The birth of General Relativity
Tom Potter
Einstein co-opted the ideas and methods of stress-analysis gurus,
particularly the ideas and methods of Cauchy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(physics)
Stress was introduced into the theory of elasticity
by Cauchy around ***1822***
Cauchy's stress principle asserts that when a continuum body is acted
on by forces,
there are internal reactions throughout the body.
Based on this principle, Cauchy demonstrated
that the state of stress at a point in a body
is completely defined by the
*** nine components of a second-order Cartesian tensor ***
called the Cauchy stress tensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustin_Louis_Cauchy
Augustin Louis Cauchy (21 August 1789 - 23 May 1857;
was a French mathematician.
His daughter indicated that his final words were "Jesus, Mary, and
Joseph."
Considering the race/religious bias of the Mass Media,
it is not surprising that the mass media uses Einstein
as their Poster Boy for Cauchy's great intellectual works,
much as they made Salk and Sabin Poster Boys
for the works of John Enders
in ending the scourge of polio.
Of course, as folks knowledgeable in science understand,
although Einstein applied Cauchy's stress and strain model
to the entire universe
it is not valid for modeling spaces occupied by sentient beings,
and is not a viable, cost-effective model
that sentient beings can use
to shape and control their world.
--
Tom Potter
http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm
Sam Wormley
> As folks knowledgeable in the history of science know,
> Einstein co-opted the ideas and methods of stress-analysis gurus,
> particularly the ideas and methods of Cauchy.
>
I join you in celebrating that there has never been a prediction
for relativity that's been contradicted by an observation. Pretty
good theory so far.
eric gisse
<tdp...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
That irrelevant screen can be condensed into two sentences:
a) Tom Potter learned that Cauchy had something to do with tensor
analysis, which GR uses.
b) Tom Potter still has no explanation for why the GPS works.
Spaceman
Poor Eric can not give a reason that they remove the clock malfunctions
for GPS to work at all.
If time really changed, why would we need to remove that "change"
to fix "time" to work correctly for GPS.
Again Eric proves he has no clue about the proper function of a clock.
:)
Igor
All you've done is validate the concept that math is used in physics.
I suppose next you'll say that I cannot use Laplace's equation to
solve a physics problem because I'd be stealing it.
Tom Potter
>
> All you've done is validate the concept that math is used in physics.
> I suppose next you'll say that I cannot use Laplace's equation to
> solve a physics problem because I'd be stealing it.
I am disappointed to see that I did not make my point
clear enough so that everyone could comprehend it.
My points were that
although Einstein has been deified by a friendly media,
and declared Time Magazine's
"Man of the Century"
thus conditioning millions of impressionable people
that Einstein's models such as General Relativity
that wastes time, money and minds
on such pursuits as time travel, warping through space,
worm holes to dump radioactive waste into,
the birth and death of the universe,
and the mind of God,
is more important than such models
as the DNA model which is used to
improve health, fight crime, improve food production,
reconstruct history, etc.,
and that Einstein basically ripped off others
such as Cauchy, Maxwell, Fitzgerald, etc.
and gave them little or no credit for their works.
The bottom line is that Einstein is the Poster Boy
of Jews in the Mass Media who brainwashed the
ignorant masses to think that a Jew was the most
intelligent man of all time, and naturally
that this reflected on them and their proclamations.
One can just look at America's economic situation,
Wall Street, and the Iraqi War to see how valuable
the Jewish input to the American system has been.
Tom Potter
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 19:33:37 -0700 (PDT),Tom Potter
>
>
> [snip]
>
> That irrelevant screen can be condensed into two sentences:
>
> analysis, which GR uses.
> b)Tom Potterstill has no explanation for why the GPS works.
I am pleased to see that my pal Gisse,
wants to know how the GPS system works.
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,
(From the center of the Earth.)
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.
Frankly the usefullness of the "precision code" is vastly overrated
as current commercial GPS receivers have the capacity to
phase lock with the carrier frequency.
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
a 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.
Eric Gisse
Tom Potter wrote:
[...]
> 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.
....and uncorrected clock drift is measured in tens of nanoseconds per
day. Welcome to why GR is used in the GPS.
Tom Potter
> Tom Potterwrote:
Sam is right when he suggests that General Relativity
is a "Pretty good theory"
if sentient beings aren't in the loop.
The bottom line is:
If you want to model
where no sentient being is, or has gone before,
use the stress and strain ideas and methods
of the Frenchman Cauchy (General Relativity).
On the other hand,
if you want to model times and spaces
occupied by sentient beings
use the mechanical and electro-magnetic
ideas and methods of the Englishmen, Newton and Maxwell.
Tom Potter
> Tom Potterwrote:
I am surprised to see that my pal Eric Gisse
is ignorant of the fact that atomic clocks DO NOT drift
"in tens of nanoseconds per day. "
What confuses my pal is that
what Galileo discovered centuries ago,
is that oscillators are affected by acceleration,
and that if one wants to have an oscillator
oscillate at the same rate in a different place,
one has to take the differences in accelerations
of the places into account.
The fact of the matter is
that the short term and long term drifts
of all of the oscillators used in the GPS system
is about the same.
It is interesting to see that although I have challenged
all of the General Relativity Cultists for years
to explain why it is desirable
BUT NOT ESSENTIAL
to have the oscillators in orbit
oscillate at the same rate as the
master oscillator on the ground,
NONE of the cultists seem to understand
why this is desirable.
All they do is just parrot their favorite
General Relativity Guru,
who is on the taxpayer dole.
One would think that if these Gurus and Cultists
were privity to powerful, esoteric knowledge
that they would use it to get off the tax payer dole
and make a few million bucks in the few market.
Androcles
"Tom Potter" <tdp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44a93d28-3713-473e...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 5, 7:34 pm, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 19:33:37 -0700 (PDT),Tom Potter
>
> <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> That irrelevant screen can be condensed into two sentences:
>
> a)Tom Potterlearned that Cauchy had something to do with tensor
> analysis, which GR uses.
> b)Tom Potterstill has no explanation for why the GPS works.
I am pleased to see that my pal Gisse,
wants to know how the GPS system works.
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.
==============================
Relative to what?
2. Time interval measurements of E-M waves in air, and space,
are equivalent to distance measurements.
=============================
What's an EM wave?
distance = time interval * C
=============================
What's 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.
================================
Standing waves do not travel.
Clock(A) sends a message that it is time(X).
Clock(B) notes that it is time(X) + I1 on its' clock.
================================
Now you are beginning to make sense. Messages
DO travel. You did not define I1. What's I1?
The distance between the clocks is
I1 * C
==================================
What's C?
In other words, systems of synchronized clocks
can quantize the distances between the clocks,
by transmitting the time at each clock's location.
====================================
Yes.
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
========================================
What's a radio wave?
If they also measure a time delay of "I2" of a radio wave
from San Francisco,
==========================================
Just now we were in New York.
What you need is this, Tom:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
Androcles
> On Oct 7, 4:36 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tom Potterwrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>> ....and uncorrected clock drift is measured in tens of nanoseconds per
>> day. Welcome to why GR is used in the GPS.
>
> I am surprised to see that my pal Eric Gisse
> is ignorant of the fact that atomic clocks DO NOT drift
> "in tens of nanoseconds per day. "
Sure they do. Some gain, some lose. Where the bigot Goose goes wrong
is in thinking his religion has something to do with it and can convince
someone else of his stupidity. GPS is accurate to 90 feet, uncorrected.
Modern combine harvesters are accurate to an inch using differential GPS.
That's quite simple, a local receiver obtains its GPS position and transmits
the difference between that and its actual position. The moving receiver
then adds its GPS position to the offset it obtains from the fixed local
receiver and thus knows its position exactly.
Jeff▲Relf
I, for one, don't. Invest in your mind; then, maybe, you won't lose it.
Where's “ up ” ? How fast is your clock ticking here vs. there ?
Einstein's General Relativity, your favorite topic,
answers these questions in fine detail.
Newton didn't know: “ c = 1, Energy = Mass ”.
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 7, 4:36 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Tom Potterwrote:
>
> > [...]
>
> > > 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.
>
> > ....and uncorrected clock drift is measured in tens of nanoseconds per
> > day. Welcome to why GR is used in the GPS.
>
> I am surprised to see that my pal Eric Gisse
> is ignorant of the fact that atomic clocks DO NOT drift
> "in tens of nanoseconds per day. "
We've been over this before, Tom.
http://www.leapsecond.com/history/Ashby-Relativity.htm
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
This is knowledge that is pushing well past 30 years old. What's your
excuse?
>
> What confuses my pal is that
> what Galileo discovered centuries ago,
> is that oscillators are affected by acceleration,
The period of a pendulum clock depends on its' acceleration. Welcome
to undergraduate mechanics.
>
> and that if one wants to have an oscillator
> oscillate at the same rate in a different place,
> one has to take the differences in accelerations
> of the places into account.
a) Explain how acceleration affects an atomic clock.
b) Clocks in orbit are in free-fall and experience no such
acceleration.
[snip]
Stop equating fundamental research with being 'on the dole'.
Sam Wormley
>
> 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.
>
>
Wrong again Potter... GPS must take into account atmospheric
DELAY and refraction.
Rest of the garbage snipped!
Sam Wormley
>
> My points were that
> although Einstein has been deified by a friendly media,
> and declared Time Magazine's
> "Man of the Century"
>
Einsteins contributions had (and have) a big impact on our
understanding of nature.
Eric Gisse
Potter hates fundamental & basic research. He'd be the kind of person
arguing against the British research into sonar, pre-WW1.
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:4JIGk.
376274$yE1.369887@attbi_s21...
I was surprised to see that Sam Wormley
did not know that:
"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."
and was disappointed to see that he snipped
the rest of my post that negates his strawman
such as:
"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.."
Tom Potter
> On Oct 7, 12:58 am,Tom Potter<tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 7, 4:36 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Tom Potterwrote:
>
> > > [...]
>
> > > > 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.
>
> > > ....and uncorrected clock drift is measured in tens of nanoseconds per
> > > day. Welcome to why GR is used in the GPS.
>
> > I am surprised to see that my pal Eric Gisse
> > is ignorant of the fact that atomic clocks DO NOT drift
> > "in tens of nanoseconds per day. "
>
> We've been over this before, Tom.
>
>
> This is knowledge that is pushing well past 30 years old. What's your
> excuse?
>
> > What confuses my pal is that
> > what Galileo discovered centuries ago,
> > is that oscillators are affected by acceleration,
>
> The period of a pendulum clock depends on its' acceleration. Welcome
> to undergraduate mechanics.
>
> > and that if one wants to have an oscillator
> > oscillate at the same rate in a different place,
> > one has to take the differences in accelerations
> > of the places into account.
>
> a) Explain how acceleration affects an atomic clock.
> b) Clocks in orbit are in free-fall and experience no such
> acceleration.
It is interesting to see that Eric Gisse
does not know that "g" changes with altitude,
and that "g" is acceleration.
g = G * m/r^2
I suggest that my pal Gisse visit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_(Earth)
If Gisse wants to know how much "g" affects
the oscillators on the GPS satellites,
I suggest that he read one of the many posts
that hanson has made about this.
Eric Gisse
[snip]
When your level of argument cannot surpass the 'physics for liberal
arts' level of detail, you should know that you do not know what you
are talking about.
The period of a crystal oscillator or an atomic clock is not a
function of acceleration - JUST PENDULUM CLOCKS. Get it right or don't
talk.
Y.Porat
----------------
if Poter clames that GPS has nothing to do with
curved space time
he is right!!
the GPS has many much more significant technical factors to deal with
and it does it by trial and error data fitting in system
the crooks (or suckers ) of GR
are decorating themselves with feathers that do not belong to them !!
ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------------
Eric Gisse
>
> ----------------
> if Poter clames that GPS has nothing to do with
> curved space time
> he is right!!
> the GPS has many much more significant technical factors to deal with
> and it does it by trial and error data fitting in system
No it doesn't. The GPS spec says differently.
When you were an engineer, did you read the specs or did you just do
whatever the fuck you wanted?
Y.Porat
idiot crook psychopath
go fuck yourself with the homosexual bears of Alasks
and go see a psychiatrist
bye
Y.P
=-------------------------
Eric Gisse
[...]
> idiot crook psychopath
> go fuck yourself with the homosexual bears of Alasks
> and go see a psychiatrist
> bye
> Y.P
> =-------------------------
I defer to your expertise in regarding how to find a homosexual bear.
Tom Potter
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4bcc3958-
a6f8-4bd9-960...@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
- No it doesn't. The GPS spec says differently.
-
- When you were an engineer, did you read the specs or did you just do
- whatever the fuck you wanted?
Gisse is a school boy from the Great Frozen North,
and does not yet know that people use the phrase
"relativity effects" from ignorance,
or to generically mean the
affects of acceleration and velocity.
What rational, intelligent system engineers do
is design closed loop system that adjust for
all effects including the DOPPLER EFFECT,
and the GALILEO EFFECT.
If the school boy read and understood my post,
he could see that it is not necessary to
get involved with tensors, worm holes,
rubber clocks and rulers, etc.
I assume that the boy understands the Doppler Effect,
and if he reads one of the many posts by hanson
about how acceleration is compensated for
by considering the Galileo Effect,
he might understand that.
The problem is that young boys
and people with inferiority complexes,
like to think they are privy to powerful, esoteric knowledge
as it makes them feel adequate.
And of course, Rabbis, Preachers, and people on the public dole
take advantage of this weakness in people.
to develop cult followings.
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:MLIGk.
320863$TT4.302692@attbi_s22...
In what ways have "Einsteins contributions"
"had a big impact on our understanding of nature"
and demonstrate that these contributions
were not actually contributions of others.
Note for example, that I pointed out that
Einstein's General Relativity "contribution"
was a ripoff of Cauchy's stress principle
which asserts that when a continuum body is acted
on by forces, there are internal reactions throughout the body.
Based on this principle, Cauchy demonstrated
that the state of stress at a point in a body
is completely defined by the
*** nine components of a second-order Cartesian tensor ***
called the Cauchy stress tensor.
Tom Potter
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:8ac6f6e6-
c683-4322-874...@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 7, 4:39 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
> Tom Potter wrote:
>
> > My points were that
> > although Einstein has been deified by a friendly media,
> > and declared Time Magazine's
> > "Man of the Century"
>
> Einsteins contributions had (and have) a big impact on our
> understanding of nature.
- Potter hates fundamental & basic research. He'd be the kind of
person
- arguing against the British research into sonar, pre-WW1.
Anyone who uses the taxpayer's money
to do research should justify the cost of the research
based on it asserted returns to the taxpayers,
and not waste the taxpayer's money on things
beyond man's capacity to ever experience
in time and space.
Can you imagine wasting the taxpayer's money
on such things as the beginning and end of the universe,
the mind of God, water witching, mind reading,
or even communicating with LGM's
if it cannot be justified in terms of
probability and return on investment?
It is easy to send other people's money
on your own fantasies.
Jeff▲Relf
best to find other things to occupy your mind.
If, as you claim, Einstein's General Relativity is a waste of time,
then you should be dwelling on other, more fruitful, activities.
Jeff▲Relf
so what ? I can think of a million bad investments.
What would you invest in, and why aren't you doing it ?
As it stands now, I see you spending most of your time
pondering General Relativity, like a fat-man ponders food.
Eric Gisse
[snip pointless discourse]
>
> What rational, intelligent system engineers do
> is design closed loop system that adjust for
> all effects including the DOPPLER EFFECT,
> and the GALILEO EFFECT.
And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
specifications.
You should know that there is no such thing as the 'Galileo effect'.
That's just something you made up.
[snip pointless discourse]
Sam Wormley
Tom Potter
As I indicated Eric,
"General Relativity" is a generic buzz word
generally used to indicate composite effects
such as the Doppler Effect, and the effect of acceleration
of an oscillating system discovered by Galileo hundreds
of years ago.
England sent ships all over the world with
standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
and Newton used the data collected by this project
to compute the shape of the Earth, the mass of the Moon,
and tides all over the world.
Trust me on this Eric.
The GPS System does not operated open loop
based on General Relativity with 13 Classical Physics hacks.
It is a closed loop system that takes all possible
factors into account and compensates for them
as much as possible.
No doubt General Relativity is the model of choice
if you want to design a time travel machine,
create a worm hole, or warp space,
or speculate about the beginning and end of the universe,
and the mind of God, but it is not too useful for
real world applications in spaces occupied by
sentient beings, or for that matter living
plants and animals.
Sam Wormley
>
> As I indicated Eric,
> "General Relativity" is a generic buzz word
>
There you go again, Potter. General relativity is very fruitful
theory invented by Albert Einstein which describes gravitational
forces in terms of the curvature in space caused by the presence
of mass.
hanson
>
> Tom Potter wrote:
>> As I indicated Eric,
>> "General Relativity" is a generic buzz word
>>
> There you go again, Potter. General relativity is very fruitful
> theory invented by Albert Einstein which describes gravitational
> forces in terms of the curvature in space caused by the presence
> of mass.
>
But Sam, when you fall off the protruding balcony
off the 5th floor, the masses, you and the earth,
are there for sure, and you fall down very, very
straight. So, where is that fruitful, curved space?
Thanks for the laughs, guys.... ahahahahnson
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 9, 8:47 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 9, 1:22 am,Tom Potter<tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [snip pointless discourse]
>
> > > What rational, intelligent system engineers do
> > > is design closed loop system that adjust for
> > > all effects including the DOPPLER EFFECT,
> > > and the GALILEO EFFECT.
>
> > And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
> > Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
> > specifications.
>
> > You should know that there is no such thing as the 'Galileo effect'.
> > That's just something you made up.
>
> > [snip pointless discourse]
>
> As I indicated Eric,
> "General Relativity" is a generic buzz word
Web 2.0 is a generic buzz word. General relativity has a specific
meaning because its a goddamn physical theory with specific
predictions for specific conditions.
>
> generally used to indicate composite effects
> such as the Doppler Effect, and the effect of acceleration
> of an oscillating system discovered by Galileo hundreds
> of years ago.
I would like you to not only document one instance of GR being used as
a catchall to include Doppler, but one peer-reviewed publication that
shows how acceleration affects an atomic clock.
Or do I actually have to tell you that GPS doesn't use pendulum
clocks? Because pendulum, water, and other weight-based clocks are the
only clocks whose period depends on acceleration.
>
> England sent ships all over the world with
> standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
> and Newton used the data collected by this project
> to compute the shape of the Earth, the mass of the Moon,
> and tides all over the world.
>
> Trust me on this Eric.
Why? You were a salesman, not an engineer or scientist involved in the
project. Hell you can't even be bothered to read the specifications
that contradict you!
> The GPS System does not operated open loop
That's right, it isn't an open loop. Retard.
> based on General Relativity with 13 Classical Physics hacks.
It incorporates GR, read the spec. God knows I've personally cited it
you more than a dozen times.
As for your '13 hacks', well that's just more shit you made up. You
ranted about those hacks for years but myseriously stopped talking
about them when you realized you couldn't even fucking tell me what
they are.
>
> It is a closed loop system that takes all possible
> factors into account and compensates for them
> as much as possible.
Including GR...just like the spec says. Read it some time.
>
> No doubt General Relativity is the model of choice
> if you want to design a time travel machine,
> create a worm hole, or warp space,
Since none of these things are possible with matter configurations
that don't violate practical energy conditions, your whining is pure
smoke.
> or speculate about the beginning and end of the universe,
So far so good.
> and the mind of God, but it is not too useful for
You are the one invoking god.
> real world applications in spaces occupied by
> sentient beings, or for that matter living
> plants and animals.
Except in GPS. Its' in the spec - read it some time.
Since you have personally said a few more things that are clearly
contradicted by the GPS spec, I will once again cite it to you so you
can see it then ignore it while spouting ignorant bullshit.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Do I have to read it for you to find the page numbers, or are you
equally capable of using F3?
>
> --
> Tom Potter
>
Y.Porat
>
> Do I have to read it for you to find the page numbers, or are you
> equally capable of using F3?
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > Tom Potter
>
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
---------------------
imbecil crackparroter
GPS has nothing to do with curved space time
if there is some curving of em waves
it is because Em waves HAS MASS !!
got it imbecil idot looser crook ??
Y.P
---------------------------------------
Eric Gisse
>
> > Do I have to read it for you to find the page numbers, or are you
> > equally capable of using F3?
>
> > > --
> > > Tom Potter
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ---------------------
> imbecil crackparroter
>
> GPS has nothing to do with curved space time
>
> if there is some curving of em waves
> it is because Em waves HAS MASS !!
> got it imbecil idot looser crook ??
>
> Y.P
> ---------------------------------------
Why does GR work then?
RustyJames
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ---------------------
> > imbecil crackparroter
>
> > GPS has nothing to do with curved space time
>
> > if there is some curving of em waves
> > it is because Em waves HAS MASS !!
> > got it imbecil idot looser crook ??
>
> > Y.P
> > ---------------------------------------
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
how do they account for a polar flip do they just change the software
or do we have to change the dials on our compass 180 degreese
Sue...
>
> > England sent ships all over the world with
> > standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
>
> PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
The energy stored in the SV's clock is compensated
before launch, just as you would compensate a
pendulum clock before you take it up Mount Everest.
EFFECT OF GRAVITY ON NUCLEAR RESONANCE
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0617511
Your self perceived right to decide what is
"relevant" is hereby revoked.
Sue...
BURT
> On Oct 9, 10:41 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > England sent ships all over the world with
> > > standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
>
> > PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
>
> The energy stored in the SV's clock is compensated
> before launch, just as you would compensate a
> pendulum clock before you take it up Mount Everest.
>
>
> Your self perceived right to decide what is
> "relevant" is hereby revoked.
>
> Sue...
General Relativity contains the hint of a fastest time uneffected by
gravity or accelerated motion. Time must have a slow down from a
fastest starting point.
Mitch Raemsch
Eric Gisse
>
>
>
> > > England sent ships all over the world with
> > > standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
>
> > PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
>
> The energy stored in the SV's clock is compensated
> before launch, just as you would compensate a
> pendulum clock before you take it up Mount Everest.
Really, how would you compensate a pendulum clock? I know the answer,
I just want to see if you can string the appropriate words together.
>
> EFFECT OF GRAVITY ON NUCLEAR RESONANCEhttp://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&ident...
A pendulum is not a resonator. Try again.
>
> Your self perceived right to decide what is
> "relevant" is hereby revoked.
Why? I'm educated in the field and I can read for comprehension. You
can do neither.
>
> Sue...
Sue...
> On Oct 10, 2:30 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 9, 10:41 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > England sent ships all over the world with
> > > > standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
>
> > > PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
>
> > The energy stored in the SV's clock is compensated
> > before launch, just as you would compensate a
> > pendulum clock before you take it up Mount Everest.
>
> Really, how would you compensate a pendulum clock? I know the answer,
> I just want to see if you can string the appropriate words together.
That is the problem I gave you to solve a few months ago.
>
>
>
EFFECT OF GRAVITY ON NUCLEAR RESONANCE
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&ident...
>
> A pendulum is not a resonator. Try again.
Search: "torsion pendulum frequency"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22torsion+pendulum+frequency%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
>
>
>
> > Your self perceived right to decide what is
> > "relevant" is hereby revoked.
>
> Why? I'm educated in the field and I can read for comprehension. You
> can do neither.
You aren't even educated in the English language
much less anything taught in an English speaking country.
What you mean to say is: "you don't understand the relevance".
Sue...
>
>
>
> > Sue...
>
>
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 10, 7:30 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 10, 2:30 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 9, 10:41 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > England sent ships all over the world with
> > > > > standard pendulums (Oscillating systems)
>
> > > > PENDULUM CLOCKS. Not relevant.
>
> > > The energy stored in the SV's clock is compensated
> > > before launch, just as you would compensate a
> > > pendulum clock before you take it up Mount Everest.
>
> > Really, how would you compensate a pendulum clock? I know the answer,
> > I just want to see if you can string the appropriate words together.
>
> That is the problem I gave you to solve a few months ago.
The answer actually isn't as simple as you think. But you have no
ability to read for comprehension, making the exercise pointless.
>
>
>
> EFFECT OF GRAVITY ON NUCLEAR RESONANCEhttp://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&ident...
A resonator is not a pendulum. Try again.
>
>
>
> > A pendulum is not a resonator. Try again.
>
> Search: "torsion pendulum frequency"
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22torsion+pendulum+frequency%22...
Or I could open one of my mechanics textbooks, or just write it from
memory.
>
>
>
> > > Your self perceived right to decide what is
> > > "relevant" is hereby revoked.
>
> > Why? I'm educated in the field and I can read for comprehension. You
> > can do neither.
>
> You aren't even educated in the English language
> much less anything taught in an English speaking country.
>
> What you mean to say is: "you don't understand the relevance".
I said exactly what I meant to say, which was that you are neither
educated in the field or able to read for comprehension.
>
> Sue...
>
>
>
> > > Sue...
>
>
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 9, 1:22 am, Tom Potter wrote:
> > What rational, intelligent system engineers do
> > is design closed loop system that adjust for
> > all effects including the DOPPLER EFFECT,
> > and the GALILEO EFFECT.
>
> And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
> Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
> specifications.
This is a blatant lie. As a multi-year super-senior, if you don’t
know, just keep your mouth shut. With al receivers doing acquisitions
of at least 4 satellites, GR correction is not needed. Just check
with the GPS manufacturers, and stop f*ckin’ spreading lies.
> You should know that there is no such thing as the 'Galileo effect'.
> That's just something you made up.
This should be a no-brainer. GPS requires a special frame of
reference to work which is right at the center of the earth. This
proves the principle of relativity wrong. Since the Galilean and the
Lorentz transforms both satisfy the obsolete principle of relativity
discovered more than 400 years ago by Galileo, GPS does not endorse
the ‘Galileo effect’. <shrug>
> [snip pointless discourse]
Snipping stuff you don’t understand explains why you still remain a
multi-year super-senior today at the very prestigious University of
Alaska. <shrug>
Hey, as long as Mommy is paying for all the bills, who give s a f*ck?
Koobee Wublee
General relativity is totally based on the nonsense of mathematics
involved. You don’t understand the mathematics, and that is fine.
You don’t have to believe in the Wizard of Oz. <shrug>
The curvature of space was first conceived Gauss. It was his student
Riemann who was able to explain mathematically what curved space
really meant. The curvature in spacetime was first played around by
the Goettingen group of mathematicians including Klein, Hilbert,
Minkowski, and Schwarzschild. Notes that the curvature in spacetime
in 4-dimensions is merely an extension to the curvature in space of 3
dimensions already characterized by Riemann and Christoffel.
Mathematically, it is no big deal to add one more dimension to the
equations. The field equations can only be derived with the Lagangian
Hilbet pulled out of his very own *ss. The while episode is totally
nonsense in which Einstein offered no contributions. Your messiah
Einstein was merely a nitwit, a plagiarist, and a liar. <shrug> You
need to get over with that. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 9, 5:47 am, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > On Oct 9, 1:22 am, Tom Potter wrote:
> > > What rational, intelligent system engineers do
> > > is design closed loop system that adjust for
> > > all effects including the DOPPLER EFFECT,
> > > and the GALILEO EFFECT.
>
> > And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
> > Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
> > specifications.
>
> This is a blatant lie.
So when the GPS specifications discuss the relativistic
corrections....they are lying? Or are you being stubborn?
>As a multi-year super-senior, if you don’t
> know, just keep your mouth shut. With al receivers doing acquisitions
> of at least 4 satellites, GR correction is not needed. Just check
> with the GPS manufacturers, and stop f*ckin’ spreading lies.
Of course the GR correction is not needed as far as the receivers are
concerned, as the correction is applied within the transmitter
hardware itself.
Do explain why the GPS receiver manufacturers are relevant to this
discussion when the corrections aren't performed there.
>
> > You should know that there is no such thing as the 'Galileo effect'.
> > That's just something you made up.
>
> This should be a no-brainer. GPS requires a special frame of
> reference to work which is right at the center of the earth. This
> proves the principle of relativity wrong.
Working in a handy coordinate system proves the PoR wrong? No, try
again.
> Since the Galilean and the
> Lorentz transforms both satisfy the obsolete principle of relativity
> discovered more than 400 years ago by Galileo, GPS does not endorse
> the ‘Galileo effect’. <shrug>
The 'Galileo effect' is something crackpotter made up. Do catch up.
>
> > [snip pointless discourse]
>
> Snipping stuff you don’t understand explains why you still remain a
> multi-year super-senior today at the very prestigious University of
> Alaska. <shrug>
>
> Hey, as long as Mommy is paying for all the bills, who give s a f*ck?
You don't know my situation or even how long I have been here, so why
don't you have a nice tall glass of shut the fuck up?
Y.Porat
> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4bcc3958-
>
> a6f8-4bd9-960b-8b873fe33...@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
> The problem is that young boys
> and people with inferiority complexes,
> like to think they are privy to powerful, esoteric knowledge
> as it makes them feel adequate.
>
> And of course, Rabbis, Preachers, and people on the public dole
> take advantage of this weakness in people.
> to develop cult followings.
>
> --
> Tom Potter
>
----------------------
in short :
to claim that GPS is one of the achiements of GR is a
damn shameless or stupid lie !!
GPS has nothing to do with curved space-time
Eric Gisse
>
> ----------------------
> in short :
> to claim that GPS is one of the achiements of GR is a
> damn shameless or stupid lie !!
>
> GPS has nothing to do with curved space-time
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Your denials of reality bore me.
Sam Wormley
> On Oct 9, 5:02 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> Tom Potter wrote:
>
>>> As I indicated Eric,
>>> "General Relativity" is a generic buzz word
>> There you go again, Potter. General relativity is very fruitful
>> theory invented by Albert Einstein which describes gravitational
>> forces in terms of the curvature in space caused by the presence
>> of mass.
>
> General relativity is totally based on the nonsense of mathematics
> involved. You don’t understand the mathematics, and that is fine.
> You don’t have to believe in the Wizard of Oz. <shrug>
>
<laughing>
Sam Wormley
> With al[l] receivers doing acquisitions
> of at least 4 satellites, GR correction is not needed.
>
Koobee should so some self education
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Tom Potter
Eric Gisse's preoccupation with what some spec writer wrote,
rather than simply examining how the GPS System
actually works, reminds me of the
navigator in the book "No time for Sergeants".
The navigator kept insisting they were over
the Gulf of Mexico, and telling the pilot
"Look at my charts!"
while the pilot kept pointing out
they were flying over a large city.
It is impossible to lead Eric through an explanation
of how the GPS System works,
because his mind is controlled by his
desire to have General Relativity play an essential role,
by what some spec writer wrote,
and by what some guy on the taxpayer dole wrote.
I used to read and write specs myself,
and come into contact with many spec writers,
and the people who told them what to write,
and I am very familiar with how specs are written.
Hopefully Eric will show where the specs spell out
the General Relativity algorithm used in the system.
If General Relativity is essential and is used,
how is the algorithm expressed in the programming
of the master station, the birds, and GPS receivers?
The spec writer could just as easily written
the Doppler and Galileo Effects are compensated for,
but what sounds better in this day and age?
And of course, a closed loop system compensates
for many effects, temperature, velocity effects, acceleration
effects,
pressure, drift due to aging of components, etc.
I, for one, am still anxiously awaiting for the General Relativity
Guru's
to design a time travel machine, a worm hole generator,
or a space warp rocket ship.
Or maybe design a machine, a bridge, a chemical compound,
a DNA sequence, a refrigerator, etc.
Eric Gisse
[...]
Let me ask you a simple question...
How do you know how the global position system was designed and built
since you had no part in the process and refuse to read the published
specifications?
Tom Potter
The difference between you and me Gisse,
is that I analyze how things HAVE TO WORK,
and you believe what is written in some book,
on some paper, told to you by someone in authority,
told to you by mass media, etc.
That's why you are good cult material,
and I am an independent, creative thinker
who has helped many people in science and industry
solve problems.
Jeff▲Relf
Eric Gisse
> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:
>
>
> >On Oct 11, 6:50 am, Tom Potter <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >[...]
>
> >Let me ask you a simple question...
>
> >How do you know how the global position system was designed and built
> >since you had no part in the process and refuse to read the published
> > specifications?
>
> The difference between you and me Gisse,
> is that I analyze how things HAVE TO WORK,
> and you believe what is written in some book,
> on some paper, told to you by someone in authority,
> told to you by mass media, etc.
>
> That's why you are good cult material,
> and I am an independent, creative thinker
> who has helped many people in science and industry
> solve problems.
That didn't answer the question. Read the question, and try again.
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 10, 10:28 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
> > > Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
> > > specifications.
>
> > This is a blatant lie.
>
> So when the GPS specifications discuss the relativistic
> corrections....they are lying? Or are you being stubborn?
The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug> See below.
> > As a multi-year super-senior, if you don’t
> > know, just keep your mouth shut. With al[l] receivers doing
> > acquisitions of at least 4 satellites, GR correction is not needed.
> > Just check with the GPS manufacturers, and stop f*ckin’ spreading
> > lies.
>
> Of course the GR correction is not needed as far as the receivers are
> concerned,
So, finally you have agreed. You have always argued otherwise.
> as the correction is applied within the transmitter
> hardware itself.
The only requirement is to allow all satellites to synchronize with
the same rate of change in clock. So, where is the relativistic
correction on board the satellites?
> Do explain why the GPS receiver manufacturers are relevant to this
> discussion when the corrections aren't performed there.
<shrug>
> > This should be a no-brainer. GPS requires a special frame of
> > reference to work which is right at the center of the earth. This
> > proves the principle of relativity wrong.
>
> Working in a handy coordinate system proves the PoR wrong? No, try
> again.
GPS requires a special frame of reference to work which is right at
the center of the earth. This proves the principle of relativity
wrong.
> > Since the Galilean and the
> > Lorentz transforms both satisfy the obsolete principle of relativity
> > discovered more than 400 years ago by Galileo, GPS does not endorse
> > the ‘Galileo effect’. <shrug>
>
> The 'Galileo effect' is something crackpotter made up. Do catch up.
I understand what that mean. You don’t because of your own
ignorance. <shrug>
> > Snipping stuff you don’t understand explains why you still remain a
> > multi-year super-senior today at the very prestigious University of
> > Alaska. <shrug>
>
> > Hey, as long as Mommy is paying for all the bills, who give s a f*ck?
>
> You don't know my situation or even how long I have been here, so why
> don't you have a nice tall glass of shut the fuck up?
With the economic conditions like these we are facing, don’t you think
you should give your mommy some break?
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 10, 11:41 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > On Oct 10, 10:28 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > > And that's what the designers did, which includes general relativity.
> > > > Which is why the GR correction is written in the GPS technical
> > > > specifications.
>
> > > This is a blatant lie.
>
> > So when the GPS specifications discuss the relativistic
> > corrections....they are lying? Or are you being stubborn?
>
> The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug> See below.
Why is it a part of the GPS spec? Or do you take the added step of
arguing it isn't in the spec even after having the relevant parts of
the spec quoted from multiple sources?
>
> > > As a multi-year super-senior, if you don’t
> > > know, just keep your mouth shut. With al[l] receivers doing
> > > acquisitions of at least 4 satellites, GR correction is not needed.
> > > Just check with the GPS manufacturers, and stop f*ckin’ spreading
> > > lies.
>
> > Of course the GR correction is not needed as far as the receivers are
> > concerned,
>
> So, finally you have agreed. You have always argued otherwise.
Read the rest of the sentence. The correction isn't applied in the
receivers. Which is the whole fucking point.
>
> > as the correction is applied within the transmitter
> > hardware itself.
>
> The only requirement is to allow all satellites to synchronize with
> the same rate of change in clock. So, where is the relativistic
> correction on board the satellites?
Why ask questions whose answers you already know? The correction is in
the de-tuning of the clock so that the correct frequency is observed
on the Earth's surface.
>
> > Do explain why the GPS receiver manufacturers are relevant to this
> > discussion when the corrections aren't performed there.
>
> <shrug>
>
> > > This should be a no-brainer. GPS requires a special frame of
> > > reference to work which is right at the center of the earth. This
> > > proves the principle of relativity wrong.
>
> > Working in a handy coordinate system proves the PoR wrong? No, try
> > again.
>
> GPS requires a special frame of reference to work which is right at
> the center of the earth. This proves the principle of relativity
> wrong.
Why do you confuse 'requires' with 'makes the computations simpler' ?
>
> > > Since the Galilean and the
> > > Lorentz transforms both satisfy the obsolete principle of relativity
> > > discovered more than 400 years ago by Galileo, GPS does not endorse
> > > the ‘Galileo effect’. <shrug>
>
> > The 'Galileo effect' is something crackpotter made up. Do catch up.
>
> I understand what that mean. You don’t because of your own
> ignorance. <shrug>
Of course I'm ignorant of someone's personal terminology. You should
know that better than anyone, considering your propensity to use
personal terminology in an argument.
[snip]
My personal life will never be a topic for discussion as long as you
hide under a pseudonym. Coward.
G=EMC^2 Glazier
light beams. TreBert
Sam Wormley
>
> The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug>
See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> > The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug>
>
> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
is required in the GPS design. At least, the multi-year super-senor
has capitulated. He now agreed that there is no relativistic effect
needed in the design of the receiver. Well, you need to argue with
that multi-year super-senior still without any college degree first.
<shrug>
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 12, 11:25 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug> See below.
>
> Why is it a part of the GPS spec? Or do you take the added step of
> arguing it isn't in the spec even after having the relevant parts of
> the spec quoted from multiple sources?
Your buddy VD moortel had already posted that one. Get it from him.
> > So, finally you have agreed. You have always argued otherwise.
>
> Read the rest of the sentence. The correction isn't applied in the
> receivers. Which is the whole fucking point.
When cornered, you change side. <shrug> The wishy-washy behavior
explains why you remain a multi-year super-senior today. <shrug>
> > The only requirement is to allow all satellites to synchronize with
> > the same rate of change in clock. So, where is the relativistic
> > correction on board the satellites?
>
> Why ask questions whose answers you already know? The correction is in
> the de-tuning of the clock so that the correct frequency is observed
> on the Earth's surface.
Are you crazy? That is several part per million. Out of touch with
engineering discipline also explain why you remain a multi-year super-
senior today. <shrug>
> > GPS requires a special frame of reference to work which is right at
> > the center of the earth. This proves the principle of relativity
> > wrong.
>
> Why do you confuse 'requires' with 'makes the computations simpler' ?
No, there is no confusion on my part. I just pointed out the
inconsistency in your GPS analyses. Is that the best response I can
get? If so, that explains why you remain a multi-year super-senior
today. <shrug>
> > I understand what that mean. You don’t because of your own
> > ignorance. <shrug>
>
> Of course I'm ignorant of someone's personal terminology. You should
> know that better than anyone, considering your propensity to use
> personal terminology in an argument.
Yes, you are very mentally challenged. That also explains why you
remain a multi-year super-senior today. <shrug>
> > Snipping stuff you don’t understand explains why you still remain a
> > multi-year super-senior today at the very prestigious University of
> > Alaska. <shrug>
>
> > Hey, as long as Mommy is paying for all the bills, who give s a f*ck?
>
> > With the economic conditions like these we are facing, don’t you think
> > you should give your mommy some break?
> [unsnipped]
>
> My personal life will never be a topic for discussion
This is your public life we are discussing. Your private lifestyle is
your own business such as your sexual habit. <shrug> Come on. You
must be in your late twenties now. Unlike you, I had not burdened my
folks since I was eighteen. Again, as long as mommy is paying for
everything, who give a f*ck, right?
> as long as you hide under a pseudonym.
Using your own logic, you are coward without giving out your social
security number to prove that you are indeed the nitwit Eric Gisse.
<shrug>
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 12, 1:20 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > On Oct 12, 11:25 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > The relativistic correction is not needed at all. <shrug> See below.
>
> > Why is it a part of the GPS spec? Or do you take the added step of
> > arguing it isn't in the spec even after having the relevant parts of
> > the spec quoted from multiple sources?
>
> Your buddy VD moortel had already posted that one. Get it from him.
I ask you questions...and you refer to someone else? Do you not know
the answers, or did you just not read what I said?
>
> > > So, finally you have agreed. You have always argued otherwise.
>
> > Read the rest of the sentence. The correction isn't applied in the
> > receivers. Which is the whole fucking point.
>
> When cornered, you change side. <shrug> The wishy-washy behavior
> explains why you remain a multi-year super-senior today. <shrug>
The receivers were never under discussion. I do believe this has been
explained to you before.
>
> > > The only requirement is to allow all satellites to synchronize with
> > > the same rate of change in clock. So, where is the relativistic
> > > correction on board the satellites?
>
> > Why ask questions whose answers you already know? The correction is in
> > the de-tuning of the clock so that the correct frequency is observed
> > on the Earth's surface.
>
> Are you crazy? That is several part per million. Out of touch with
> engineering discipline also explain why you remain a multi-year super-
> senior today. <shrug>
The speed of light is approximately one foot per nanosecond, and the
timing delays from ignoring GR amounts to some 50ns/day. What kind of
position error would be accumulated after a week?
Try to not take cracks about my engineering ability when you willfully
ignore critical pieces of the GPS specifications.
When you were an engineer...did you ignore the spec when building
things? Alternatively, what would you say if people responsible for
building what you helped design willfully ignored the specifications
you wrote? Think about it.
[...]
Eric Gisse
You must be an amazingly small, passive-aggressive, and petty little
man to act like this towards your betters.
Sam Wormley
> On Oct 12, 5:38 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
>
> Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
> is required in the GPS design.
Belief systems are not a factor. Physical reality--for an observer on
the earth, satellite clocks tick faster or slower as a function of
attitude (measurable effect). Predicted accurately by general relativity.
See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Koobee should shrug and choose to do some self education.
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
> > is required in the GPS design.
>
> Belief systems are not a factor.
It should not be a factor, yes. So, why do you continue to believe in
it?
> Physical reality--for an observer on
> the earth, satellite clocks tick faster or slower as a function of
> attitude (measurable effect). Predicted accurately by general relativity.
This phenomenon is also predicted by several other hypotheses.
<shrug>
> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Yeah, I read all these. Any more?
> Koobee should shrug and choose to do some self education.
Oh, I have done all my homework. Just when are you going to apply
logic and mathematics into this subject?
The bottom line is that GPS does not require any relativistic
corrections. Physicists stupidly thought so, but it was the
ingenuities of the engineers made it work without relativistic
effect. Get a clue for a change. <shrug>
Sam Wormley
> On Oct 13, 6:22 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
>>> Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
>>> is required in the GPS design.
>> Belief systems are not a factor.
>
> It should not be a factor, yes. So, why do you continue to believe in
> it?
>
>> Physical reality--for an observer on
>> the earth, satellite clocks tick faster or slower as a function of
>> attitude (measurable effect). Predicted accurately by general relativity.
>
> This phenomenon is also predicted by several other hypotheses.
> <shrug>
Such as?
>
>> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
>
> Yeah, I read all these. Any more?
>
>> Koobee should shrug and choose to do some self education.
>
> Oh, I have done all my homework. Just when are you going to apply
> logic and mathematics into this subject?
>
> The bottom line is that GPS does not require any relativistic
> corrections. Physicists stupidly thought so, but it was the
> ingenuities of the engineers made it work without relativistic
> effect. Get a clue for a change. <shrug>
>
>
You must be Tom Potter (using an alias).
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 12, 8:55 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Your buddy VD moortel had already posted that one. Get it from him.
>
> I ask you questions...
And I have shown you where to get the answers.
> and you refer to someone else? Do you not know
> the answers, or did you just not read what I said?
Hint: Search the older posts.
Being such lazy, that explains why you remain a multi-year super-
senior today. <shrug>
> > When cornered, you change side. <shrug> The wishy-washy behavior
> > explains why you remain a multi-year super-senior today. <shrug>
>
> The receivers were never under discussion. I do believe this has been
> explained to you before.
So, you like to change history as well after failed arguments.
> > Are you crazy? That is several part per million. Out of touch with
> > engineering discipline also explain why you remain a multi-year super-
> > senior today. <shrug>
>
> The speed of light is approximately one foot per nanosecond, and the
> timing delays from ignoring GR amounts to some 50ns/day. What kind of
> position error would be accumulated after a week?
Apparently, you have no idea how GPS works. <shrug>
> Try to not take cracks about my engineering ability when you willfully
> ignore critical pieces of the GPS specifications.
You are not an engineer. You have no college degree. You are still a
multi-year super-senior still supported by his mommy. <shrug>
> When you were an engineer...did you ignore the spec when building
> things?
Was I ever been an engineer? Well, when I have been in research and
development for most of my career (and still am), I have to create the
spec as I discover new things. However, when rare circumstances do
come up, yes, I do respect specifications. Most of the time, they
were subject to negotiations. <shrug>
> Alternatively, what would you say if people responsible for
> building what you helped design willfully ignored the specifications
> you wrote? Think about it.
Keep whining.
Sam Wormley
>
> Was I ever been an engineer? Well, when I have been in research and
> development for most of my career (and still am), I have to create the
> spec as I discover new things. However, when rare circumstances do
> come up, yes, I do respect specifications. Most of the time, they
> were subject to negotiations. <shrug>
Too bad Koobee that you don't understand the relativistic corrections
employed in the Global Positioning System. It's got to be embarrassing
that you deny that relativistic corrections are an integral part of the
system.
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > This phenomenon is also predicted by several other hypotheses.
> > <shrug>
>
> Such as?
Check out Mr. Polasek’s postings for one.
> You must be Tom Potter (using an alias).
Wrong for sure. How much do you want to be on this one?
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Was I ever been an engineer? Well, when I have been in research and
> > development for most of my career (and still am), I have to create the
> > spec as I discover new things. However, when rare circumstances do
> > come up, yes, I do respect specifications. Most of the time, they
> > were subject to negotiations. <shrug>
>
> Too bad Koobee that you don't understand the relativistic corrections
> employed in the Global Positioning System.
That is a wrong accusation. <shrug>
> It's got to be embarrassing
> that you deny that relativistic corrections are an integral part of the
> system.
In GPS, relativistic correction is not need at all. Just what denying
on what do you have?
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:QYHIk.330335$TT4.91406@attbi_s22...
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>> On Oct 12, 5:38 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
>>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
>>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
>>
>> Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
>> is required in the GPS design.
>
> Belief systems are not a factor. Physical reality--for an observer on
> the earth, satellite clocks tick faster or slower as a function of
> attitude (measurable effect). Predicted accurately by general relativity.
If what Sam says is true,
the GPS receivers of "observers on the earth"
must have 13 General Relativity algorithms in their receivers,
to compensate for the 13 hacks of General Relativity
required to make the GPS System work.
Those little battery operated computer chips
must be very powerful to
compute all 13 hacks of General Relativity every second or so,
or else the algorithms used must be pretty simple.
In either case, I am sure the General Relativity Guru's and Cultist's
know what they are and will tell us.
As Dork Moortel is not only a General Relativity genius,
and a math genius, he is also a computer genius
so no doubt he will be able to post the algorithms in
one of the computer languages to prove to folks
that General Relativity is really useful,
and is essential to the GPS System.
Dork's son is also a genius
who knows more physics than anyone in sci.physics,
except Dork himself of course,
and maybe if Dork does not have time
from the unemployment line,
he'll have his son post some of the algorithms.
--
Tom Potter
http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Sam Wormley
You can deny all you like Koobee, but Satellite clocks are affected by
gravitation and relative velocity... the effects accurately modeled by GTR.
See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Sam Wormley
> On Oct 13, 10:01 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
>>> This phenomenon is also predicted by several other hypotheses.
>>> <shrug>
>> Such as?
>
Such as?
Eric Gisse
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote in messagenews:QYHIk.330335$TT4.91406@attbi_s22...
> > Koobee Wublee wrote:
> >> On Oct 12, 5:38 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
> >>> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> >>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
> >>> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
>
> >> Oh, yes. You are still stuck in the belief that relativistic effect
> >> is required in the GPS design.
>
> > Belief systems are not a factor. Physical reality--for an observer on
> > the earth, satellite clocks tick faster or slower as a function of
> > attitude (measurable effect). Predicted accurately by general relativity.
>
> If what Sam says is true,
> the GPS receivers of "observers on the earth"
> must have 13 General Relativity algorithms in their receivers,
> to compensate for the 13 hacks of General Relativity
> required to make the GPS System work.
What are these '13 hacks', Tom? Since you are once again using them in
your arguments, you should probably explain WTF you are talking about.
[snip]
Tom Potter
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:01570d8b-979e-4579...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
================================================
Note that Gisse's posts do not allow indents.
Gisse, why don't you do as I do,
and read some of Sam Wormley's references,
so that you will know what 13 Classical Physics hacks are needed
to get GPS data to agree with General Relativity.
I'll give you a hint,
the Hubble, Galileo, and Doppler effects
must be accounted for,
as well as the magnetic and electric effects,
the lumpiness of the Earth, static friction,
dynamic friction, variations in the ionosphere,
atmospheric pressure and humidity, etc.
doug
Tom Potter wrote:
Doppler is not relativity.
> must be accounted for,
> as well as the magnetic and electric effects,
These are not relativity
> the lumpiness of the Earth,
This is not relativity
static friction,
In space?
> dynamic friction,
In space?
variations in the ionosphere,
This is not relativity.
> atmospheric pressure and humidity, etc.
These are not relativity.
So you do not have any idea what the relativity
corrections are. You have only your blind hatred
and jealousy about relativity. You should get
some help for that.
>
Eric Gisse
> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:01570d8b-979e-4579...@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Only Tom Potter would complain about including physics in a system
that wouldn't work without the corrections.
Sam Wormley
>
> Gisse, why don't you do as I do,
> and read some of Sam Wormley's references,
> so that you will know what 13 Classical Physics hacks are needed
> to get GPS data to agree with General Relativity.
>
> I'll give you a hint,
> the Hubble, Galileo, and Doppler effects
> must be accounted for,
> as well as the magnetic and electric effects,
> the lumpiness of the Earth, static friction,
> dynamic friction, variations in the ionosphere,
> atmospheric pressure and humidity, etc.
>
The trouble is, Tom, that you didn't read my references and you
don't have the foggiest idea what the twelve relativistic corrections
are and why some are space based and why one is in receiver algorithms.
http://edu-observatory/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
"Relativity in the Global Positioning System" by Neil Ashby
"Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks" by Neil Ashby
"General Relativity in the Global Positioning System" by Neil Ashby
"Can GPS Test Gravity's Speed of Propagation?" by Neil Ashby
"General Relativity in the Global Positioning System" by Neil Ashby
"Relativity of GPS Measurement" by Thomas B Bahder
"Real-World Relativity: The GPS Navigation System" by Richard W. Pogge
"Student Project on the Global Positioning System" by E.F. Taylor
"Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life" by Clifford M. Will
"General Relativity in the Global Positioning System" by Clifford M. Will
Potter, you would learn an lot if you sat down for a few days with the
reference below... but I suspect that you don't have the academic or
intellectual capability to work through the material and gain insight
for the considerations that must be taken into effect. The last time
you tried or pretended to try... your fixed on an offset value and tried
to convince yourself that it didn't have anything to do with relativity.
Your attitude appears to be, "I can't understand this shit, so therefore
it is wrong, or not needed".
The literature is there for all to learn from... Many sources. It's OK
to admit it is beyond your grasp, Potter. It's OK!
See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Eric Gisse
[...]
The lumpiness manifests in multipole moments that need to be taken
into account when modeling Earth's gravitational field.
Koobee Wublee
It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
need for GR anymore.
> Potter, you would learn an lot if you sat down for a few days with the
> reference below... but I suspect that you don't have the academic or
> intellectual capability to work through the material and gain insight
> for the considerations that must be taken into effect. The last time
> you tried or pretended to try... your fixed on an offset value and tried
> to convince yourself that it didn't have anything to do with relativity.
> Your attitude appears to be, "I can't understand this shit, so therefore
> it is wrong, or not needed".
Sam, you are still stuck in the 20th century. Guess what century this
is now.
> The literature is there for all to learn from... Many sources. It's OK
> to admit it is beyond your grasp, Potter. It's OK!
>
> See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5....
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Sam, it is also OK for you not to understand the mechanism in
acquisition of 4 satellites instead of just 3. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
GPS works whether you believe in GR or not.
Reality doesn't care about you.
[snip]
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 20, 9:38 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
> > worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
> > meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
>
> > Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
> > of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
> > the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
> > lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
> > found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
> > need for GR anymore.
>
> GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
“dono”.
> GPS works whether you believe in GR or not.
That is correct. There is no need for GR nonsense in GPS. <shrug>
> Reality doesn't care about you.
That is also very correct. GPS continues to function without
pollution from GR. <shrug>
> [snip]
More cowardly excuses from a multi-year super-senior. <shrug> What
time did you wake up this afternoon?
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 20, 11:18 pm, Eric Gisse < wrote:
>
> > On Oct 20, 9:38 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
> > > worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
> > > meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
>
> > > Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
> > > of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
> > > the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
> > > lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
> > > found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
> > > need for GR anymore.
>
> > GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
>
> Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> “dono”.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:L3cLk.397738$yE1.339158@attbi_s21...
Sammy, I suspect that you don't have the academic or
intellectual capability to work through the material and gain insight
about how the GPS System actually works,
because you are more interested in attracting folks to your
phony "EDU" web site, and accumulate Google sense hits,
and in trying to con folks into thinking
that you are a General Relativity and GPS Guru,
and are privy to powerful esoteric knowledge.
Now Sammy, if you really have the
academic and intellectual capability to express yourself,
and you understand tensors and General Relativity,
why don't you prove it by computing just ONE
of the many tides that Newton computed hundreds of
years ago, using his primitive model, and hand calculation.
Sammy, your attitude appears to be,
"I can't understand this shit, (General Relativity and GPS)
so therefore I will attack the messenger
in order to avoid looking like a phony asshole."
Tom Potter
"doug" <x...@xx.com> wrote in message news:Hcmdnb_cu8fOpWDV...@posted.docknet...
I am pleased to see that my pal "doug"
got my message that General Relativity is
not capable of modeling the GPS System,
and that is necessary to
operate the GPS System CLOSED LOOP
use other models to account for many effects,
in order for the GPS Syatem to operate successfully.
I was disappointed to see that my pal "doug"
did not know about that "air friction"
occurs whenever an object is moving through a gas
and is a function of the speed of an object and it's geometry.
Perhaps my pal does not know
that there are are gas particles in the GPS orbit,
and that this introduces effects that must be corrected for.
Tom Potter
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:c3bd71f4-5d07-41e4...@t18g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 20, 10:56 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 20, 11:18 pm, Eric Gisse < wrote:
>
> > On Oct 20, 9:38 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
> > > worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
> > > meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
>
> > > Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
> > > of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
> > > the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
> > > lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
> > > found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
> > > need for GR anymore.
>
> > GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
>
> Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> "dono".
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
==========================
Gisse --- Fix your newsreader
if you want me to respond to your posts.
Eric Gisse
> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:c3bd71f4-5d07-41e4...@t18g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
>
> On Oct 20, 10:56 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 11:18 pm, Eric Gisse < wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 20, 9:38 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > > It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
> > > > worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
> > > > meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
>
> > > > Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
> > > > of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
> > > > the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
> > > > lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
> > > > found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
> > > > need for GR anymore.
>
> > > GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
>
> > Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> > these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> > "dono".
>
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
>
> The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
>
> You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
> physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
>
> ==========================
>
> Gisse --- Fix your newsreader
> if you want me to respond to your posts.
Nothing wrong with google groups, it is outlook express which has
feature-regressed such that it can't properly indent anymore.
[...]
Sam Wormley
> I am pleased to see that my pal "doug"
> got my message that General Relativity is
> not capable of modeling the GPS System,
>
> and that is necessary to
> operate the GPS System CLOSED LOOP
> use other models to account for many effects,
> in order for the GPS Syatem to operate successfully.
>
Potter, you'vr been corrected on this point before.
GPS is not a "Closed Loop" system.
Please read the specs:
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/default.htm
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
Sam Wormley
Potter, you really need do do some self education. You just
embarrass yourself over and over and over... must be fun for
you to piss in your pants like that.
Sam Wormley
<laughing>
Poor Pathetic Potter! Pitiful!
hanson
** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR **.news:2krLk.398777$yE1.313947@attbi_s21...
>>>
Koobee Wublee wrote:
It looks like the physicists are still playing in the sand box
worrying about non-existent issues in a schizophrenic fashion. In the
meantime, the engineers are carrying this GPS technology ahead.
Get a grip, Sam. The first GPS proposal called out for an acquisition
of 3 satellites. In this case, there is indeed a need to synchronize
the ground and the satellite clocks. However, engineers seem to be a
lot more clever than physicists time after time. The engineers had
found a way in acquisition of 4 satellites. In this case, there is no
need for GR anymore.
>>>
GR is in the spec whether you accept it or not.
>>>>
Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
"dono".
>>
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
[ does NOT contain the words "relativity" nor "Einstein" ::h:: ]
The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
>
Physicists do not write specs... ahahaha.. That job goes
to newly hired employees, fresh off the school bench ...
with the aim for them to familiarize themselves with
the systems that their employer makes, so that they
can become good salesmen... Eric, you will become one
of those peddlers... and you'll begin to adore & envy Potter.
ahahaha... ahahaha... You watch!.. it's unavoidable!
>>
>> ===== what are these "=" lines for =========
>> === just cut'n paste "poster wrote:" instead ===
>>
Potter wrote:
Gisse --- Fix your newsreader
if you want me to respond to your posts.
>>
Potter, you really need do do some self education. You just
embarrass yourself over and over and over... must be fun for
you to piss in your pants like that. Please read the specs:
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
[does NOT contain the words "relativity" nor "Einstein" ::h:: ]
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/default.htm
[does NOT contain the words "relativity" nor "Einstein" ::h:: ]
> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
[ is the only link with Einstein Dingleberry Ashby's crap. ::h::]
>
[::h::] hanson wrote:
>
**** Tom & KW 4 -:- ED Sam & Eric, zilch, zero, nada ****
>
Sam & Eric, you 2 Einstein Dingleberries are hanging
onto your pathetic REL belief so fanatically that it is
reminiscent of Islamist, Xian or Jewish martyr behavior
who are defending their RELIGIOUS beliefs... ahahaha...
>
That is understandable though, cuz neither one of you
two Einstein Dingleberries, Sam & Eric, a teacher and a
student, have worked out in the real world where GPS
was designed, built, tested and is operating....ahaha..
>
But Potter and KW have done so... Yet, you two Einstein
Dingleberries, Sam & Eric, who are dangling close from
Einstein's Sphincter do continue to lecture your rabid
relativity delusions about GPS in the real world....
AHAHAHA... ahahaha... What's in it for you 2 mooches?
>
Sam & Eric, you 2 Einstein Dingleberries, with your
fetish about those 38usec, are you hoping to get fame
by association?... by feeding off the successes of
**GPS which NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR**
not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations.
>
Your catechism for your 38usec fetish is Ashby's crap
wherefor he needed some 40 equations to finally twist
and wring out his 38 usec... which every middle;school
student can do for that system in ONE fell swoop with
Newtonian mechanics as:
== (M_e /h ) * (2 G/c^2) * 86400 = 38 microsec ==
http://tinyurl.com/622an2 or http://tinyurl.com/57asbg
>
Furthermore, if GPS would have needed or used any
Einstein shit then that case/event would appear in large
print on all the Seller's promo literature ...but as seen in
here, it does not: http://tinyurl.com/645yo5
>
Sam, where do the GPS manufactures & operators like
Nokia, Motorola, LG, Samsung, TRG, Garmin or TomTom
say that they could not have achieved that level/success
of technology were it not for Einstein and his lunatic SR
and GR?... Nowhere!... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA
>
Sam, do yourself and mainly other students a favor.
Stop making an ass out of yourself and refer to
yourself as teacher/professor ... at the same time.
If your REL fetish is so overwhelming to yourself then
at least state that
** "GPS may be modeled with the use of REL" ***
>
That will take you off the hook of being a charlatan.
The student Gisse in his Eritum, who has not graduated
for his BSc yet, is forgiven. He doesn't know any better.
>
But as usual, thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahahanson
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 20, 10:56 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> > these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> > “dono”.
>
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
>
> The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
>
> You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
> physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
ignorant engineer. <shrug>
In the meantime, GPS continues to function without any pollution from
GR. <shrug>
Since you have also accepted that there is no need for GR correction
in the GPS receiver, how do you reconcile with Wormley and Professors
Ashby’s and Taylor’s nonsense of 38uSec crap?
Koobee Wublee
> > Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> > these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> > “dono”.
>
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
>
> The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
>
> You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
> physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
ignorant engineer. <shrug>
In the meantime, GPS continues to function without any pollution from
GR. <shrug>
Since you have also accepted that there is no need for GR correction
in the GPS receiver, how do you reconcile with Wormley and Professors
Ashby’s and Taylor’s nonsense of 38uSec-per-day crap? How does it
feel to betray your fellow Einstein Dingleberries?
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 21, 12:06 am, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 20, 10:56 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > Show me the spec that is if you recognize a spec. The write-ups by
> > > these schizophrenic physicists do not count as a spec in case if you
> > > “dono”.
>
> >http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
>
> > The same cite I have been citing you for god knows how long now.
>
> > You don't get to ignore the spec just because you hallucinate that
> > physicists wrote it and that you hate physicists.
>
> That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
> multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
> ignorant engineer. <shrug>
Show me the true spec then. Oh wait, you have no idea what you are
talking about so you can't do it.
>
> In the meantime, GPS continues to function without any pollution from
> GR. <shrug>
The GPS designers say otherwise. You are clueless.
>
> Since you have also accepted that there is no need for GR correction
> in the GPS receiver, how do you reconcile with Wormley and Professors
> Ashby’s and Taylor’s nonsense of 38uSec-per-day crap? How does it
> feel to betray your fellow Einstein Dingleberries?
It isn't in the receiver, fucking moron. How stupid are you?
Sam Wormley
> That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
> multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
> ignorant engineer. <shrug>
>
> In the meantime, GPS continues to function without any pollution from
> GR. <shrug>
>
> Since you have also accepted that there is no need for GR correction
> in the GPS receiver, how do you reconcile with Wormley and Professors
> Ashby’s and Taylor’s nonsense of 38uSec crap?
See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Helmut Wabnig
hanson, still riding his horse backwards.
just a few
http://www.google.at/search?hl=de&q=galileo+gps+relativity&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=
http://tau.fesg.tu-muenchen.de/~drazen/Diplom.pdf
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0507121
and so on.
Yawn, yawn.
w.
Koobee Wublee
> On Oct 21, 9:16 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
> > multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
> > ignorant engineer. <shrug>
>
> Show me the true spec then. Oh wait, you have no idea what you are
> talking about so you can't do it.
It looks like our multi-year super-senior is utterly confused. He
possesses no intellectual reasoning to tell what is bullsh*t and what
is not. In doing so, he chooses to accept the academics as faith
while the engineering world is telling him otherwise.
You have capitulated on GR having nothing to do with the receivers.
Yes, it only takes some rudimentary understanding of algebra to do
so. Yet, the academic power houses like Professors Ashby and Taylor
are telling you otherwise.
The darkside of science is not worth the fame and the grants. With
the depressed economy going forward, I predict these so-called
physicists are going to turn on their crackpot thinkings to a zenith
to compete with their pears (excuse me, peers).
> > In the meantime, GPS continues to function without any pollution from
> > GR. <shrug>
>
> The GPS designers say otherwise. You are clueless.
You are just a pawn manipulated by these who are looking for ever
bigger grants. <shrug>
> > Since you have also accepted that there is no need for GR correction
> > in the GPS receiver, how do you reconcile with Wormley and Professors
> > Ashby’s and Taylor’s nonsense of 38uSec-per-day crap? How does it
> > feel to betray your fellow Einstein Dingleberries?
>
> It isn't in the receiver, fucking moron. How stupid are you?
You are utterly incoherent now. Go back to be a multi-year super-
senior sponging off mommy. I hope she is wealthy. <shrug>
hanson
>
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations..
----- AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahaha... AHAHAHA ----
Nervous "Helmut Wabnig" is another one of those
frothing Einstein Dingleberries who belongs into the
same heap as does Sam and Eric, cranked himself,
is riding in, yawning in his ED impotence, to come
to the rescue of his 2 Einstein Dingleberries cronies...
ahaha ... ahahaha... But no matter how many Ashby
co-Dingleberries you cite, Helmut, it doesn't change
the fact that:
>
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations.
>
that REL is such a useless crock o'shit... ahahaha...
But keep on masterbating over it, while you still can.
>
BTW, have you finally figured out that the wavelength
corrections you've posted are noting else then another
expression for the useless 38 usec I discussed above?
>
Thanks for the laughs though, Wabie... ahahahanson
Eric Gisse
> On Oct 21, 10:58 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
> > On Oct 21, 9:16 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > That is no spec. It is merely a lousy application note, you ignorant
> > > multi-year super senior. That must be written by a physicist or an
> > > ignorant engineer. <shrug>
>
> > Show me the true spec then. Oh wait, you have no idea what you are
> > talking about so you can't do it.
>
> It looks like our multi-year super-senior is utterly confused. He
> possesses no intellectual reasoning to tell what is bullsh*t and what
> is not. In doing so, he chooses to accept the academics as faith
> while the engineering world is telling him otherwise.
>
> You have capitulated on GR having nothing to do with the receivers.
> Yes, it only takes some rudimentary understanding of algebra to do
> so. Yet, the academic power houses like Professors Ashby and Taylor
> are telling you otherwise.
No, they aren't. They are saying the effect is accounted for in the
GPS sattelite itself. Which is what people have been telling you for
years now, and I guess you still don't get it.
RustyJames
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Relativity has been confirmed to high accuracy over time periods of
many days. New corrections for epoch offset and rate for each clock
are determined anew typically once each day in the GPS Systems, These
corrections differ by a few ns and a few ns/day, respectively, from
similar corrections for other days in the same week. At much later
times, unpredictable errors in the clocks build up with time squared,
so comparisons with predictions become increasingly uncertain unless
these empirical corrections are used. But within each day, the clock
corrections remain stable to within about 1 ns in epoch and 1 ns/day
in rate.
So if these GPS Systems are in geosynchronous orbit with our earths
rotation it makes since that the further away from the center of our
core more distance is covered as they travel trough longer periods of
gravations because of circular orbit is larger than the rotational
orbit of a clock closer to the center of where our gravity feild
originates it's logical that Contributions from altitude
synchronization prescription are intimately connected.
but what if the clocks on the satellites were made to travel the same
rotational distance around the earths rotation by lagging the orbit so
the same distance was traveled through the gravations I suggest that
it's not so much the altitude but the distance traveled longitudal
relative to both clocks orbit around the center of our gravity feild,
not altitude, with altitude longitudinal distance increases away from
the center of a rotating spheroid’s, the difference in this distance
around the orbit between the two clocks that cause clock malfunction.
more distance is covered in geosynchronous orbit so a clock closer to
the gravity center of a rotational sphere has less gravitational drag
almost like saying gravity must have resistance.