

All that said, IAOTO there should be unanticipate effects upon the probe gyros and their spin rates that is best characterized as period functions of the distance of the earth and moon from the sun. Unfortunately, the precision measuring period was less than one year, so this curious result would be less than fully established.

Hopefully, the results will lead to more careful measurements of gravitational potentials within the solar system.

For the few of us that think Titan is covered with silicate sand and gravel, and in general, the Newtonian predictions of masses based upon orbital calculations are severly flawed, the only true test is to start using primary standards in planetary probes; and including instrumentation in outer solar system probes that can absolutely quantify the composition of the moons of the outer planets.

In order for these nonnewtonian predictions to be true, the noise levels - the absolute variance found in the Gravity B probe must be greater-than-expected...and this has already been confirmed to be true. The only question is if they are systemic.

...and I think the reported 'difficulty' in reducing the data has already reduced the expectations of this probe to where 'seminal notch' status is inappropriate. Remember, the PI's insisted that only data reduction routines formalized before the launch would be used to analyse the data. That didn't work.

__________________
jwj

It's ok not to know. We should try harder to find out.