The Cost of Relativity
Leonard Pardin
spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In addition,
the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
holes, and black holes.
Scientists have expended and are now expending huge sums of
taxpayer money to prove that all those jumbled mathematical
calculations really do point to something real. For years government
funding of the Einstein legend amounted to more than $2 million per
year just to develop technology that might help to find something. But
then in 1980, funding was increased to cover groundtesting of
subsystems. By 1992, funding level had grown to $30 million each
year. When Relativity scientists announced the project had entered a
"science mission" phase, the annual outlay was raised to above $50
million. This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
a waste.
Robert J. Kolker
Leonard Pardin wrote:
> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In addition,
> the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
> unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
> holes, and black holes.
Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
Bob Kolker
Len Gaasenbeek
I am in full agreement with your posting below.
Relativity is the greatest confidence cult in the history of mankind.
One of the reasons may be that it preaches that the faster you move,
the longer you will live since you will "age" more slowly.
It is almost as bad as the notion that if you blow yourself up, you
will reach paradise sooner and enjoy its rewards longer!
Len.
..................................................................
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
Bernardz
leop...@MailAndNews.com says...
> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable.
>
Parts have been proven long ago eg the British eclipse expeditions in
1919 confirmed its predictions.
--
Logically we attempt to devise reasons for our irrational behaviour.
Observations of Bernard - No 62
Dirk Van de moortel
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable.
General relativity helps your plane to take off and land with
zero visibility. Next time you tak an airplane, demand one that
does not use the GPS system.
> In addition,
> the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
> unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
> holes, and black holes.
>
> Scientists have expended and are now expending huge sums of
> taxpayer money to prove that all those jumbled mathematical
> calculations really do point to something real. For years government
> funding of the Einstein legend amounted to more than $2 million per
> year just to develop technology that might help to find something. But
> then in 1980, funding was increased to cover groundtesting of
> subsystems. By 1992, funding level had grown to $30 million each
> year. When Relativity scientists announced the project had entered a
> "science mission" phase, the annual outlay was raised to above $50
> million. This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
> a waste.
Yes, hurry, get out and go vote for that 6000 years old universe
idiot again.
Dirk Vdm
Sam Wormley
funded science for our benefit, so we understand the
funding in terms of percent of all science funding.
Michael Varney
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit.
GPS, particle accelerators, synchrotron, our understanding of the universe.
You are a dumbass.
Michael Varney
"Len Gaasenbeek" <gaas...@rideau.net> wrote in message
news:10f5388...@corp.supernews.com...
> To Leonard,
>
> I am in full agreement with your posting below.
That means you are a dumbass as well.
Harry
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:nfwIc.183251$45.87...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
> "Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> > spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> > hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> > Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable.
>
> General relativity helps your plane to take off and land with
> zero visibility. Next time you tak an airplane, demand one that
> does not use the GPS system.
Exactly. It may be flawed, but it's pretty usuful.
> > In addition,
> > the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
> > unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
> > holes, and black holes.
There is a lot of junk around. But it's only harmful if junk is claimed to
be fact.
> > Scientists have expended and are now expending huge sums of
> > taxpayer money to prove that all those jumbled mathematical
> > calculations really do point to something real. For years government
> > funding of the Einstein legend amounted to more than $2 million per
> > year just to develop technology that might help to find something. But
> > then in 1980, funding was increased to cover groundtesting of
> > subsystems. By 1992, funding level had grown to $30 million each
> > year. When Relativity scientists announced the project had entered a
> > "science mission" phase, the annual outlay was raised to above $50
> > million. This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
> > a waste.
It's hard to judge what optimal spending would be.
Harald
EjP
> To Leonard,
>
> I am in full agreement with your posting below.
It's always comforting when the retards are in agreement.
-E
Uncle Al
>
> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit.
Global Positioning Satellite System, wide-screen color TV CRTs.
That gets you to the party even though you can't read a map and
lets you see the widescreen porn lifesize undistorted in aspect
and color. What more do you want?
Idiot.
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume4/2001-4will/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
Experimental constraints on General Relativity.
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html>
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
<http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP>
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
<http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html>
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Bilge
>spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit.
>Almost a hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
>Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In addition,
>the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
>unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
>holes, and black holes.
> Scientists have expended and are now expending huge sums of
>taxpayer money to prove that all those jumbled mathematical
>calculations really do point to something real. For years government
>funding of the Einstein legend amounted to more than $2 million per
>year just to develop technology that might help to find something. But
>then in 1980, funding was increased to cover groundtesting of
>subsystems. By 1992, funding level had grown to $30 million each
>year. When Relativity scientists announced the project had entered a
>"science mission" phase, the annual outlay was raised to above $50
>million. This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
>a waste.
It's rather hard to take seriously, someone who cannot find
something better to do than post messages to a newsgroup dedicated
to a subject he neither understands nor likes. If you're so
smart, why can't you find a newsgroup which is related to something
about which you know more than zero?
Spaceman
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
Yes.
Tis sad.
Spaceman
>
> I am in full agreement with your posting below.
> Relativity is the greatest confidence cult in the history of mankind.
>
> One of the reasons may be that it preaches that the faster you move,
> the longer you will live since you will "age" more slowly.
>
> It is almost as bad as the notion that if you blow yourself up, you
> will reach paradise sooner and enjoy its rewards longer!
Don't forget this one,
If you cut your lawn at faster than the speed of light,
It would take longer than normal.
:)
Spaceman
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04...
> Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
> which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
> bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
Bullshit.
and used so many times,
assholes like you think it is correct.
A bunch of switches (basic electronics devices) are what is responsible.
Spaceman
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nfwIc.183251$45.87...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
> zero visibility. Next time you tak an airplane, demand one that
> does not use the GPS system.
Bullshit,
triangulation and radio waves/micro waves do such.
Sam Wormley
NOT PRACtical... oop caps lock was on.
Trilateration with GPS signals is the way to go.
Spaceman
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:40F30C07...@mchsi.com...
> Trilateration with GPS signals is the way to go.
GPS signals?
<ROFLOL>
no microwaves or radio waves huh Sam?
<ROFLOL>
David Evens
Make up your pretended mind: Is it a bunch of switches, or is it
basic electronic devices?
David Evens
Yes, and they worked so WELL for KAL 007, didn't they? Or are you to
YOUNG to remember the days when airliners routinely wandered hundreds
of miles of course?
MorituriMax
> To Leonard,
>
> I am in full agreement with your posting below.
> Relativity is the greatest confidence cult in the history of mankind.
Tell that to the people at Hiroshima and Nagasaki... oh oops, you can't....
Einsteins fake stuff sure seemed to work well in vaporizing, melting, or burning
the people there..
MorituriMax
> Don't forget this one,
> If you cut your lawn at faster than the speed of light,
> It would take longer than normal.
No it wouldn't, since you can't do it.
Guybrush Threepwood
> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable.
You mean like absolutely everything derived through the scientific method?
> This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
> a waste.
But you don't believe in black holes...
Guy
mme...@cars3.uchicago.edu
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
me...@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Randy
Just a curious lurker. I read Uncle Al's reference:
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
(on page A-8 it says:)
Note 2: Our analysis assumed the speed Vearth of the Earth clock to be
that of the speed of the equator. One might expect that this
speed-dependent correction would take on different values at different
latitudes north or south of the equator, going to zero at the poles
where there is no motion of the Earth clock due to rotation of Earth. In
practice there is no latitude effect because Earth is not spherical; it
bulges a bit at the equator due to its rotation. The smaller radius at
the poles increases the M/rEarth term in equation [[12] by the same
amount that the velocity term decreases. The outcome is that our
calculation for the equator applies to all latitudes.
(me again)
Is this just a (rather remarkable ?) coincidence or is there a more
fundamental reason that the Earth's shape would offset the velocity term
so closely?
Also I could not help but wonder why they did not resync the clocks with
periodic timestamp transmissions from earth rather than worry about
accumulated time offsets due to relativistic effects? Do you think they
were worried the timestamps might be jammed in a war situation?
Thanks
Dirk Van de moortel
"Randy" <rhowe...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:YiNIc.4718$ek5.2303@pd7tw2no...
> Hi
>
> Just a curious lurker. I read Uncle Al's reference:
> http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
>
> (on page A-8 it says:)
>
> Note 2: Our analysis assumed the speed Vearth of the Earth clock to be
> that of the speed of the equator. One might expect that this
> speed-dependent correction would take on different values at different
> latitudes north or south of the equator, going to zero at the poles
> where there is no motion of the Earth clock due to rotation of Earth. In
> practice there is no latitude effect because Earth is not spherical; it
> bulges a bit at the equator due to its rotation. The smaller radius at
> the poles increases the M/rEarth term in equation [[12] by the same
> amount that the velocity term decreases. The outcome is that our
> calculation for the equator applies to all latitudes.
>
> (me again)
>
> Is this just a (rather remarkable ?) coincidence or is there a more
> fundamental reason that the Earth's shape would offset the velocity term
> so closely?
Earth has taken a form that gives an equilibrium configuration.
See http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath182.htm
Dirk Vdm
Gregory L. Hansen
Electronic devices are well in the realm of non-relativistic quantum
mechanics.
--
"A good plan executed right now is far better than a perfect plan
executed next week."
-Gen. George S. Patton
ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com
> In article <l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04>,
> Robert J. Kolker <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Leonard Pardin wrote:
> >
> >> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> >> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> >> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> >> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In addition,
> >> the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
> >> unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
> >> holes, and black holes.
> >
> >Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
> >which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
> >bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
> >
> >Bob Kolker
> Electronic devices are well in the realm of non-relativistic quantum
> mechanics.
GPS?
--
Jim Pennino
Remove -spam-sux to reply.
Gregory L. Hansen
The semiconductors are.
--
"We don't grow up hearing stories around the camp fire anymore about
cultural figures. Instead we get them from books, TV or movies, so the
characters that today provide us a common language are corporate
creatures" -- Rebecca Tushnet
Tom Potter
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:nfwIc.183251$45.87...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
Different strokes for different folks.
Some folks want to spend a million or so
of the taxpayer's hard earned money,
on proving a 6000 year old universe,
and some folks want to spend hundreds of billions,
of the taxpayer's hard earned money,
on proving worm holes, black holes, time travel,
warped space, etc.
I suggest that the free market
is the best arbiter
of what reality is all about.
The taxpayer should not be force to subsidize
anyone's model of reality, as all of the subsidized models
are based on race, religion and national agendas.
If Ohm's Law works, or Maxwell's Equations work,
or Kirchoff''s Laws work, they should be able
to justify their use with the fruits of their use.
If someone is privy to powerful, esoteric knowledge,
they don't need to rape the tax payer.
--
Tom Potter http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp
Bjoern Feuerbacher
> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable.
Ever heard of the GPS satellites? Idiot.
[snip]
> Scientists have expended and are now expending huge sums of
> taxpayer money to prove that all those jumbled mathematical
> calculations really do point to something real. For years government
> funding of the Einstein legend amounted to more than $2 million per
> year just to develop technology that might help to find something. But
> then in 1980, funding was increased to cover groundtesting of
> subsystems. By 1992, funding level had grown to $30 million each
> year. When Relativity scientists announced the project had entered a
> "science mission" phase, the annual outlay was raised to above $50
> million. This is known as throwing good money down a black hole. What
> a waste.
So the GPS satellites are a waste?
Bye,
Bjoern
Tom Potter
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04...
>
> Leonard Pardin wrote:
>
> > Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> > spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
> > hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
> > the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
> > unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
> > holes, and black holes.
>
> which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
> bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
It is interesting to see how the worship
of a particular model invokes intense emotional responses
in many people.
The fact of the matter is,
that electronics was a natural evolution,
and the models had little to do with the actual discoveries
that paved the way.
Edison's discovery of the "Edison Effect"
lead directly to the invention of the diode,
which lead directly to the invention of the triode,
which combined with the discovery of the "cat's whisker"
lead directly to the invention of the point contact transistor,
which lead directly to the engineering of integrated circuits,
which, combined with Boolean logic,
lead to the engineering of the micro processor.
Anyone who doesn't understand this
is a "fucking idiot".
Technology is driven by a few discoveries,
like the discovery of the battery,
the capacitor, the relationship between magnetism and current,
and Edison's diode.
Models follow discovery
and the state of the art in measurement and fabrication.
Sam Wormley
>
> Edison's discovery of the "Edison Effect"
> lead directly to the invention of the diode,
> which lead directly to the invention of the triode,
> which combined with the discovery of the "cat's whisker"
> lead directly to the invention of the point contact transistor,
> which lead directly to the engineering of integrated circuits,
> which, combined with Boolean logic,
> lead to the engineering of the micro processor.
>
> Anyone who doesn't understand this
> is a "fucking idiot".
>
Potter fails to show how the "Edison Effect" applies to
solid state electronics... and calls other people names
due to his own failings. Pity Potter.
Tom Potter
<ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
news:cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com...
As I have posted in explicit detail,
Relativity is not needed to design, engineer,
and maintain the GPS system.
If this thread continues,
I'll Google my old post,
and repost it to illustrate this.
The essential elements of the GPS system
are a constant speed of radio waves, stable oscillators,
auto-correlation, spread spectrum technology,
and microprocessors.
Sam Wormley
>
>
> If this thread continues,
> I'll Google my old post,
> and repost it to illustrate this.
>
Crank Information
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3APotter
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Tom+Potter%22+site%3Awww.crank.net
Michael Varney
Michael Varney
"Tom Potter" <t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:2likorF...@uni-berlin.de...
You are an idiot... as always CrackPotter.
Androcles
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04...
|
|
| Leonard Pardin wrote:
|
| > Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
| > spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost a
| > hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
| > Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In addition,
| > the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
| > unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
| > holes, and black holes.
|
| Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
| which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
| bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
|
| Bob Kolker
moron.
Androcles
Androcles
A bunch of satellites continually updated from ground stations because some
relativist idiot misprogrammed them and the need constant correction to
ground time.
Androcles
Androcles
|
| Just a curious lurker. I read Uncle Al's reference:
| http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
|
| (on page A-8 it says:)
|
| Note 2: Our analysis assumed the speed Vearth of the Earth clock to be
| that of the speed of the equator. One might expect that this
| speed-dependent correction would take on different values at different
| latitudes north or south of the equator, going to zero at the poles
| where there is no motion of the Earth clock due to rotation of Earth. In
| practice there is no latitude effect because Earth is not spherical; it
| bulges a bit at the equator due to its rotation. The smaller radius at
| the poles increases the M/rEarth term in equation [[12] by the same
| amount that the velocity term decreases. The outcome is that our
| calculation for the equator applies to all latitudes.
|
| (me again)
|
| Is this just a (rather remarkable ?) coincidence or is there a more
| fundamental reason that the Earth's shape would offset the velocity term
| so closely?
0 + 0 = 0...
Androcles
Gregory L. Hansen
A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
kilometer per day between corrections.
--
"The preferred method of entering a building is to use a tank main gun
round, direct fire artillery round, or TOW, Dragon, or Hellfire missile to
clear the first room." -- THE RANGER HANDBOOK U.S. Army, 1992
Bilge
>In article <cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com>:
>>In sci.physics Gregory L. Hansen <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Electronic devices are well in the realm of non-relativistic quantum
>>> mechanics.
>>
>>GPS?
>
>The semiconductors are.
>
Sure, but in an ad hoc way. The electron spin has to be introduced by
hand as an additional assumption. You can assume you have fermions and
bosons and assume the existence of a fermi surface, but you can't explain
it without relativity. The importance of relativity is not that it gives
a nice description of a classical particle at a large relative velocity.
I think if that were the only reason to use relativity to explain an
effect, no one would have a real reason to choose relativity as a
description over anything else.
Gregory L. Hansen
Sure, but the electron spin *was* first introduced by hand as an
additional assumption. When you do that, and when you assume electrons
and nuclei and Coulomb potentials exist, you can do a lot of solid-state
physics with Galilean transforms. Most applications of quantum mechanics,
those concerning materials, don't use the relativistic theory at all.
That doesn't mean the relativistic theory isn't terrific. But Kolker's
computer isn't an example of why we need it. You don't need to know the
relativistic theory to design a transistor.
--
"Are those morons getting dumber or just louder?" -- Mayor Quimby
Leonard Pardin
You are right on, Mr. Potter: Relativity, whether special or
general, serves no function in the GPS system. The measured
differences between the orbiting clocks and the ground clocks are due
entirely to the blue shift in the signal sent from the satellite to
earth receivers. In fact, Prof. Carroll O. Alley of the University of
Maryland Physics Department, the consultant who worked with the
original designers of the GPS system, doesn't even believe in
Relativity. He actually argued with the technicians not to employ
Relativitic adjustments because they weren't needed after the clocks
were adjusted to account for the frequency shift of the satellite
signal. They wouldn't listen, and it took some expensive testing to
prove that Alley was right.
Spaceman
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
> general, serves no function in the GPS system. The measured
> differences between the orbiting clocks and the ground clocks are due
> entirely to the blue shift in the signal sent from the satellite to
> earth receivers. In fact, Prof. Carroll O. Alley of the University of
> Maryland Physics Department, the consultant who worked with the
> original designers of the GPS system, doesn't even believe in
> Relativity. He actually argued with the technicians not to employ
> Relativitic adjustments because they weren't needed after the clocks
> were adjusted to account for the frequency shift of the satellite
> signal. They wouldn't listen, and it took some expensive testing to
> prove that Alley was right.
:)
It's sad that people don't realize that if they actually used
Relativity, the clocks would be considered right, even when they were wrong.
:)
Peter Kinane
"Spaceman" <Spac...@realspaceman.com> wrote in message news:qZYIc.69436$MB3.42251@attbi_s04...
Indeed. It shows, or many here keep showing, even up to a couple of
hours ago, that they do not know what a model- -system is.
As I posted elsewhere:
*What future for physics if the Einstein camp continues to prevail,
and
for people and the world given that the matter is now more-so seen as
having, shall we say, "experimental support" ([and] that philosophy
does not
matter)?*
--
Peter Kinane
http://www.effectuationism.com/
Spaceman
"Peter Kinane" <pki...@iol.ie> wrote in message news:d8097fcc.04071...@posting.google.com...
> Indeed. It shows, or many here keep showing, even up to a couple of
> hours ago, that they do not know what a model- -system is.
>
> As I posted elsewhere:
> *What future for physics if the Einstein camp continues to prevail,
> and
> for people and the world given that the matter is now more-so seen as
> having, shall we say, "experimental support" ([and] that philosophy
> does not
> matter)?*
Einstien is a false God and such that follow him so faithfully
will fall some day.
:)
Leonard Pardin
> Len Gaasenbeek wrote:
> > To Leonard,
> >
> > I am in full agreement with your posting below.
> > Relativity is the greatest confidence cult in the history of mankind.
>
> Tell that to the people at Hiroshima and Nagasaki... oh oops, you can't....
> Einsteins fake stuff sure seemed to work well in vaporizing, melting, or burning
> the people there..
Relativity theories, general or special, have nothing to do with
nuclear fusion or fission. Nor does any Relativity theory serve any
function in computers, gps system satellites, microcircuits, lasers,
wide screen television, birth control pills, toenail clippers, or any
of the other marvelous devices Einstein lovers repeatedly attribute to
Relativity theories. In fact, The theories serve no useful purpose
whatever. They never did. They are unproven, unprovable, and
improbable.
Uncle Al
Idiot.
<http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html>
Mathematics of gravitation
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume4/2001-4will/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
Experimental constraints on General Relativity.
<http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf>
Nature 425 374 (2003)
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html>
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
<http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Nordtvedt Effect
MorituriMax
> Relativity theories, general or special, have nothing to do with
What's really hilarious is that you're going to go through life, then die, and
people who understand how the stuff does work will happily putter on with better
quality of life than you will ever achieve. Do you think that by denying it
here it somehow makes you a better person?
I really pity you. It is so sad but yet so funny.
Richard Herring
Pardin <leop...@MailAndNews.com> writes
>Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
>spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit.
sci.physics.relativity is different from sci.physics for a reason. Don't
crosspost between them.
Followups set.
--
Richard Herring
Androcles
"Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:cd1adv$gof$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
Which one, the GR "correction" or the SR "correction"?
| --
| "The preferred method of entering a building is to use a tank main gun
| round, direct fire artillery round, or TOW, Dragon, or Hellfire missile to
| clear the first room." -- THE RANGER HANDBOOK U.S. Army, 1992
How very subtle. Is that the method you use to visit your grandmother?
Androcles
Androcles
"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feue...@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in message
news:cd13k1$il$3...@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
Of course they are not. They are very useful, but what does that have to do
with wasting money on relativity?
Androcles
Robert J. Kolker
Androcles wrote:
> Of course they are not. They are very useful, but what does that have to do
> with wasting money on relativity?
For a company that either puts up, maintains or uses GPS, relativity is
not a waste. However that may be, no public funds should be expended to
scientic work unless it is explicitly and completely for the purpose of
making weapons for the military or police. One might argue that medical
research for preventing contagions fall under the rubric of national or
community defense.
Anything else ought to be strictly private. What people spend their own
money on is by definition not a waste to -them, the rightful owners of
the money-.
Bob Kolker
Tom Potter
As can be seen,
Sam Wormley does what most losers do,
when they are unable to address an issue effectively,
he tries to make the messenger the issue.
It is also interesting to observe that Sam
continues to use his favorite reference,
the web site of a computer programmer
that took some data processing classes,
at a third rate California college.
As my pappy used to say,
"If you want good information,
get it from the horses mouth,
not from a horse's ass."
Tom Potter
"Bilge" <dub...@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net> wrote in message
news:slrncf8g0e....@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net...
I observed the early evolution of the semiconductor industry,
toured the research labs, and the manufacturing facilities,
talked to the engineers, technicians and scientists,
and I never saw one case where relativity was considered.
After the 1925 patents of Julius Edgar Lilienfeld
for the field effect transistor expired,
Bell Labs hacked the point contact transistor
which was based on the "cat's whicker" diode,
and the triode, and others followed up
adopting Lilienfeld's field effect approach.
Note that as it was by far the largest electronic based company,
and needed billions of audio amplifiers,
it was in AT&T's best interests to wait for the transistor patents
to expire before "inventing" their own.
An engineer at Texas Instruments,
a small Texas company engineered the integrated circuit,
by simply adding resistances and capacitances to the
transistor substrate, and the race was on to put
more and more components on the substrate.
Tom Potter
"Michael Varney" <varney@colorado_no_spam.edu> wrote in message
news:8hVIc.239$wv5....@news.uswest.net...
Poor sick Varney!
A debit to the State of Colorado.
You are a sociopath... as always VisiousVarney.
Tom Potter
"Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:cd1adv$gof$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
As I explained in a lengthy, explicit post
on the GPS system several months ago,
the what makes the GPS system work
are stable oscillators, fast cross-correlation computers,
consistency in the speed of radio waves,
and spread spectrum technology.
Relativity is not needed to design, engineer, program,
and maintain the GPS system.
The fact of the matter is,
that General Relativity is a Tower of Babel,
that generates more heat than light,
and wastes time, trillions of dollars, and minds,
on useless pursuits like time travel,
worm holes, space warps, black holes,
experiments to prove Relativity, etc.
General Relativity is more of a religious/ethnic religion,
than a useful engineering tool.
Special relativity is an expression that basically states
that if you use the same oscillator to quantize distance
( Measure a time interval between two points.)
and to quantize time,
you end up with the constant
that expresses time intervals
in some preferred distanv\ce units.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Gregory L. Hansen
Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
>news:cd1adv$gof$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
>| In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
>| Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>| >| GPS?
>| >
>| >A bunch of satellites continually updated from ground stations because
>some
>| >relativist idiot misprogrammed them and the need constant correction to
>| >ground time.
>| >Androcles
>|
>| A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
>| the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
>| kilometer per day between corrections.
>
>Which one, the GR "correction" or the SR "correction"?
There's no such thing as a GR correction that does not include an SR
correction.
--
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea -- massive,
difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of
mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it. "
-- Gene Spafford, 1992
Dirk Van de moortel
"Tom Potter" <t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:2lkrd5F...@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> news:cd1adv$gof$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
[snip]
> > A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
> > the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
> > kilometer per day between corrections.
>
> As I explained in a lengthy, explicit post
> on the GPS system several months ago,
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/FullHoles.html
Dirk Vdm
Tom Potter
I am pleased to see that Sam Wormly agrees with me,
that calling folks a "fucking idiot" is rude, crude, and sociopathic.
I was disappointed to see that Sam was unable to
comprehend that I used the phrase to call attention
to the previous poster's use of the phrase.
I am confident that the intelligent readers in the
news group got the drift of my message,
and hopefully the poster that used the phrase
also got the message, and will clean up his act.
And hopefully Sam Wormly will clean up his act,
and chastise the people who regularly call folks
nasty names, and posters who post URLs
designed to insult other folks.
This kind of behavior is rude, crude, anti-social,
and sociopath, and I am pleased to see that
Sam is joining with me in calling attention to it.
Sam Wormley
>
> "Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> news:40F42054...@mchsi.com...
> > Tom Potter wrote:
> > >
> > > If this thread continues,
> > > I'll Google my old post,
> > > and repost it to illustrate this.
> >
> > Crank Information
> > http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3APotter
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Tom+Potter%22+site%3Awww.crank.net
>
> As can be seen,
> Sam Wormley does what most losers do,
> when they are unable to address an issue effectively,
> he tries to make the messenger the issue.
>
I "googled" your old posts for you. A record for the world to see
of all your glorious posts right out of the horse's ass.
-Sam Wormley
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#Relativity
Sam Wormley
>
> A debit to the State of Colorado.
> You are a sociopath... as always VisiousVarney.
>
Hey Potter, what makes you think that Dr. Varney is in Colorado?
He is busy contributing to the physics knowledge when he is not
suffering fools such as yourself [not] gladly.
Sam Wormley
>
> As I explained in a lengthy, explicit post
> on the GPS system several months ago,
> the what makes the GPS system work
> are stable oscillators, fast cross-correlation computers,
> consistency in the speed of radio waves,
> and spread spectrum technology.
>
Pity Potter--You left out a few essentials regarding satellite
based navigation. The modest list below includes some of the
"pieces" necessary for accurate global satellite based navigation
including a full dozen corrections based on SR and GTR.
o rocket technology
o accurate survey and modeling of the earth's surface
o Keplarian mechanics
o precise orbital monitoring
o radiation hardening
o accurate models of the Earth's ionosphere and troposphere
o fruits of quantum mechanics
- atomic clocks
- integrated electronics
- solar power technology
- extremely low noise sensitive RF electronics
- computer processing chips
o fruits of special and general relativity
- two major relativistic corrections to satellite clocks
- another ten relativistic corrections
o robust mathematical signal processing correlation receivers
- Doppler
- Shannon
- Hamming
- Gibbs
- Fourier
- Cooley-Tukey
Sam Wormley
>
> This kind of behavior is rude, crude, anti-social,
> and sociopath, and I am pleased to see that
> Sam is joining with me in calling attention to it.
>
Let me also call your attention to a few essentials regarding
Tom Potter
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:40f5...@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
As my pappy used to say,
"You get better information from the horses mouth,
than from a horses ass."
An old post of mine about the GPS system follows.
Straight from the horses mouth.
For more of my articles on the GPS system,
do a Google search on "tom potter" and GPS.
Of course, if you prefer getting stuff from a horses ass,
by all means, visit Dork's web site.
1. Light travels at a constant speed
of 299 792.458 meters per second
in the absence of matter,
and in media with sparse matter,
such as the Earth's atmosphere.
2. Time interval measurements of E-M waves in air, and space,
are equivalent to distance measurements.
distance = time interval * C
3. Synchronized clocks can be used to
quantize the distance between the points
by measuring the time it takes light/radio waves
to travel from one point to another.
Clock(A) sends a message that it is time(X).
Clock(B) notes that it is time(X) + I1 on its' clock.
The distance between the clocks is
I1 * C
In other words, systems of synchronized clocks
can quantize the distances between the clocks,
by transmitting the time at each clock's location.
Any clock can determine the distances
between it and other clocks,
by simply determining time(I) for all of the other clocks.
For example,
if one measures a time delay of "I1" of a radio wave
from New York, they must be somewhere on
the surface of a sphere, with a distance radius of I1 * C,
centered about New York
If they also measure a time delay of "I2" of a radio wave
from San Francisco, they must be somewhere on
the surface of a sphere, with a distance radius of I2 * C,
centered about San Francisco.
If they measure both,
they must be on a circle represented by the
intersection of the two spheres.
As can be seen, the measurement of a third point,
would be the intersection of the circle with
another sphere, and would let tell the observer that
they are on one of two points.
A fourth measurement would resolve the situation,
and tell them at which of the two points they are
located.
4. As the GPS satellites are moving,
whereas New York and San Francisco are located
at fixed points (With respect to Earth bound observers.),
it is necessary that GPS receivers know where
the satellites were when they transmitted the time.
This is handled, by having each satellite
transmit its' position in space, along with
the time data.
Each satellite not only transmits where it is ("ephemeris data"),
it transmits its' orbital data ("almanac data"),
along with its' time.
The "ephemeris data"
serves the same purpose to the GPS receiver,
as the Sun does is to a sailor with a sextant.
5. Ground stations continuously monitor
the satellites' orbits and transmissions,
and when changes exceed certain amounts,
signals are sent to the offending satellites,
updating their "almanac data", their "ephemeris data",
their time settings, and drift in their clocks
with respect to the master clock on Earth.
In other words, the ground station monitors the data
transmitted by the satellites and when necessary
sends them signals that tells them, that their
clock is x nano-seconds fast, their orbit has changed to
such and such (Perhaps because of dust drag, etc.),
that their "ephemeris data" should be xxx, etc.
The GPS clocks are set,
to some reference time,
just as your digital watch is,
the only difference being that
the ticks are far more stable, and much finer,
nanoseconds, rather than tenths of seconds.
Drifts in oscillators are corrected by
inserting "ticks", and by adjusting
divider circuits to divide by the desired count.
6. As portable GPS receivers do not have
extremely stable oscillators, they must
derive precision times from the satellites.
As the satellites are at an altitude of about 11,000 miles,
and radio waves travel 186,000 miles in one second,
it takes about .006 seconds for the
time, ephemeris, and almanac data
to reach a sea level receiver.
This means that in a typical transmission,
the GPS receiver must subtract about .006 seconds
from its' clock, in order to set its' clock.
GPS receivers receive and average the times
from several satellites, and recursively
home in on the master time, and make an adjustment
for recursively computed position of the satellite.
In other words, at the reception of the first data,
the GPS receiver knows the master time to about .006 seconds
higher than the first time it receives,
and as it picks up signals from other satellites,
and recursively computes the distances to the
satellites, and averages out multi-path signal variations,
its' own clock homes in on the master clock time.
As the satellites take about 12 hours
(43200 seconds) to orbit the Earth,
and the ephemeris data takes about .006 seconds
to reach the receiver, this means that
the GPS receiver knows where the
satellite is to an accuracy of about one part in
43000 / .006 = 71600000 parts,
even without clock and ephemeris corrections.
Considering that the Earth is about
24,000 miles or 126,000,000 feet in circumference,
this amounts to a sphere of uncertainty of about
1.76 feet at sea level.
7. The clocks used in the GPS system are extremely stable.
They have a long term and short term stability
of about 1 part in 10^14 over one day and even months.
As there are about 3 x 10^13 MICROseconds in a year,
this means that the GPS clocks can maintain microsecond
agreement for over a year, even if no corrections are made.
But of course, adjustments ARE made to the clocks
on a regular basis by a ground clock,
to which all of the GPS clocks are referenced to.
8. As the satellites have a life expectancy of about 10 years,
their orbits are very stable.
In other words, when ground stations get a fix on a satellite's orbit,
we know pretty much where the satellite will be for a long time, and
GPS receivers on the ground have an extremely dependable target to sight on
9. There is some variation in the time it takes the
signal to reach the receiver due to multi paths
taken by the radio wave to the GPS receiver,
so GPS receivers are programmed to compute out the
multi-path variations, and to compute the time,
using the most reliable data it gets from
several satellites.
10. The GPS satellites broadcast on two carrier frequencies:
L1 at 1575.42 MHz and L2 at 1227.6 MHz.
They transmit a "coarse acquisition code" at 1.0 bits per nanosecond and
a "precision code" at a bit rate of 10.230 bits per nanosecond.
As light travels at about 300,000,000 meters per second,
or 300 meters in one micro-second,
a one nano second error would result in an error sphere of about .3 meters
( One foot), and a 10 nanosecond error would
result in an error of about 3 meters or ten feet.
By averaging data from multiple satellites,
a receiver can reduce the timing uncertainty
due to multipaths, and can reduce the error sphere
by only averaging where the error spheres
of several satellites overlap.
The single largest contributor to time transfer uncertainty is path delay,
the delay introduced as the signal travels from the satellite
to the receiver.
In order to measure the time interval most accurately,
a quasi-random code is used. The GPS receiver performs
an auto-correlation on the quasi-random signal
in order to eliminate the jitter in the leading edge
of the transmitted signal, caused by transmitter noise,
receiver noise, environmental noise, multipath signal combining,
jamming, etc.
In other words, a segment of the quasi-random signal is
incrementally delayed, and multiplied by the signal stream.
If two string of random numbers are multiplied,
a maximum occur when and if the strings match,
otherwise the product tends toward zero.
The Military can play games with the GPS signals by
juggling the "precision code" signals,
and thus messing up the accuracy
to which a GPS receiver can the time interval.
In summary, the largest contributor
to time transfer uncertainty is caused by
variations path delay, due to signals reflected
off mountains, buildings, etc., and as note,
much of the path delay errors can be averaged out,
because the satellites are moving, and signals
are received from several satellites.
The best GPS receivers can,
by using the methods addressed above,
reduce the uncertainty in time to about one nanosecond,
which amounts to a sphere of uncertainty of about one foot.
Androcles
Easy, Tom. Earth's atmosphere is thick stuff, not sparse at all. Heck, the
setting or rising sun is red, and light is refracted. If the horizon wasn't
so close, even the red light wouldn't penetrate. Water may look clear, but
the sunlight doesn't penetrate to ocean depths, it's dark down there.
| 2. Time interval measurements of E-M waves in air, and space,
| are equivalent to distance measurements.
|
| distance = time interval * C
Nope. distance = time interval * (c+v), where v is the relative speed of the
source, in the absence of a medium.
|
| 3. Synchronized clocks can be used to
| quantize the distance between the points
| by measuring the time it takes light/radio waves
| to travel from one point to another.
Only if v = 0.
Androcles.
Dirk Van de moortel
"Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message news:cd3d6o$5jg$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> In article <hI7Jc.2816$Wu4.33...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
> Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
> >news:cd1adv$gof$2...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> >| In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
> >| Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >| >| GPS?
> >| >
> >| >A bunch of satellites continually updated from ground stations because
> >some
> >| >relativist idiot misprogrammed them and the need constant correction to
> >| >ground time.
> >| >Androcles
> >|
> >| A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
> >| the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
> >| kilometer per day between corrections.
> >
> >Which one, the GR "correction" or the SR "correction"?
>
> There's no such thing as a GR correction that does not include an SR
> correction.
Even *that* he won't be able to understand.
Dirk Vdm
Randy
> In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
> Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>news:cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com...
>>| In sci.physics Gregory L. Hansen <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>>| > In article <l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04>,
>>| > Robert J. Kolker <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>| > >
>>| > >
>>| > >Leonard Pardin wrote:
>>| > >
>>| > >> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
>>| > >> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost
>>a
>>| > >> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
>>| > >> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In
>>addition,
>>| > >> the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
>>| > >> unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
>>| > >> holes, and black holes.
>>| > >
>>| > >Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
>>| > >which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
>>| > >bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
>>| > >
>>| > >Bob Kolker
>>|
>>| > Electronic devices are well in the realm of non-relativistic quantum
>>| > mechanics.
>>|
>>
>>A bunch of satellites continually updated from ground stations because some
>>relativist idiot misprogrammed them and the need constant correction to
>>ground time.
>>Androcles
>
>
> A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
> the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
> kilometer per day between corrections.
>
Hi
I don't have (nor am I qualified) to have any opinion on the validity of
relativity.
However when I read the very interesting article that Uncle Al
referenced http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf I could not help
wondering if the implementation they chose really required the
adjustments for relativity.
I was pretty much convinced it did until I read the Summary starting on
page A-8. In part it states:
"The clock in the hand held receiver on Earth is far less accurate than
the atomic clock in each satellite, so the signal from a fourth
satellite is employed to correct the Earth clock."
If they mean actual time values are sent to the Earth clock then the
only use of the receiver's clock that I can see is to calculate a rough
positioning in order to deduce the amount of satellite to receiver
propogation delay to add on to the time value received. For even more
precision the calculation could be done again after the Earth clock is
corrected.
What am I missing here ?
Randy
David Evens
wrote:
Inreality, of course, as Potty's opwn references show, no progress was
made in semiconductor development until quantum theory was applied and
what was actually happening was worked out. Then, discrete component
progress was rapid. Integrated circuits, of course, remained a
semiconductor lab curiosity until NASA, realising that they HAD to
have more compact electronics if they were going to get a ship back to
Earth from Lunar orbit, paid great gobs of money to turn them into
something useful, leading to the microprocessor revolution that began
in the 1970's. (If you ever get asked what the Apollo program got us
for those billions, just point to everything with integrated circuits,
every kind of orbital device, and nearly every kind of remote sensing
system in existence.)
Double-A
[snip]
> General Relativity is more of a religious/ethnic religion,
> than a useful engineering tool.
And just which ethnic religion would that be, Tom?
Double-A
Bilge
>
>Androcles wrote:
>
>> Of course they are not. They are very useful, but what does that have to do
>> with wasting money on relativity?
>
>For a company that either puts up, maintains or uses GPS, relativity is
>not a waste. However that may be, no public funds should be expended to
>scientic work unless it is explicitly and completely for the purpose of
>making weapons for the military or police. One might argue that medical
>research for preventing contagions fall under the rubric of national or
>community defense.
Why should the military or the police be an exception? There is no
difference between what you see as a justifiable expenditure of public
funds and what anyone else sees as justifiable, other than personal
preference.
>Anything else ought to be strictly private. What people spend their own
>money on is by definition not a waste to -them, the rightful owners of
>the money-.
Simply by replacing ``making weapons for the military or police'' with
what anyone else considers a justifiable reason to collect taxes and spend
public money, your exact reasoning could be used by everyone in the world.
So-called conservatives and liberals have exactly the same philosophy. The
only difference is the implementation and choice of misleading cliches
used to peddle the same philosophy to others who identify with the type of
individual to whom the cliches are targeted.
Ballisticus
(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
>Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>><ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
>>news:cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com...
>>| In sci.physics Gregory L. Hansen <glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>>| > In article <l2wIc.61323$MB3.44465@attbi_s04>,
>>| > Robert J. Kolker <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>| > >
>>| > >
>>| > >Leonard Pardin wrote:
>>| > >
>>| > >> Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
>>| > >> spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit. Almost
>>a
>>| > >> hundred years after Einstein first proposed his General Theory of
>>| > >> Relativity, the theory is still unproved and unproveable. In
>>addition,
>>| > >> the theory has spawned an astonishing array of unproved and
>>| > >> unproveable bastard theories like time warps, vacuum energy, worm
>>| > >> holes, and black holes.
>>| > >
>>| > >Special Theory of Relativity is at the base of quantum electrodynamics,
>>| > >which among other things is responsible for the computer you are
>>| > >bitching and moaning with. You are a fucking idiot.
>>| > >
>>| > >Bob Kolker
>>|
>>| > Electronic devices are well in the realm of non-relativistic quantum
>>| > mechanics.
>>|
>>| GPS?
>>
>>A bunch of satellites continually updated from ground stations because some
>>relativist idiot misprogrammed them and the need constant correction to
>>ground time.
>>Androcles
>
>A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
>the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
>kilometer per day between corrections.
Cesium clocks speed up a little when in free fall and cutting the Earth's
magnetic field.
That is what is observed...unless, of course, one believes in Paul Andersen's
famous 'tick fairies'.
See why relativity is wrong:
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
Michael Varney
"Ballisticus" <B@..> wrote in message
news:9eecf0drgrvj5erj1...@4ax.com...
<SNIP>
> Cesium clocks speed up a little when in free fall and cutting the Earth's
> magnetic field.
You are an idiot.
Robert J. Kolker
Bilge wrote:
> Why should the military or the police be an exception? There is no
> difference between what you see as a justifiable expenditure of public
> funds and what anyone else sees as justifiable, other than personal
> preference.
Wrong. Governments are instituted specifically for the defense of the
lives and property of its citizens and has no other legitimate purpose.
So any scientific research that does not directly apply to a proper
purpose of government should not be supported by taxpayer funds.
What are the proper functions of government.
1. Maintain an army.
2. Maintain a police force.
3. Maintain courts of law.
An argument could be made for
4. Take steps necessary to prevent contagious deadly diseases that can
ravage the public (like smallpox) and enforce quarantines.
Governments do not exist for the moral improvement or perfection of its
citizens or to promote their finer sensibilities, like artistic
discernment. That is way tax money should not go to the arts (theatre,
fine arts, music etc etc) regardless of how desireable these things may
be. Governments do not exist to "civilize" its citizens, but rather to
punish crooks, murderers and defrauders and to fight wars.
Period.
Bob Kolker
Androcles
"Ballisticus" <B@..> wrote in message
news:9eecf0drgrvj5erj1...@4ax.com...
Or cutting the g-field between Earth and Moon. We cannot be certain as to
the cause, that would require investigation that no relativist would
consider.
Androcles.
|
| That is what is observed...unless, of course, one believes in Paul
Andersen's
| famous 'tick fairies'.
Tick fairies are useful when used correctly.
Androcles
Leonard Pardin
> Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
> >
> > A bunch of satellites updated once per day from ground stations. Without
> > the relativistic consideration, the error would drift by about a
> > kilometer per day between corrections.
> >
>
> Hi
>
> I don't have (nor am I qualified) to have any opinion on the validity of
> relativity.
>
> However when I read the very interesting article that Uncle Al
> referenced http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf I could not help
> wondering if the implementation they chose really required the
> adjustments for relativity.
>
> I was pretty much convinced it did until I read the Summary starting on
> page A-8. In part it states:
>
> "The clock in the hand held receiver on Earth is far less accurate than
> the atomic clock in each satellite, so the signal from a fourth
> satellite is employed to correct the Earth clock."
>
> If they mean actual time values are sent to the Earth clock then the
> only use of the receiver's clock that I can see is to calculate a rough
> positioning in order to deduce the amount of satellite to receiver
> propogation delay to add on to the time value received. For even more
> precision the calculation could be done again after the Earth clock is
> corrected.
>
> What am I missing here ?
>
> Randy
I think you might be missing the need for a correction between the
system's orbiting clocks and the system's earthbound clock. A
correction is necessary, so the relativists claim Relativity applies.
In fact, all the clocks keep exactly the same time; the correction is
necessary only because of the shift in frequency in the signal from
the orbiting satellites to the earth station. Relativity is not
involved.
But see how the clever relativists handle the situation in a
desperate attempt to find some support for Relativity theory. From
that same article, here is a quote from Clifford Will:
"A question that is often asked is, Do the intrinsic rates of the
emitter and receiver or of the clock change, or is it the light signal
that changes frequency during its flight? The answer is that it
doesn't matter. Both descriptions are physically equivalent."
We see, then, that although any clock adjustment in the GPS system
is unrelated to Relativity, it can be thought of as related to
Relativity because it is "equivalent." The result: Relativists claim
that GPS could not work without Relativity.
Sam Wormley
>
> "A question that is often asked is, Do the intrinsic rates of the
> emitter and receiver or of the clock change, or is it the light signal
> that changes frequency during its flight? The answer is that it
> doesn't matter. Both descriptions are physically equivalent."
>
For those wishing to put that quote in context, see:
Student Project on the Global Positioning System by E.F. Taylor
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
Gregory L. Hansen
Ballisticus <B@the..> wrote:
>On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:07 +0000 (UTC), glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu
>(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>
>>In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
>>Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>><ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
>>>news:cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com...
>
>Cesium clocks speed up a little when in free fall and cutting the Earth's
>magnetic field.
Really? How does that happen? How does a cesium clock operate, and how
is the time affected by gravitational and magnetic fields?
--
"Is that plutonium on your gums?"
"Shut up and kiss me!"
-- Marge and Homer Simpson
Richard Henry
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oTrJc.96237$Oq2.36214@attbi_s52...
> Governments are instituted specifically for the defense of the
> lives and property of its citizens and has no other legitimate purpose.
> So any scientific research that does not directly apply to a proper
> purpose of government should not be supported by taxpayer funds.
>
> What are the proper functions of government.
>
> 1. Maintain an army.
>
> 2. Maintain a police force.
>
> 3. Maintain courts of law.
>
> An argument could be made for
>
> 4. Take steps necessary to prevent contagious deadly diseases that can
> ravage the public (like smallpox) and enforce quarantines.
>
> Governments do not exist for the moral improvement or perfection of its
> citizens or to promote their finer sensibilities, like artistic
> discernment. That is way tax money should not go to the arts (theatre,
> fine arts, music etc etc) regardless of how desireable these things may
> be. Governments do not exist to "civilize" its citizens, but rather to
> punish crooks, murderers and defrauders and to fight wars.
>
> Period.
Well, that is certainly definite.
How about maintaining surveys and records of property ownership?
How about maintaining a system of common streets and roads?
How about providing a dependable supply of healthy water?
How about safeguarding public health and safety by picking up trash, garbage
and sewage and disposing of it in a healthy manner?
How about maintaining standards for building construction, including review,
inspection and approval services?
How about providing street lighting in the interests of public safety
(reducing night-time crime and traffic accidents)?
How about constructing dams, drains and basins to reduce the damage caused
by inevitable, but unpredictable, flooding?
How about providing public parks and playgrounds?
How about providing a system of public education?
Governments exist for the purposes desired by the governed. If that
includes "Athenian" purposes such as fine arts (or schools, or parks, or
streetlights, etc.), which you do not wish to support, perhaps you should
sell out and move to a more "Spartan" dominion.
Len Gaasenbeek
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oTrJc.96237$Oq2.36214@attbi_s52...
>
>
To Bob,
What about educating its young people, the building of roads, bridges,
hospitals and the immunization of its people to prevent them from getting
sick, to mention a few other things.
"What is madness? To have erroneous perceptions and to reason correctly from
them."
Voltaire; Philosophical Dictionary, 'Madness'.
Len.
.................................................................
Leonard Pardin
> In message <d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com>, Leonard
> Pardin <leop...@MailAndNews.com> writes
> >Never in the history of the scientific world has so much money been
> >spent to prove a theory that has provided so little benefit.
>
> crosspost between them.
>
What? Are you the usenet police? Well, you'll have to come and get
me, and you'll never take me alive, copper!
Besides, who do you think you are suggesting that Relativity is
not even a proper subject of discussion in physics. I dare you to get
up and say that outright in sci.physics.relativity. I can tell you the
response: Einstein is too deep for you, and you don't have the
proficiency in mathematics to understand Relativity. You probably
can't even define a Minkowski spacetime covariant hyperplane
collateral coefficient. You Dummy.
Randy
Thanks for the reply Leonard.
If by system's earthbound clock you mean the GPS receiver clocks then I
think I understand the need for a correction between the orbiting clocks
and the earthbound clocks. I will leave it to you guys to sort out the
reason for it although the frequency change as an equivalent reason is
very interesting :)
My question was more to do with the implementation they used.
My interpretation of the article's summary (specifically the part I
quoted) is that they are continually correcting the earth based receiver
clock by sending orbiting clock time to it from a satellite, which
seemingly overrides the need to correct the earth based receiver clock
with calculated time corrections.
Randy
Dirk Van de moortel
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
You clearly have not understood the question and you clearly
have not understood the article.
>
> But see how the clever relativists handle the situation in a
> desperate attempt to find some support for Relativity theory.
You obviously are not well placed to decide whether "relativists"
[whatever that might be] are clever or not.
> From
> that same article, here is a quote from Clifford Will:
>
> "A question that is often asked is, Do the intrinsic rates of the
> emitter and receiver or of the clock change, or is it the light signal
> that changes frequency during its flight? The answer is that it
> doesn't matter. Both descriptions are physically equivalent."
>
> We see, then, that although any clock adjustment in the GPS system
> is unrelated to Relativity, it can be thought of as related to
> Relativity because it is "equivalent." The result: Relativists claim
> that GPS could not work without Relativity.
There is a difference between the clock rates. The difference
is exactly as predicted by the theory.
You don't like it of course. But then again, no idiot likes what
he doesn't understand, does he?
Dirk Vdm
Sam Wormley
Here is what you need--a very good read
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
.............. ...Having realised that we can depend on no outside
authority in bringing about a total revolution within the structure of our
own psyche, there is the immensely greater difficulty of rejecting our own
inward authority, the authority of our own particular little experiences and
accumulated opinions, knowledge, ideas and ideals. You had an experience
yesterday which taught you something and what it taught you becomes a new
authority --and that authority of yesterday is as destructive as the
authority of a thousand years. To understand ourselves needs no authority
either of yesterday or of a thousand years because we are living things,
always moving, flowing never resting. When we look at ourselves with the
dead authority of yesterday we will fail to understand the living movement
and the beauty and quality of that movement.
To be free of all authority, of your own and that of another, is
to die to everything of yesterday, so that your mind is always fresh, always
young, innocent, full of vigour and passion. It is only in that state that
one learns and observes. And for this a great deal of awareness is required,
actual awareness of what is going on inside yourself, without correcting it
or telling it what it should or should not be, because the moment you
correct it you have established another authority, a
censor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!................... ...
-- J. Krishnamurti,
--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Best Regards!
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:40F6F39F...@mchsi.com...
Robert J. Kolker
Richard Henry wrote:
>
> Well, that is certainly definite.
>
> How about maintaining surveys and records of property ownership?
Under protecting property.
>
> How about maintaining a system of common streets and roads?
The first turnpike in the Colonies was privately builts as were most of
the railroads. Government need not be involved.
>
> How about providing a dependable supply of healthy water?
The first municipal water supply (Cleveland O.) was privately funded and
built.
>
> How about safeguarding public health and safety by picking up trash, garbage
> and sewage and disposing of it in a healthy manner?
I mentioned protection against contagion, didn't I. By the was most
trash and garbage pickups are private.
>
> How about maintaining standards for building construction, including review,
> inspection and approval services?
Not necessary. Class action suits would do better. Few building code
inspectors to bride.
>
> How about providing street lighting in the interests of public safety
> (reducing night-time crime and traffic accidents)?
Questionable. London had streetlight privately funded for many years.
>
> How about constructing dams, drains and basins to reduce the damage caused
> by inevitable, but unpredictable, flooding?
That is an good open question.
>
> How about providing public parks and playgrounds?
Not a proper governmental function.
>
> How about providing a system of public education?
Not a governmental function. Until 1844 all education in the U.S. was
church sponsered or private. It was the dreadful Horace Mann who brought
the Prussian system of State Schooling to these shores.
>
> Governments exist for the purposes desired by the governed. If that
> includes "Athenian" purposes such as fine arts (or schools, or parks, or
> streetlights, etc.), which you do not wish to support, perhaps you should
> sell out and move to a more "Spartan" dominion.
The people or their representatives ordain government. The Constitution
of 1787 was brought into being by private citizens assembled for the
purpose.
When you get a chance read Thomas Paine's essay -Common Sense-.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
Len Gaasenbeek wrote:
> To Bob,
>
> What about educating its young people, the building of roads, bridges,
> hospitals and the immunization of its people to prevent them from getting
> sick, to mention a few other things.
Contagion control and quarantine might be a governmental function.
Bob Kolker
Leonard Pardin
> Leonard Pardin wrote:
> > We see, then, that although any clock adjustment in the GPS system
> > is unrelated to Relativity, it can be thought of as related to
> > Relativity because it is "equivalent." The result: Relativists claim
> > that GPS could not work without Relativity.
>
> Thanks for the reply Leonard.
>
> If by system's earthbound clock you mean the GPS receiver clocks then I
> think I understand the need for a correction between the orbiting clocks
> and the earthbound clocks. I will leave it to you guys to sort out the
> reason for it although the frequency change as an equivalent reason is
> very interesting :)
>
> My question was more to do with the implementation they used.
>
> My interpretation of the article's summary (specifically the part I
> quoted) is that they are continually correcting the earth based receiver
> clock by sending orbiting clock time to it from a satellite, which
> seemingly overrides the need to correct the earth based receiver clock
> with calculated time corrections.
>
> Randy
I didn't mean to burden you with info unrelated to your question.
I thought you were questioning orbital clock corrections.
As to the clocks in the hand-held receiver, I think you
interpreted the article correctly. The trick here is that the
hand-held clock has to be accurate only for a few moments while
establishing the fix. So the hand-held receiver can use an inexpensive
clock rather than a prohibitively expensive cesium clock. The
satellites send signals to the hand-held clock which then checks and
resets itself to the accurate time only for the brief time it takes to
fix the location. Clever, heh?
Sam Wormley
> As to the clocks in the hand-held receiver, I think you
> interpreted the article correctly. The trick here is that the
> hand-held clock has to be accurate only for a few moments while
> establishing the fix. So the hand-held receiver can use an inexpensive
> clock rather than a prohibitively expensive cesium clock. The
> satellites send signals to the hand-held clock which then checks and
> resets itself to the accurate time only for the brief time it takes to
> fix the location. Clever, heh?
Here is what you need--a very good read
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
Bilge
>
>Bilge wrote:
>
>> Why should the military or the police be an exception? There is no
>> difference between what you see as a justifiable expenditure of public
>> funds and what anyone else sees as justifiable, other than personal
>> preference.
>
>Wrong. Governments are instituted specifically for the defense of the
>lives and property of its citizens and has no other legitimate purpose.
>So any scientific research that does not directly apply to a proper
>purpose of government should not be supported by taxpayer funds.
[...]
>Governments do not exist for the moral improvement or perfection of its
>citizens or to promote their finer sensibilities, like artistic
>discernment. That is way tax money should not go to the arts (theatre,
>fine arts, music etc etc) regardless of how desireable these things may
>be. Governments do not exist to "civilize" its citizens, but rather to
>punish crooks, murderers and defrauders and to fight wars.
Just like all rationalizations, yours is self-contradictory. If the
government doesn't exist for ``moral improvement'' or ``perfection of its
citizens'', the government has no business enforcing the moral codes you
just mentioned with regard to punishing people. Just like everyone else,
you want the government to pay for what _you_ consider a justifiable
expense. The reason the government provides so many services is because
there are so many hypocrites, each of whom believes his/her idea of
a justifiable expense is really a government obligation.
Bill Hobba
"Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oTrJc.96237$Oq2.36214@attbi_s52...
>
>
> Bilge wrote:
>
> > Why should the military or the police be an exception? There is no
> > difference between what you see as a justifiable expenditure of public
> > funds and what anyone else sees as justifiable, other than personal
> > preference.
>
> Wrong. Governments are instituted specifically for the defense of the
> lives and property of its citizens and has no other legitimate purpose.
Bob I generally am not in favor of government intervention. But the purpose
of governments is basically to do what society demands of it. As Winston
Churchill said democracy is the worst form of government ever devised except
for any other one that has ever been tried. If you genuinely believe what
you wrote above (and I think it has a lot of validity) then you should be
able to convince propel to vote in governments to deliver it.
Problem is of course it is not that clear cut. For example take health. It
is generally recognized that the cost of health care is greatest in
countries with the least amount of socialised medicine. For health what you
basically end up with is lots if insurance companies vying for the same
amount of money. This means duplication of administrative systems, each
insurance company separately negotiating with hospitals to get the best
deal, and large advertising budgets for the zero sum game of pinching
clients form other companies. It is totally inefficient. It has been
proven that it is much better to have a universal health system run by the
government topped up by some kind of compulsory saving to pay for
emergencies. That is just one example. What you need to do is examine each
case on its merits and then convince the public. If you can not convince
the public then I suggest your idea may not be as totally obvious as you
think it is.
Thanks
Bill
Kenneth Doyle
> What are the proper functions of government.
Defend the borders and deliver the mail.
--
CodeCutter - good, fast and cheap; pick two.
Kenneth Doyle
news:Xns9528A018F84E5...@61.9.191.5:
> "Robert J. Kolker" <robert...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:oTrJc.96237$Oq2.36214@attbi_s52:
>
>> What are the proper functions of government.
>
> Defend the borders and deliver the mail.
er, we're talking about federal government and not state
government, aren't we?
Ballisticus
(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>In article <9eecf0drgrvj5erj1...@4ax.com>,
>Ballisticus <B@the..> wrote:
>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 18:42:07 +0000 (UTC), glha...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu
>>(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <6JVIc.2406$W75.28...@news-text.cableinet.net>,
>>>Androcles <andr...@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>><ji...@specsol-spam-sux.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:cd0ql8$je4$4...@mail.specsol.com...
>
>>
>>Cesium clocks speed up a little when in free fall and cutting the Earth's
>>magnetic field.
>
>Really? How does that happen? How does a cesium clock operate, and how
>is the time affected by gravitational and magnetic fields?
Time isn't affected. The clocks are. Their changed rate is observed by the
original observer in his original frame. He counts all the ticks emitted per
orbit by the moving clock. (unless the tick fairies are operative).
Both the ground observer and the moving clock can agree on a common time unit,
ONE ORBIT of the clock.
An observer traveling with the clock will count the same number of ticks PER
ORBIT as the ground observer (again, unless the tick fairies gobble some of
them up)
How could time be affected by the movement of a clock?
You could move thousands of clocks in different ways. Which way would 'time'
choose to go?
Do you have an aversion to logic like all other SRians?
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
............. ...You do see by yourself, how stupid you are and how you
are a full of a revenge as a full of a hate even about something you do not
know. The reason which it has had made you a strictly a mechanical as to
answer to something you have had not even seen yourself. As to also
something which over would be as it is a lesson which it could be an
adequate lesson for your entire existence.
............. ...However, for your information stoopido, I am a damn good
whether a stronger in an advanced Mathematics and a damn good as a stronger
too in so many languages. As in anything I do.
............. ...Therefore, that a most of the time, I do find their
native -Languages among anything else- people they do not know as I do, and
they are not as a stronger and as a flexible as I am, as in so many think
that I do and I know. The crucial reason, they do always send to me some
stupids to say to me any kind of a stupidity, they cannot say by
themeselves, or they do not understand neither.
--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Think About That!
"Uncle Al" <Uncl...@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:40F711D8...@hate.spam.net...
> "Ahmed Ouahi, Architect" wrote:
> >
> > .............. ...Having realised that we can depend on no
outside
> > authority in bringing about a total revolution within the structure of
our
> > own psyche,
>
> Bloviating idiot.
>
> > there is the immensely greater difficulty of rejecting our own
> > inward authority, the authority of our own particular little experiences
and
> > accumulated opinions, knowledge, ideas and ideals.
>
> Do the math.
>
> [snip bonehead English homework]
>
> > To be free of all authority, of your own and that of another,
is
> > to die to everything of yesterday, so that your mind is always fresh,
always
> > young, innocent, full of vigour and passion.
>
> Masterbate, wash your hands, get over yourself.
>
> [snip]
>
> Uncle Al says, "Mystics are baffled by the obvious yet possess a
> complete understanding of the nonexistent."
>
> If East Indians are so clever, why don't they have toilets?
>
> --
> Uncle Al
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
> http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
Tom Potter
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvand...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote
in message news:bkAJc.186224$hX5.9...@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
>
> "Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
> > We see, then, that although any clock adjustment in the GPS system
> > is unrelated to Relativity, it can be thought of as related to
> > Relativity because it is "equivalent." The result: Relativists claim
> > that GPS could not work without Relativity.
>
> There is a difference between the clock rates. The difference
> is exactly as predicted by the theory.
> You don't like it of course. But then again, no idiot likes what
> he doesn't understand, does he?
As can be seen from the following excerpt from a paper given at the
31st Annual Precise Time and Time Interval (PTTI) Meeting,
the "gravitational red shift" numbers for
"both general relativity and the quasi-Newtonian approach"
yield the same results, as far as frequency shift is concerned.
"According to general relativity, frequency gravitational shifts are the
consequence of time retardation in the vicinity of massive bodies. Time
retardation must cause the same relative shifts of frequencies for
oscillators of all types.
According to the quasi-Newtonian approach, frequency gravitational shifts
are caused by changes in parameters of oscillators: near a massive body the
effective mass of classical oscillators is increased, and the energy levels
of quantum oscillators are lowered. Thus, gravitational shifts in the cases
of classical and quantum oscillators have different natures, and the shift
predicted in the classical case are half the shift in the quantum case,
which in a linear approximation coincides with the prediction of general
relativity.
Note that both general relativity and the quasi-Newtonian approach agree
with the experiments performed so far: gravitational effects are tiny, and
they have only been observed with the help of precise quantum oscillators.
But recently an ultra-stable quartz; i.e., classical, oscillator became
available. It would be of interest to compare a quartz oscillator with a
quantum frequency standard onboard a plane, searching for a variation of
their frequency difference which is correlated with a change in altitude.
According to general relativity, the difference in their gravitational
shifts should be equal to zero. According to the quasi-Newtonian approach, a
20-km change in altitude should cause an effect on the order of 1.1 x 10-l*.
It could be detected by an ultra-stable quartz oscillator and by a
transportable H-maser for averaging times of about IO s with the sampling
time, i.e., the period of altitude change is several minutes long.
An absence of difference in gravitational relative shifts of frequencies of
quartz and hydrogen standards could be treated as an additional argument in
favor of time retardation in the vicinity of massive bodies."
The "classical" "gravitational red shift" equation is:
f = f0 * ( 1 + 1/2 * g * distance / C^2)
where "g" is about 9.8 meters per seconds^2
"distance" is about 10,000 kilometers or 10,000,000 meters,
and "C" is about 300,000,000 meters per second,
in the case of the GPS system in Earth orbit.
* Note that I have used the popular approximate values ("about").
Computing we get: 1.00000000054444444,
and subtracting one (1.0..) to get the difference,
we get the 5.4*10^-10 which is basically the number used
( Allowing for the distance from the surface of the Earth,
rather than the center, and for the variation in permittivity of the
ionosphere.)
in the GPS system to offset the "chip rate" (Frequency)
of the "P code" offset.
I dare say that the GR worshippers,
don't even understand why it is desirable
(But not essential.)
to have the "P-code" frequency offset.
I, for one,
would like to see one of them make an actual post about this,
rather than post a laundry list of useless URL's,
and make dogmatic statements asserting that GTR
is some sort of powerful model of reality,
and is essential to the GPS and other systems.
General Relativity is a Tower of Babel,
that generates more heat than light,
and wastes time, money and minds
on the pursuit of such things as
time travel, warped space, black holes, etc.
General Relativity is not a viable, cost-effective model,
and it spawns a host of GR charlatans,
who pretend to be privy to powerful, esoteric knowledge.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
--
Tom Potter http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp
Tom Potter
> Tom Potter wrote:
> >
> > A debit to the State of Colorado.
> > You are a sociopath... as always VisiousVarney.
> >
> Hey Potter, what makes you think that Dr. Varney is in Colorado?
> He is busy contributing to the physics knowledge when he is not
> suffering fools such as yourself [not] gladly.
Hopefully "Sam Wormley" will clue us in
on some specific "contributions" Dr. Varney
( Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...)
has made to "physics knowledge".
Now it may be, that Dr. Varney
( Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...)
has pissed away a lot of the taxpayer's hard earned dollars
conducting experiments of dubious value.
If Dr. Varney
( Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...)
is privy to powerful, useful information,
I'd like to see him make a lot of money
capitializing on it in the free market.
Frankly, I don't think that Dr. Varney
( Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...),
and many of the other physics, GTR and GPS phonies and charlatans
who feed off the taxpayers,
could hold down good jobs in the private sector,
or make any money in the free market
using their knowledge of physics.
As an individual who has interviewed, hired, and known
hundreds of PhD's,
I must point out,
that anyone can get a PhD degree by sponging off the taxpayer,
and/or his parents.
The quality of a person is measured by their
value to society, and not by some title they
inherited, bought, or was given to them because
they extended their puberty by sponging off the
taxpayers and/or their parents.
Tom Potter
> > > Tom Potter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If this thread continues,
> > > > I'll Google my old post,
> > > > and repost it to illustrate this.
> > >
> > > Crank Information
> > >
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3APotter
> > >
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Tom+Potter%22+site%3Awww.crank.net
> > As can be seen,
> > Sam Wormley does what most losers do,
> > when they are unable to address an issue effectively,
> > he tries to make the messenger the issue.
>
> I "googled" your old posts for you. A record for the world to see
> of all your glorious posts right out of the horse's ass.
I am pleased to see that Sam Wormly
acknowledges that he is a "horse's ass".
As my pappy used to say:
"You get better information from the horses mouth,
than from a horse's ass."
If anyone wants to get valid information about me,
they can visit my web site, which has all kinds of
information about me, my family and my ideas.
And if anyone wants to see how I view a particular issue,
for purposes of agreeing with me,
or for purposes of debating with me on some subject,
all they have to do is use Google to search on the posts
I have made on the subject,
and of course, if they are moral, and rational and truthful,
they will use SPECIFIC and COMPLETE quotes from my posts.
On the other hand, if they are dishonest and immoral,
they should make inferences, insults, and phony references,
and avoid engaging in a debate on the issues.
As can be seen, Sam continues to use his favorite reference,
the web site of a computer programmer,
who took some data processing classes
at a third rate California college.
As can be seen, this web site is the primary standard
that Sam uses for proof of his positions.
This tells you a lot about the quality of input from Sam Wormly.
Tom Potter
"Leonard Pardin" <leop...@MailAndNews.com> wrote in message
news:d746a243.04071...@posting.google.com...
As can be seen from the following excerpt from a paper given at the
--
Tom Potter http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp