Re: GPS World: USNO's Fountain: Time at 100 Trillionths of a Second
Y.Porat
> USNO's Fountain: Time at 100 Trillionths of a Second
> http://uc.gpsworld.com/gpsuc/content/printContentPopup.jsp?id=576197
>
> Jan 19, 2009
> GPS World
>
> The ultra-precise timing technology that enables GPS and high-speed Internet communication
> soon may resolve the measure of time to 100 trillionths of a second, according to the U.S.
> Naval Observatory, a central contributor to the international determination of time.
>
> "To know when an event occurred, you need a clock. We are that clock," said Geoff Chester,
> public affairs officer at the USNO. He explained the development of this new timing
> technology during the January 15 "Armed with Science: Research and Applications for the
> Modern Military" radio program on BlogTalkRadio.com.
>
> "Atomic clocks define time scales in terms of a certain number of oscillations of a
> certain type of atom that take place in the course of one second. The master clock at the
> Naval Observatory is an ensemble of dozens of these devices, and we take a weighted
> average of all of them to determine our base-reference time scale."
----------------------
Please note carefully what is written here
just above !!!
GPS is not based on GR theory!!!
it is a rial and error technique !!!
just write it before yourself
and internalize the conclusions
ie dont boggle our minds
that GPS is a profe for GR !!
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
Sam Wormley
>
> GPS is not based on GR theory!!!
>
> it is a rial and error technique !!!
> just write it before yourself
> and internalize the conclusions
> ie dont boggle our minds
> that GPS is a profe for GR !!
>
> ATB
> Y.Porat
> -----------------------------
>
The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Koobee Wublee
> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>
> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
the Bible.
When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
with very low actual data bit rate.
Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
<shrug>
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
>> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
>> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>>
>> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
>> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> the Bible.
>
The beautiful thing about GPS is that observational data is available
to all most anyone and be compared to predictions of GTR... GPS is a
wonderful relativity laboratory.
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
Take some time to learn what really happens.
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> > necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> > However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> > a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> > the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> > Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> > much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>
> > That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> > continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> > to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> > frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> > errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> > with very low actual data bit rate.
>
> > Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> > about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> > the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
>
> The beautiful thing about GPS is [... nonsense snipped]
The bottom line is that GPS has no applications of SR or GR anywhere
in the system. To claim so, is a lie where:
** FAITH IS THEORY
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** LYING IS TEACHING
Just because your idol Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the
liar was indeed a liar, you don’t have to blatantly lie about GPS.
Eric Gisse
> On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
> > The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
> > Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
> > http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>
> > Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
> > http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> the Bible.
>
> When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>
> That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> with very low actual data bit rate.
Light speed is 3x10^8 m/s. A 500 part per trillion error corresponds
to a 15 centimeter positioning error. You need to remember that GPS
doesn't work how _you_ would have designed it, it works differently.
The timing information is how position is determined, as the receiver
has access to precious little else.
You'll note that the relativistic corrections are 100 times larger
than this - ~50,000 ns/day.
>
> Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
> <shrug>
Engineers are neither smarter nor dumber, but they have different
educations. You'll note that engineers were the ones who actually
built the global positioning system which happens to use relativity as
a highly important correction, one of many. Did the atmospheric
science cabal force the GPS designers to include ionospheric
corrections in the timing signal too, or is it as important as the
relativistic correction?
Sue...
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
> >> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
> >> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
> >> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>
> >> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
> >> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> > Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> > the Bible.
>
> The beautiful thing about GPS is that observational data is available
> to all most anyone and be compared to predictions of GTR... GPS is a
> wonderful relativity laboratory.
>
> Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Those Sagnac corrections are from the Hafele and Keating
Experiment, right ?
http://www.zeiss.com/C125716F004E0776/0/DB95426F0494AB1DC125717500445CEE/$File/Innovation_10_18.pdf
Sue...
Eric Gisse
So how do you know there is no relativity in the global positioning
system when literally every document involing signal timing cites
relativity at one point or another?
Show us proof that GPS has no relativity in it, if you can. You
somehow know it is true so it should be simple for you to point at the
thing that convinced you, unless it is irrational and emotional
arguments that have no basis in reality.
Tom Roberts
> The bottom line is that GPS has no applications of SR or GR anywhere
> in the system.
This is just plain false. Koobee does not know what the GPS actually is.
In particular, the actual GPS has a ground segment with many clocks that
are REQUIRED to remain synchronized with the clocks in the space segment
[#]. In addition, GPS time must remain within 1 microsecond of UTC
modulo leap seconds. Remember that the actual GPS is a military system,
and they require the space segment to continue to meet its requirements
for a month without any ground segment (in military jargon, the
satellites are MUCH more survivable than the ground segment is).
That clearly requires that the time variations predicted and modeled by
GR be incorporated into the system clocks. And, of course, they are.
That simple fact disproves Koobee's claims.
[#] Synchronization is of course in the ECI frame. Note also
that "clock" here means the reading of the clock AFTER the
corrections are applied. The raw reading of the clock is
adjusted for the basic GR effect, but the corrections handle
clock drift and other minor errors. The basic GR effect is about
38 microseconds per day for satellites, far larger than the
corrections. GR is also used to compute some of the corrections
(e.g. time offsets due to the sun and moon; time offsets due
to improper orbit, etc.).
Koobee, please stop making things up and discussing them as if they were
facts.
Tom Roberts
Androcles
"Tom Roberts" <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1tsel.9392$hc1....@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>> The bottom line is that GPS has no applications of SR or GR anywhere
>> in the system.
>
> This is just plain false. Koobee does not know what the GPS actually is.
>
Clearly Roberts cannot do the math and KW can.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
However, KW is an aetherialist cretin.
Eric Gisse
> "Tom Roberts" <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/AC/AC.htm
Nice to see Androcles continues to get basic E&M wrong after several
years.
Uncle Ben
>
> - Show quoted text -
From "Living Reviews in Relativity" by Neil Ashby" (emphasis added)
-----------------------------
Figure 2 shows the net fractional frequency offset of an atomic clock
in a circular orbit, which is essentially the left side of Eq. (35)
plotted as a function of orbit radius , with a change of sign. Five
sources of relativistic effects contribute in Figure 2. The effects
are emphasized for several different orbit radii of particular
interest. For a low earth orbiter such as the Space Shuttle, the
velocity is so great that slowing due to time dilation is the dominant
effect, while for a GPS satellite clock, the gravitational blueshift
is greater. The effects cancel at . The Global Navigation Satellite
System GALILEO, which is currently being designed under the auspices
of the European Space Agency, will have orbital radii of approximately
30,000 km.
There is an interesting story about this frequency offset. At the time
of launch of the NTS-2 satellite (23 June 1977), which contained the
first Cesium atomic clock to be placed in orbit, it was recognized
that orbiting clocks would require a relativistic correction, but
there was uncertainty as to its magnitude as well as its sign.
*Indeed, there were some who doubted that relativistic effects were
truths that would need to be incorporated [5]!* A frequency
synthesizer was built into the satellite clock system so that after
launch, if in fact the rate of the clock in its final orbit was that
predicted by general relativity, then the synthesizer could be turned
on, bringing the clock to the coordinate rate necessary for operation.
After the Cesium clock was turned on in NTS-2, it was operated for
about 20 days to measure its clock rate before turning on the
synthesizer [11]. The frequency measured during that interval was
+442.5 parts in compared to clocks on the ground, while general
relativity predicted +446.5 parts in . The difference was well within
the accuracy capabilities of the orbiting clock. This then gave about
a 1% verification of the combined second-order Doppler and
gravitational frequency shift effects for a clock at 4.2 earth radii.
-----------------------------
Uncle Ben
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > The bottom line is that GPS has no applications of SR or GR anywhere
> > in the system.
>
> This is just plain false. Koobee does not know what the GPS actually is.
You make these distorted statements because you do not understand the
simple mathematics. <shrug>
Here is the mathematics that you need to understand first to
understand GPS.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/9971008d6e75fbae?hl=en
When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to
impose
a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his
feet
to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
with very low actual data bit rate.
> In particular, the actual GPS has a ground segment with many clocks that
> are REQUIRED to remain synchronized with the clocks in the space segment
> [#].
And what are these clocks again?
> In addition, GPS time must remain within 1 microsecond of UTC
> modulo leap seconds.
Why is that again?
> Remember that the actual GPS is a military system,
<shrug>
> and they require the space segment to continue to meet its requirements
> for a month without any ground segment (in military jargon, the
> satellites are MUCH more survivable than the ground segment is).
It sounds like you know nothing about defense system. Only
mysticism. <shrug>
> That clearly requires that the time variations predicted and modeled by
> GR be incorporated into the system clocks.
Again, this claim is not necessary in the explanation I gave you.
<shrug>
> And, of course, they are.
> That simple fact disproves Koobee's claims.
You cannot make up specs to promote the nonsense of GR. <shrug>
> [snipped word salad]
>
> Koobee, please stop making things up and discussing them as if they were
> facts.
I am afraid you are the one who is making things up. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
[snip]
> > And, of course, they are.
> > That simple fact disproves Koobee's claims.
>
> You cannot make up specs to promote the nonsense of GR. <shrug>
Then show us the evidence - the 'actual' specifications - that support
your claims.
[snip rest]
Koobee Wublee
> On Jan 23, 1:01 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> > necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> > However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> > a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> > the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> > Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> > much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>
> > That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> > continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> > to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> > frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> > parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> > errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> > with very low actual data bit rate.
>
> Light speed is 3x10^8 m/s. A 500 part per trillion error corresponds
> to a 15 centimeter positioning error. You need to remember that GPS
> doesn't work how _you_ would have designed it, it works differently.
I guess the manufacturer of GPS receivers disagree with you.
http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/theory.htm
> The timing information is how position is determined, as the receiver
> has access to precious little else.
You still don’t understand the idea behind the data acquisition of
four satellites. <shrug>
> You'll note that the relativistic corrections are 100 times larger
> than this - ~50,000 ns/day.
There is no need for relativistic corrections. <shrug>
> > Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> > about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> > the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
> > <shrug>
>
> Engineers are neither smarter nor dumber, but they have different
> educations. You'll note that engineers were the ones who actually
> built the global positioning system which happens to use relativity as
> a highly important correction, one of many. Did the atmospheric
> science cabal force the GPS designers to include ionospheric
> corrections in the timing signal too, or is it as important as the
> relativistic correction?
Hmmm... Physicists like Professor Roberts did Lucent in. Not only
that, he still has trouble like yourself to understand how Garmin’s
concept of receiver design. It says the engineers are making things
work that physicists are still perplexed. In doing so, physicists
just choose to hold on to their mysticism. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
> On Jan 23, 3:11 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 23, 1:01 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > > When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> > > necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> > > However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> > > a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> > > the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> > > Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> > > much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>
> > > That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> > > continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> > > to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> > > frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> > > parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> > > errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> > > with very low actual data bit rate.
>
> > Light speed is 3x10^8 m/s. A 500 part per trillion error corresponds
> > to a 15 centimeter positioning error. You need to remember that GPS
> > doesn't work how _you_ would have designed it, it works differently.
>
> I guess the manufacturer of GPS receivers disagree with you.
>
> http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/theory.htm
"The satellite itself has an atomic clock to keep the time very
precisely, but your unit is probably not big enough nor expensive
enough to have an atomic clock built in, so your clock is likely to be
in error! For this reason our assumptions about the distance
calculation are likely to have considerable error and the fourth
satellite fix will reveal this to us. However, if we assume the error
is caused by an error in our clock then we can adjust our clock a
little and recompute all 4 fixes, continuing to do this iteratively
until the error disappears! We will then have a good position fix and
as a side effect we will also have the correct time to about 200
nanoseconds or so. One of the applications of gps technology is to
provide the correct time even when we don't care about our position."
Precision of < 200ns requires relativistic corrections. Demonstrated
amply by NTS-2, Hafele-Keating, anyone who does accurate timekeeping
at NIST, etc, etc.
He doesn't describe the atmospheric corrections used against the
timing signal either like the signal specification says, so is the
spec lying about that too or is this guy's information not complete?
>
> > The timing information is how position is determined, as the receiver
> > has access to precious little else.
>
> You still don’t understand the idea behind the data acquisition of
> four satellites. <shrug>
You still don't understand that the system works differently than from
how you wish it did.
>
> > You'll note that the relativistic corrections are 100 times larger
> > than this - ~50,000 ns/day.
>
> There is no need for relativistic corrections. <shrug>
Why do the signaling specifications say otherwise? Why does experiment
show otherwise?
Why can't you prove otherwise by citing actual specifications instead
of a hobbyist writeup that is clearly not complete?
>
> > > Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> > > about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> > > the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
> > > <shrug>
>
> > Engineers are neither smarter nor dumber, but they have different
> > educations. You'll note that engineers were the ones who actually
> > built the global positioning system which happens to use relativity as
> > a highly important correction, one of many. Did the atmospheric
> > science cabal force the GPS designers to include ionospheric
> > corrections in the timing signal too, or is it as important as the
> > relativistic correction?
>
> Hmmm... Physicists like Professor Roberts did Lucent in. Not only
> that, he still has trouble like yourself to understand how Garmin’s
> concept of receiver design. It says the engineers are making things
> work that physicists are still perplexed. In doing so, physicists
> just choose to hold on to their mysticism. <shrug>
The receivers are irrelevant as they perform no signal corrections, as
has been amply explained to you personally and in the literature on
the subject. Furthermore, the page you cited isn't a valid substitute
for signal specifications.
Apparently you feel that since a hobbyist writeup of how a GPS
receiver works does not describe the relativistic corrections, then
they do not exist. Even though the signal specifications published by
the United States military who had the system designed say otherwise.
So why is the military's publication not proof enough of the content
of the sattelite signal? Do you wish to assume yet another massive
conspiracy?
Koobee Wublee
> On Jan 23, 10:34 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > I guess the manufacturer of GPS receivers disagree with you.
>
> >http://www.gpsinformation.org/dale/theory.htm
>
> [whining crap snipped]
You never did understand how the time and space is calculated in a GPS
receiver, and there is no point to continue. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
Why even respond with anything other than "NURRRRR HURF DURF" if you
are just going to do that?
Koobee Wublee
> On Jan 23, 11:04 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > You never did understand how the time and space is calculated in a GPS
> > receiver, and there is no point to continue. <shrug>
>
> Why even respond with anything other than "NURRRRR HURF DURF" if you
> are just going to do that?
Oh, stop crying. It is your own fault. You never did understand how
Y.Porat
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
> >> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
> >> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
> >> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>
> >> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
> >> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> > Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> > the Bible.
>
> The beautiful thing about GPS is that observational data is available
> to all most anyone and be compared to predictions of GTR... GPS is a
> wonderful relativity laboratory.
>
> Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
>
> Take some time to learn what really happens.
-------------
relativistic effects on clocks are not of GR
but about SR !!!
just remember
i am not against SR
i am against GR !!!
(a bit of fines Mr Wormley !!!
and above all
the above quotes are a good reminder
that GPS has nothing yo do with GR
it is a pure technical trial and error practice
and the ugly side of it is
getting credit for something that does not belong it
more bluntly:
steeling credit !!
(i know it is not your initiative
you are just t quoting without thinking
and examining properly )
ATB
Y.Porat
-------------------------
Tom Potter
"Tom Roberts" <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:1tsel.9392$hc1....@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Considering that over 300 years ago
Galileo EXPERIMENTED and discovered
that acceleration affected the frequency of oscillators,
why not give credit where credit is due,
and call the frequency difference between an Earth bound oscillator,
and an identical orbiting oscillator,
that results in tick accumulators (Clocks)
accumulating tick differences of 38 microseconds per day
the GALILEO EFFECT?
Note that the 38 microseconds per day difference
can be computed using one Galileo based equation,
and one does not have to use General Relativity
plus 13 hacks to get the right value.
Also note that after Galileo's discovery,
England sent ships all over the world
with standard pendulums to collect acceleration data (Little g)
and Newton used this data
to compute the shape of the Earth,
(Including the bumps.)
and tides all over the world.
I, for one, would like to see the
General Relativity Cultists or Gurus,
duplicate what Newton did
( Compute a few tides.)
using Galileo's discovery and hand calculations.
Are General Relativity Cultists or Gurus babble masters,
or can they really use General Relativity alone
without the 13 Classical Physics hacks,
to do cost-efficient useful work?
The greatest con jobs in the world
are diamonds, vitamin C, General Relativity, the Holocaust,
jade, whiplash, carpal tunnel syndrome, and
let me just put it in a little way.
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com/
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
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
>
> When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to
> impose a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
Satellite clocks run at a different rate that ground observers and
even when synchronized among themselves will give a totally erroneous
PVT solution in a ground receiver without relativity corrections and
time synchronization. The error would eventually become so great that
the receiver would be looking for satellites on the wrong side of the
earth.
Sue...
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> > When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> > necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> > However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to
> > impose a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> > the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
>
> Satellite clocks run at a different rate that ground observers
Would you care to show us an example ?
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/gps_datafiles.html
Sue...
Sam Wormley
>
> Considering that over 300 years ago
> Galileo EXPERIMENTED and discovered
> that acceleration affected the frequency of oscillators,
>
The problem, Potter, is that you perpetually fail to understand
that gravitation as well as relative velocity cause time dilation
and must be taken into account. Every nanosecond counts in global
navigation satellite systems.
Sam Wormley
Sure Dennis
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
Perhaps Dennis (AKA Sue) would benefit from a bit of self education
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Sam Wormley
First and formost, Koobee, one needs to provide accurate timing in
the global navigation satellite system.
Perhaps Koobee would benefit from a bit of self education
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Interface Control Document ICD-GPS-200D
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
GPS is a Satellite Navigation System
http://www.colorado.edu/geography/gcraft/notes/gps/gps_f.html
Pseudo-Range Navigation Solution Example
http://www.colorado.edu/geography/gcraft/notes/gps/gif/navigate.gif
Ephemeris Data Set Used in Pseudo-Range Navigation Solution Example
http://www.colorado.edu/geography/gcraft/notes/gps/gps_f.html
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 24, 12:16 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>>> On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>>>> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
>>>> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
>>>> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>>>> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
>>>> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>>> Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
>>> the Bible.
>> The beautiful thing about GPS is that observational data is available
>> to all most anyone and be compared to predictions of GTR... GPS is a
>> wonderful relativity laboratory.
>>
>> 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
>>
>> Take some time to learn what really happens.
>
> -------------
> relativistic effects on clocks are not of GR
> but about SR !!!
Like Potter, Porat perpetually fail to understand that gravitation as well
as relative velocity cause time dilation and must be taken into account.
Every nanosecond counts in global navigation satellite systems.
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
> just remember
>
> i am not against SR
> i am against GR !!!
> (a bit of fines Mr Wormley !!!
> and above all
> the above quotes are a good reminder
> that GPS has nothing yo do with GR
GTR predicts the error, and thus the corrections, required for accuracy
and functionality in global navigation satellite systems.
>
> it is a pure technical trial and error practice
Trial and error might have made some progress toward accuracy and
functionality in global navigation satellite systems, however, that
was not the case. Relativistic corrections were and are an integral
part of the GPS.
Sue...
>
> Perhaps Dennis (AKA Sue) would benefit from a bit of self education
> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
Why would I click on a link that has the EDU on
the wrong side of the dot ?
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html
Only someone who thinks they need Dirk and Sam
to tell them who they are and who they are not
is going to accept that my clock is slower than
your clock while your clock is slower than my clock.
Just because one psychopath is following another
psychopath is no reason anyone else should follow.
Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience
Rory Coker, Ph.D.
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html
As for you obsession with Dirk's old flame, I can only
suggest you take it up with a mental health professional.
In any case, this newsgroup is not a gay meeting forum
and I am not *Dennis* so take your crap elsewhere.
Sue !!!
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 23, 3:11 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>> Light speed is 3x10^8 m/s. A 500 part per trillion error corresponds
>> to a 15 centimeter positioning error. You need to remember that GPS
>> doesn't work how _you_ would have designed it, it works differently.
>
> I guess the manufacturer of GPS receivers disagree with you.
>
The GPS receivers don't have to have atomic clocks to work, given
a sufficient number of satellites, geometry and so on Koobee. But
the system as a whole must have exquisite timing, orbital accuracy
and a good figure of the earth.
Eric is right on.
Here are some resources for you, Koobee:
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 24, 10:08 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com>
>> Perhaps Dennis (AKA Sue) would benefit from a bit of self education
>> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> Why would I click on a link that has the EDU on
> the wrong side of the dot ?
>
> http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html
>
> Only someone who thinks they need Dirk and Sam
> to tell them who they are and who they are not
> is going to accept that my clock is slower than
> your clock while your clock is slower than my clock.
Dennis (AKA Sue) -- You keep forgetting gravitational time dilation!
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 23, 3:11 pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
>> Light speed is 3x10^8 m/s. A 500 part per trillion error corresponds
>> to a 15 centimeter positioning error. You need to remember that GPS
>> doesn't work how _you_ would have designed it, it works differently.
>
> I guess the manufacturer of GPS receivers disagree with you.
>
Here you go Koobee--GPS User Equipment Introduction - Sept 1996 (PDF Format)
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
Sam Wormley
There is every point to continue, Koobee, because you should
really take some time to understand the principles and
implementation of global navigation satellite systems.
Sam Wormley
Hey, Koobee, let me outline if for you!
Y.Porat
common man
do you have difficulty in reading englidh???
my claim is that GR repeat curvature of space time
has nothing to do with the GPS system
space is nothing and therefore cannot have
any properties except hosting mass
if there is no mass in there it does not curve and does not shmerve
the curved movement(of masses!!) is due to some
force agemnts that stem from mass !!!
em waves has mass as well !!!
othoha
he fact that whilwe a mass reaches closer to the c velocity
it becomes more dificult for it to add velocity
so relative to a stationary detector there is a change
measurments ie they do not remain constant
9the relative motion in slow elative movement
is different from that while there is a hihgr movement
of the deteced mass
that is why i agree with SR !!
**but that has nothing to do with GR**
that claimes that space is a sort of force maker
that can curve a movement pass of a mass
waht cuses the curved movement of mass
is
**mass agents that are emmited fromone mass to the other**
as in ***all forces*** that we know
electric magnetic nuclear etc etc
got it once and for all ??
and please dont forget who told you that
for the first time
and write it down in your **new books**
not in your old ones !!
and once upon a time(may be after 50 years ..) while you quote it
dont forget who was the original .thinker ...
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------------
Y.Porat
------------------------
common
the 'space segments that are quoted there
*has nothing to do with 'curvature of space time'
it has a lot to do withthe fact that satellites are
orbiting earth
and it has nothing to do with the 'force of space
curvature'
it is the Gravitons that do it!!
it is mass messengers from earth !!
2
it has nothingto do with clocks changing ther rate
*in their rest frame*
it is not in their rest frame
it is the relative movent betwen them
and earth that detects their movement!
or relative movement between themselves
plus earth
you always have the problem of 'downloading' the data to earth by EM
waves
in short
SR indeed has a lot to do with it
GR has nothing to do with it !!!
and the theory as well has nothing to do with
GR
it is only the SR which is againf just in practice
*atrial and error **engineering**system
so
stop stealing credit from engineering sytems
to your GR theory !!
and the sooner realizing it- the better for all of us --
on the long run .
ATB
Y.Porat
-------------------
Eric Gisse
NURRRRR
Paul B. Andersen
> On Jan 23, 8:14 am, Sam Wormley wrote:
>
>> The relativity corrections are written into the Interface Control
>> Document ICD-GPS-200D, Porat.
>> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>>
>> Perhaps Porat would benefit from a bit of self education
>> http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html#relativity
>
> Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> the Bible.
I note with interest that Koobee Wublee doesn't know the difference
between a specification and an application note.
The manufacturers of the GPS-satellites better take
the specification "as the Bible"! :-)
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
I quote section 3.3.1.1 from this SPECIFICATION:
<<
3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan.
The L-band signals shall be contained within two 20.46-MHz bands
centred about L1 and L2. The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2
signals shall be coherently derived from a common frequency source
within the SV. The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears
to an observer on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency
and clock rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in
the SV -- are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock
rates are offset by delta_f/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in
the P-code shipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a delta_f = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
This is equal to 10.22999999543 MHz. The nominal carrier frequencies (fo)
shall be 1575.42 MHz, and 1227.6 MHz for L1 and L2, respectively.
>>
There is nothing to discuss. It is an indisputable fact that
the -4.4647E-10 correction predicted by GR is built into
each and every GPS-satellite, which proves that the GPS works
with the corrections introduced by GR.
>
> When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
This is incredible stupid!
There are 24 satellites in 6 planes. They are moving fast relative
to each other. And you claim that it is simpler to synchronize
the satellites between themselves than to do it form the ground!
It would be virtually impossible!
And it isn't done.
Each SV clock is synchronized to the ground clocks from the ground.
> That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> with very low actual data bit rate.
It isn't very smart to lie like this when what I actually said can
be found on Google:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/864da1c5af07fc14
http://tinyurl.com/bdzm4k
<<
It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
because nobody ever said they had.
Listen autistic idiot:
The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
the ground clocks.
That the carrier and shipping frequencies also are adjusted is
just a side effect because all frequencies are derived from
the same frequency standard.
Read this:
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------
| The important point is that if the SV clock rates were not corrected,
| they would drift out of sync from GPS time after few minutes.
| The clocks have to be in sync within 100 ns for the GPS to work.
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------
All this stupid fuss about the frequencies emitted from
the satellite is copletely beside the point!
The carrier frequencies, like all other frequencies,
are at the receiver Doppler shifted between +/- 3E-7.
The satellites are moving!
This is equivalent to a frequency shift of the carriers
in the order of kHz. Since the banwidth of the channels
is ca. 20 MHz, this is of no consequence for the receiver.
The Doppler shift may be almost a thousand times more than
the minute GR-correction, so of bloody course the -4.4647E-10
offset is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver!
AND NOBODY EVER SAID OTHERWISE!
>>
>
> Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
> <shrug>
A strange statement.
The engineers building the GPS-satellites are obviously smart
enough to build them according to the specification.
So what exactly are you referring to?
--
Paul
Strich.9
> The problem, Potter, is that you perpetually fail to understand
> that gravitation as well as relative velocity cause time dilation
> and must be taken into account.
UNPROVEN (and illogical)
Eric Gisse
<paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:
[...]
> The engineers building the GPS-satellites are obviously smart
> enough to build them according to the specification.
> So what exactly are you referring to?
Simple - he found a page giving a good overview of how the system
works, but which happens to leave out some of the minutia which
includes relativity. He concludes that GR isn't in the GPS because the
writings of a hobbyist incorrectly attributed [by wubby] to Garmin do
not mention relativity.
When called upon the overall stupidity of the claim, or on little
details like how the page he cited mentions that GPS time has to be
accurate to within 200ns for the system to work, he snips everything
and runs away in a squid spray of insults and stupidity.
When asked to explain why all the published documentation on the
system disagree with him, he comes up equally empty.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/
hanson
himself over Koobee Wublee's assessment of the situation and
Paul being a fervent Einstein Dingleberry, like Sam Wormley is,
Paul wrote a lengthy tripe insisting that GPS is only possible
because of SG & GR... ahahahaha...
[snipped Paul's psalm of proselitizing for Einstein]
>
hanson wrote:
... if you Dingleberries were to says that GPS operations
can be **described** by using SR & GR you'd be off the hook.
But as long as you Einstein Dingleberries insist, in your gross
worship of Albert's sphincter, that GPS needs Einstein's crap
you are only proving that you are, well, Einstein's Dingleberries.
>
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
and if you are driven to describe it by mathematical modeling
then any high schooler can see that you need 1 single equation
of Newtonian mechanics for this system to get to your "relativistic
corrections":
== (M_e /h ) * (2 G/c^2) * 86400 = 38 microsec ==
You don't need 39+ equations of Ashby's shit to get there....
See here for more fun with this, in
-- http://tinyurl.com/6frczv - & - http://tinyurl.com/dmudrf --
Thanks for laughs, you precious Einstein Dingleberries...
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... ahahaha...ahahahanon
Sam Wormley
It's easy to prove (or I should say show) that Potter perpetually
fails to understand that gravitation as well as relative velocity
cause time dilation and must be taken into account. The evidence
is in Potter's posting record.
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Hmmm... You are taking a couple poorly written application notes as
> > the Bible.
>
> I note with interest that Koobee Wublee doesn't know the difference
> between a specification and an application note.
Hmmm... That is a strong statement. Anyway, happy new year. Maybe
this new lunar new year will bring better wisdom to you instead of you
haunted by mysticism. <shrug>
> The manufacturers of the GPS-satellites better take
> the specification "as the Bible"! :-)
>
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Yes, we have been through that already.
> I quote section 3.3.1.1 from this SPECIFICATION:
> <<
> 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan.
> The L-band signals shall be contained within two 20.46-MHz bands
> centred about L1 and L2. The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2
> signals shall be coherently derived from a common frequency source
> within the SV. The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears
> to an observer on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency
> and clock rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in
> the SV -- are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock
> rates are offset by delta_f/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in
> the P-code shipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a delta_f = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> This is equal to 10.22999999543 MHz. The nominal carrier frequencies (fo)
> shall be 1575.42 MHz, and 1227.6 MHz for L1 and L2, respectively.
> >>
>
> There is nothing to discuss. It is an indisputable fact that
> the -4.4647E-10 correction predicted by GR is built into
> each and every GPS-satellite, which proves that the GPS works
> with the corrections introduced by GR.
What if you do not correct for that 450 parts in a trillion? Are you
still able to obtain the data information from that 10.23MHz chipping
rate (or IF)? Hint: This is a broadband application!
> > When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
> > necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
> > However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
> > a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
> > the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
> > Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
> > much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>
> This is incredible stupid!
> There are 24 satellites in 6 planes. They are moving fast relative
> to each other.
You are wrong! The satellites do not move fast relative to each
other. In fact each satellite on one plane is stationary to the
others on the same plane. You are totally delusional. Perhaps,
chasing too many chickens. <shrug>
> And you claim that it is simpler to synchronize
> the satellites between themselves than to do it form the ground!
Yes, indeed. Is that too late to get a patent for that?
> It would be virtually impossible!
> And it isn't done.
> Each SV clock is synchronized to the ground clocks from the ground.
That is not very effective. The atmosphere introduces too much
error. <shrug>
> > That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> > continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> > to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> > frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> > parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> > errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> > with very low actual data bit rate.
>
> It isn't very smart to lie like this when what I actually said can
> be found on Google:
What lie?
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/864da1c5af0...
> http://tinyurl.com/bdzm4k
> <<
> It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
> that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
> the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
> because nobody ever said they had.
That comment above is absolutely stupid when dealing with a center
frequency shift of 450 in one trillion in a broadband application.
<shrug>
> Listen autistic idiot:
> The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
> for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
> the ground clocks.
Again, this is not necessary when the satellites are synchronized
among themselves. <shrug>
> That the carrier and shipping frequencies also are adjusted is
> just a side effect because all frequencies are derived from
> the same frequency standard.
Yeah, 450 parts in a trillion in a broadband application. Were you
fired at your previous job for being so obnoxiously ignorance?
> Read this:
>
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | The important point is that if the SV clock rates were not corrected,
> | they would drift out of sync from GPS time after few minutes.
> | The clocks have to be in sync within 100 ns for the GPS to work.
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bullsh*t!
> All this stupid fuss about the frequencies emitted from
> the satellite is copletely beside the point!
>
> The carrier frequencies, like all other frequencies,
> are at the receiver Doppler shifted between +/- 3E-7.
> The satellites are moving!
Wait! Aren’t we talking about 450 parts in a trillion?
> This is equivalent to a frequency shift of the carriers
> in the order of kHz. Since the banwidth of the channels
> is ca. 20 MHz, this is of no consequence for the receiver.
>
> The Doppler shift may be almost a thousand times more than
> the minute GR-correction, so of bloody course the -4.4647E-10
> offset is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver!
> AND NOBODY EVER SAID OTHERWISE!
> >>
You are mistaken again. The carrier frequencies are not utilized to
generate any clocks. The carrier frequencies are discarded after
mixing. <shrug>
> > Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
> > about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
> > the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
> > <shrug>
>
> A strange statement.
> The engineers building the GPS-satellites are obviously smart
> enough to build them according to the specification.
Now, show me where the actual specifications are instead of these
lousy out-of-date application notes.
> So what exactly are you referring to?
Paul is still chasing chickens. Keep chasing, Paul. :-)
Helmut Wabnig
Diatribes without a slightest colour hue of proof of truth -
or whatever.
hanson,
> **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
>Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
prove it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BTW, hanson, did you know that your microwave oven
is relativistically corrected?
Learn about magnetrons, if you like.
hanson eats Einstein with every chump of microwave pizza.
Don't throw up now, hanson.
:-)
w.
Strich.9
Another monkey who needs a speller: time dilation is UNPROVEN and
illogical.
Strich.9
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:45:41 GMT, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Einstein would have to rent space from Christ. You forgot who owns
the bread :-)
Androcles
"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> wrote in message
news:gootn4lcpe149d0d3...@4ax.com...
Easy. If GPS can be shown to work without SR or GR, even if it
was formerly used, then the conjecture has been proven - it was never
needed.
Here is the proof:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> BTW, hanson, did you know that your microwave oven
> is relativistically corrected?
> Learn about magnetrons, if you like.
BTW, wabbie, did you know you are an ignorant fuckhead?
Learn about gullibility, if you like.
>
> hanson eats Einstein with every chump of microwave pizza.
> Don't throw up now, hanson.
> :-)
> w.
wabbie is the chump.
hanson
>
"Helmut Wabnig" <hwabnig@ .- --- -. dotat> you said in your
last post that you, Wabie, said stupid things. See here what
it was -- http://tinyurl.com/amdmvm -- and now you just did
it again in your fanaticism, with this time not as a Jew hater
that you are, but now as a fanatically worshipping Einstein
Dingleberry which effectively prevents you from ever grasping
nor comprehending & much less to understand that
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
Diatribes without a slightest colour hue of proof of truth -
or whatever. hanson,
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
prove it.
is relativistically corrected? Learn about magnetrons, if you like.
hanson eats Einstein with every chump of microwave pizza.
Don't throw up now, hanson.
:-)
>
... ahahahaha... I have no need to throw up, but YOU just did.
... and to boot, you think your own KOTZEREI is funny [ :-) ].
Wabie, don't be so loud in your advertising that you are an
Einstein Dingleberry, or you make me agree with Androcles
that you are indeed a cretin... ahahaha...
Don't strain yourself so hard to show the world that you are a
Trottel, Totsch, Tölpel or whatever people like you are labeled
in your Austria... ahahahaha... ahahahaha... hahahahahanson
>
BTW, Wabie, you QUATSCHKOPF, thanks for keeping this
thread open... ahahahaha...
Sam Wormley
Interesting how Strich can dilude itself in so many areas of
physics... it's almost as if it knows some basic tenants of
physics and choose to troll for attention like some two-year-old.
Paul B. Andersen
Since "we have been through that already", you know that
the above is an irrefutable fact.
So we won't talk about that, will we? :-)
> What if you do not correct for that 450 parts in a trillion? Are you
> still able to obtain the data information from that 10.23MHz chipping
> rate (or IF)? Hint: This is a broadband application!
<<
It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
because nobody ever said they had.
Listen autistic idiot:
The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
the ground clocks.
>>
>
>>> When conducting an acquisition, if you have three satellites, it is
>>> necessary to synchronize the ground and the satellite clocks.
>>> However, when four satellites are acquired, there is no need to impose
>>> a synchronization of the ground and the satellite clocks as long as
>>> the clocks on all the satellites are synchronized among themselves.
>>> Synchronization of the clocks between the ground and the satellite is
>>> much more difficult to achieve than satellite-to-satellite.
>> This is incredible stupid!
>> There are 24 satellites in 6 planes. They are moving fast relative
>> to each other.
>
> You are wrong! The satellites do not move fast relative to each
> other. In fact each satellite on one plane is stationary to the
> others on the same plane. You are totally delusional. Perhaps,
> chasing too many chickens. <shrug>
There are four satellites in each plane.
What about the other 20 satellites?
Are they moving relative to these four? :-)
>
>> And you claim that it is simpler to synchronize
>> the satellites between themselves than to do it form the ground!
>
> Yes, indeed. Is that too late to get a patent for that?
Go ahead and try.
Since you don't even understand the complexity of the task,
you have obviously no clue of how it could be done.
>
>> It would be virtually impossible!
>> And it isn't done.
>> Each SV clock is synchronized to the ground clocks from the ground.
>
> That is not very effective. The atmosphere introduces too much
> error. <shrug>
But that's how if factually is done.
Your opinion is irrelevant.
>
>>> That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
>>> continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
>>> to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
>>> frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
>>> parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
>>> errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
>>> with very low actual data bit rate.
>> It isn't very smart to lie like this when what I actually said can
>> be found on Google:
>
> What lie?
Below is what I _did_ say, compare that to what you claimed I said.
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/864da1c5af0...
>> http://tinyurl.com/bdzm4k
>> <<
>> It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
>> that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
>> the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
>> because nobody ever said they had.
>
> That comment above is absolutely stupid when dealing with a center
> frequency shift of 450 in one trillion in a broadband application.
> <shrug>
Another demonstration of your reading comprehension problem which
made me exclaim:
>> Listen autistic idiot:
>> The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
>> for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
>> the ground clocks.
>
> Again, this is not necessary when the satellites are synchronized
> among themselves. <shrug>
But they are not, so it is.
Read this:
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------
| The important point is that if the SV clock rates were not corrected,
| they would drift out of sync from GPS time after few minutes.
| The clocks have to be in sync within 100 ns for the GPS to work.
| -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> That the carrier and shipping frequencies also are adjusted is
>> just a side effect because all frequencies are derived from
>> the same frequency standard.
>
> Yeah, 450 parts in a trillion in a broadband application. Were you
> fired at your previous job for being so obnoxiously ignorance?
<<
It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
because nobody ever said they had.
Listen autistic idiot:
The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
the ground clocks.
>>
>> Read this:
>>
>> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> | The important point is that if the SV clock rates were not corrected,
>> | they would drift out of sync from GPS time after few minutes.
>> | The clocks have to be in sync within 100 ns for the GPS to work.
>> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Bullsh*t!
The above is an irrefutable fact.
Your opinion is irrelevant.
>
>> All this stupid fuss about the frequencies emitted from
>> the satellite is copletely beside the point!
>>
>> The carrier frequencies, like all other frequencies,
>> are at the receiver Doppler shifted between +/- 3E-7.
>> The satellites are moving!
>
> Wait! Aren’t we talking about 450 parts in a trillion?
Another demonstration of your reading comprehension problem.
>> This is equivalent to a frequency shift of the carriers
>> in the order of kHz. Since the banwidth of the channels
>> is ca. 20 MHz, this is of no consequence for the receiver.
>>
>> The Doppler shift may be almost a thousand times more than
>> the minute GR-correction, so of bloody course the -4.4647E-10
>> offset is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver!
>> AND NOBODY EVER SAID OTHERWISE!
>> >>
>
> You are mistaken again.
So I am wrong when saying that the -4.4647E-10 offset
is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver
because:
> The carrier frequencies are not utilized to
> generate any clocks. The carrier frequencies are discarded after
> mixing. <shrug>
This doesn't make much sense, does it? :-)
>
>>> Defending a passage from an application note that you know nothing
>>> about is very hilarious indeed, Sam! This is another example of why
>>> the engineers in general are more intelligent than physicists.
>>> <shrug>
>> A strange statement.
>> The engineers building the GPS-satellites are obviously smart
>> enough to build them according to the specification.
>
> Now, show me where the actual specifications are instead of these
> lousy out-of-date application notes.
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Title: "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION"
Revision history:
A - 25. Sept 1984
B - 30. Nov 1978
C - 10. Oct 1993
D - 7. Dec 2004
It is 11 years between revision C and D.
So why do you think the last revision is outdated after
only 4 years?
But you don't, of course.
You must be pretty desperate to call a valid SPECIFICATION
"a lousy out-of-date application note", when you know better. :-)
You seem to think that you can change the facts by persistently
denying them. :-)
--
Paul
Sue...
On which page is the Sagnac correction addressed ?
Sue...
Sue...
<paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:
>
> There is nothing to discuss. It is an indisputable fact that
> the -4.4647E-10 correction predicted by GR is built into
> each and every GPS-satellite, which proves that the GPS works
> with the corrections introduced by GR.
<<Simple-minded use of Einstein synchronization in the rotating frame
gives only (eqn), and thus leads to a significant error.>> --Neal
Ashby
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/articlese2.html#x5-20002
Does that mean that Einstein was simple minded or
that his synchronisation leads to error ?
Maybe the marketeers for GR should stick to
measuring tower heights. :o)
http://www.phys.canterbury.ac.nz/research/laser/gopen.shtml
Sam Wormley
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
>
> On which page is the Sagnac correction addressed ?
>
> Sue...
>
>
"Relativity in Rotating Frames"
By Guido Rizzi, Matteo Luca Ruggiero
Strich.9
After I stumped you twice before, it's amazing you still show your
face like some ignored teenager who craves attention...
w...@2die4.com
It is very sad that education cannot make mental illness pretty.
Androcles
<w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
news:4584d3cd-b9c3-40e9...@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> It is very sad that education cannot make mental illness pretty.
>
Carry on weeping, it won't change anything.
Koobee Wublee
> > Hmmm... That is a strong statement. Anyway, happy new year. Maybe
> > this new lunar new year will bring better wisdom to you instead of you
> > haunted by mysticism. <shrug>
>
> Since "we have been through that already", you know that
> the above is an irrefutable fact.
>
> So we won't talk about that, will we? :-)
Hmmm... It is your wish that the lousy application note for the GPS
is the actual specification. I can understand that you decide to
place your tail between your legs and not to talk about it anymore.
Thus, so be it. <shrug>
> > What if you do not correct for that 450 parts in a trillion? Are you
> > still able to obtain the data information from that 10.23MHz chipping
> > rate (or IF)? Hint: This is a broadband application!
>
> <<
> It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
> that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
> the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
> because nobody ever said they had.
>
> Listen autistic idiot:
> The reason, and only reason, why the frequency standard is corrected
> for relativistic effects is to make the SV clock run synchronously with
> the ground clocks.
> >>
Listen again. Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
achieve. <shrug>
> > You are wrong! The satellites do not move fast relative to each
> > other. In fact each satellite on one plane is stationary to the
> > others on the same plane. You are totally delusional. Perhaps,
> > chasing too many chickens. <shrug>
>
> There are four satellites in each plane.
> What about the other 20 satellites?
> Are they moving relative to these four? :-)
Very slowly. <shrug>
> And you claim that it is simpler to synchronize
> the satellites between themselves than to do it form the ground!
>
> > Yes, indeed. Is that too late to get a patent for that?
>
> Go ahead and try.
> Since you don't even understand the complexity of the task,
> you have obviously no clue of how it could be done.
The task is not that complicated. It is only so because you embrace
mysticism. <shrug>
> > That is not very effective. The atmosphere introduces too much
> > error. <shrug>
>
> But that's how if factually is done.
> Your opinion is irrelevant.
Hmmm... Satellite-to-satellite does not introduce any atmospheric
errors while satellite-to-ground does. Your faith in GR and Einstein
the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar being your personal messiah
allows you to see the stupidity in your belief. <shrug>
> > That so-called professor from Norway somewhere realized that. To
> > continue to spread the nonsense of GR, he immediately pounded his feet
> > to claim the synchronization must be achieved through the operating
> > frequencies of the satellites and ground equipments. Well, given 500
> > parts in a trillion, just how accurate do you want these frequency
> > errors to be? Remember we are talking about a broadband application
> > with very low actual data bit rate.
>
> <<
> It is completely beside the point to repeat over and over
> that the small offset in the frequencies sent from
> the satellite have no consequences whatsover,
> because nobody ever said they had.
So, you are saying there is no necessity to correct for GR’s
predictions. What is then your problem?
> > That comment above is absolutely stupid when dealing with a center
> > frequency shift of 450 in one trillion in a broadband application.
> > <shrug>
>
> Another demonstration of your reading comprehension problem which
> made me exclaim:
You are totally shrouded in mysticism. <shrug>
> > Again, this is not necessary when the satellites are synchronized
> > among themselves. <shrug>
>
> But they are not, so it is.
> Read this:
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> | The important point is that if the SV clock rates were not corrected,
> | they would drift out of sync from GPS time after few minutes.
> | The clocks have to be in sync within 100 ns for the GPS to work.
> | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still bullsh*t!
> [Repeated nonsense snipped]
> > Wait! Aren’t we talking about 450 parts in a trillion?
>
> Another demonstration of your reading comprehension problem.
Is it not the predicted GR correction only accounts for 450 parts in a
trillion?
> The Doppler shift may be almost a thousand times more than
> the minute GR-correction, so of bloody course the -4.4647E-10
> offset is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver!
> AND NOBODY EVER SAID OTHERWISE!
>
> > You are mistaken again.
>
> So I am wrong when saying that the -4.4647E-10 offset
> is of no concequence whatsoever for the receiver
> because:
>
> > The carrier frequencies are not utilized to
> > generate any clocks. The carrier frequencies are discarded after
> > mixing. <shrug>
>
> This doesn't make much sense, does it? :-)
I meant chipping rate instead of carrier frequency to be more
precise. <shrug>
So, show me the spec that requires the chipping rate to establish a
system clock of some sort.
> > Now, show me where the actual specifications are instead of these
> > lousy out-of-date application notes.
>
> http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
> Title: "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION"
> Revision history:
> A - 25. Sept 1984
> B - 30. Nov 1978
> C - 10. Oct 1993
> D - 7. Dec 2004
> It is 11 years between revision C and D.
> So why do you think the last revision is outdated after
> only 4 years?
So, after you have agreed that the chipping rate really does not have
to be correct on 450 parts in a trillion, what is the fuss all about?
Show me the specification that the chipping rate is fed into another
system to establish a reference clock.
> [Desperate gibberish snipped]
Keep chasing after these chickens, Paul. You make yourself look so
stupid. :-)
Eric Gisse
> On Jan 28, 3:17 am, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote:
>
> > > Hmmm... That is a strong statement. Anyway, happy new year. Maybe
> > > this new lunar new year will bring better wisdom to you instead of you
> > > haunted by mysticism. <shrug>
>
> > Since "we have been through that already", you know that
> > the above is an irrefutable fact.
>
> > So we won't talk about that, will we? :-)
>
No, homeslice. It don't work that way.
You don't get to cite a hobbyist writeup by someone with no expertise
in the system and then turn around and claim the DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
- not an "application note" - are somehow irrelevant. It is
transparent that you have no support for your claims.
That you are unable to explain why every published reference on the
global positioning system over the last 40 years disagrees with you is
sufficient cause to ignore your dumb ass. Or in my case, mock you
mercilessly for years on end.
[snip rest, unread]
Sam Wormley
>
> Listen again. Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
> at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
> equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
> the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
> satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
> satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
> achieve. <shrug>
>
Hey Koobee, I take it you've never owned a GPS receiver. Four locked
and tracked satellites does not guarantee a PVT solution. Also, I've
pointed out to you if the time up there is different from the time
down here, the GPS does work worth shit.
Get a life.. get an education... read before spewing... Oh and you
appear kinda stoooped, like an uneducated hillbilly, going around
shrugging all the time.
Koobee Wublee
> On Jan 28, 9:03 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Hmmm... It is your wish that the lousy application note [...]
>
> No, homeslice.
Hmmm... Homeslice? Is that a new derogatory term?
> It don't work that way.
What does not work that way again?
> You don't get to cite a hobbyist writeup by someone with no expertise
> in the system and then turn around and claim the DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
> - not an "application note" - are somehow irrelevant. It is
> transparent that you have no support for your claims.
Whom have I cited again? What hobbyist write-up? Remember you are
the ones who brought up these lousy applications that are mere
hobbyist write-ups. <shrug>
> [snip the rest of whining crap from a college drop-out, unread]
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> > Listen again. Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
> > at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
> > equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
> > the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
> > satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
> > satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
> > achieve. <shrug>
>
> Hey Koobee, I take it you've never owned a GPS receiver.
<shrug>
> Four locked
> and tracked satellites does not guarantee a PVT solution.
It sounds like you bought a cheap GPS receiver without additional
corrections from ground installations. <shrug>
> Also, I've
> pointed out to you if the time up there is different from the time
> down here, the GPS does work worth shit.
And time after time, your babbling does not amount to any shit.
<shrug>
> Get a life..
Already got one. <shrug>
> get an education...
Already done. <shrug>
> read before spewing...
Also done. <shrug>
> Oh and you
> appear kinda stoooped, like an uneducated hillbilly, going around
> shrugging all the time.
Sam is describing himself using a mirror. <shrug>
Eric Gisse
[snip]
You've been arguing this idiocy since early 2005, and you are
STILLLLLL WRONGGGG.
Sue...
=
>
=
> Sam is describing himself using a mirror. <shrug>
That is doubtful. He hasn't enough electromagnetism
to make a mirror work. There IS the possibility
that "Alice" is operating the device for him.
Sue...
Strich.9
<paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/de05824ee65ab6c7
Anderthal, are you spewing nonsense again? Have you forgotten that
you yourself disproved GR when you stated the motion of the earth is
distinguishable from that of a star, thereby violating the very
principle that GR was made for?
Your tail is so far between your legs that it has come around the back
and covered your eyes.
Tom Roberts
> Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
> at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
> equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
> the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
> satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
> satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
> achieve.
This could be true in some system other than the GPS. But it is not true
in the GPS. That's because the GPS consists of MORE than just the
satellites and the receivers, and because the actual GPS has
requirements OTHER than just permitting receivers to determine their
position and time. The GPS has a ground control segment whose clocks are
REQUIRED to remain in synch with the space segment's clocks, GPS time is
REQUIRED to remain within 1 us of UTC (modulo leap seconds), and the
space segment is REQUIRED to meet its requirements for a month without
updates or corrections from the ground segment.
There is no way for a receiver's determined time to remain within 1 us
of UTC for a month without the ground segment, unless the much larger GR
correction is applied to the satellite clocks.
Note there are a number of GPS applications that ignore
the positioning data and just use the time data, and rely on
it being with 1 us of UTC. Note also that the GPS is a MILITARY
system, with military requirements and engineering.
In short, you are NOT discussing the GPS, you are discussing some
figment of your imagination.
Tom Roberts
claudegps
Guys, why are you wasting so much to answer to this not-funny,not-
educated, stupid troll???
The best way to handle him, is just to ignore him and all the stupid
things he write... :)
No waste of time, and maybe that when he'll not receive answer
anymore, he will get a real-life :D
Sam Wormley
> On Jan 28, 6:17 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
> <paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/de05824ee65ab6c7
>
> Anderthal, are you spewing nonsense again? Have you forgotten that
> you yourself disproved GR when you stated the motion of the earth is
> distinguishable from that of a star, thereby violating the very
> principle that GR was made for?
Are you CrAzy, Strich--the relative velocity between on observer on
the rotating earth, hurtling around the sun, and a distant star is
measured routinely... and some measurement incorporate GTR!
RustyJames
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -...
>
> read more »
The ring laser interferometer has a laser process that generates two
frequencies of laser light.
In every section of the ring laser cavity, the light propagates with
the same velocity in either direction. For the sake of simplicity,
assume that all emitted photons are emitted in a direction parallel to
the ring. (That is in fact a huge simplification, but it does not
affect the content of this exposition.) The atoms in the laser cavity,
represented as grey dots in the animation, have a thermal velocity,
and on average they have a velocity in counter-clockwise direction
along the ring. The molecules in the laser cavity can be seen as
resonators. A passing photon will stimulate emission of the excited
molecule only if the frequency of the passing photon exactly matches
the frequency of the photon that the molecule is ready to emit.
I understand this but in space as a ring passes through a
gravitational field circles become slightly oblong and stretched even
at non-relativistic speeds so I don’t trust their accuracy since the
circular paths of passing photons will stimulate the wrong emission of
the excited molecules causing the frequency of the passing photon not
to match exactly with the frequency of the photon that the molecule is
ready to emit.
Androcles
"Tom Roberts" <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:5Ajgl.2412$PE4....@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
of UTC for a month with or without the ground segment, unless
the much larger upload correction is applied to the satellite clocks.
In short, you are totally clueless and a lying shit, Roberts.
Strich.9
> Strich.9 wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 6:17 am, "Paul B. Andersen"
> > <paul.b.ander...@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:
>
> > Anderthal, are you spewing nonsense again? Have you forgotten that
> > you yourself disproved GR when you stated the motion of the earth is
> > distinguishable from that of a star, thereby violating the very
> > principle that GR was made for?
>
> Are you CrAzy, Strich--the relative velocity between on observer on
> the rotating earth, hurtling around the sun, and a distant star is
> measured routinely... and some measurement incorporate GTR!
No need for the sun, moon and stars. We routinely measure relative
velocities of cars, baseballs, tennis balls, ping pong balls, bullets,
etc. What are you trying to argue anyway, that GR principle does not
apply?
RustyJames
The ring laser interferometer has a laser process that generates two
w...@2die4.com
QED (and sorry to have offended you by diverting you from your child
storybook fantasy).
Androcles
<w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
news:743ea70f-bf10-4393...@35g2000pry.googlegroups.com...
===========================================
You are not sorry, you lying shit. That professed sadness is crocodile
tears.
Fuck off and whine somewhere else that isn't a sci newsgroup.
Koobee Wublee
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
> > at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
> > equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
> > the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
> > satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
> > satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
> > achieve.
>
> This could be true in some system other than the GPS. But it is not true
> in the GPS. That's because the GPS consists of MORE than just the
> satellites and the receivers, and because the actual GPS has
> requirements OTHER than just permitting receivers to determine their
> position and time. The GPS has a ground control segment whose clocks are
> REQUIRED to remain in synch with the space segment's clocks, GPS time is
> REQUIRED to remain within 1 us of UTC (modulo leap seconds), and the
> space segment is REQUIRED to meet its requirements for a month without
> updates or corrections from the ground segment.
GPS demystified:
http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=15475
Almanac data is only 50 bits per second. This data is chipped by two
frequencies each creating its own broadband signal. One is 1.023MHz
with 1.57542GHz carrier, the other one is 10.23MHz with 1.2276GHz
carrier. That is all.
> There is no way for a receiver's determined time to remain within 1 us
> of UTC for a month without the ground segment, unless the much larger GR
> correction is applied to the satellite clocks.
You are the one who came up with such a requirement. <shrug>
> Note there are a number of GPS applications that ignore
> the positioning data and just use the time data, and rely on
> it being with 1 us of UTC. Note also that the GPS is a MILITARY
> system, with military requirements and engineering.
To acquire one’s position, you need to find the following unknows:
** Your position on altitude
** Your position on longitude
** Your position on latitude
** Your time measured in satellite time
Four satellites will send you information on their satellite time and
positions. In doing so, you get a set of four equations. Solving
these four equations, you will get the four unknowns and that will pin-
point your satellite time and position. <shrug>
> In short, you are NOT discussing the GPS, you are discussing some
> figment of your imagination.
Either you are claiming mysticism or know something that only the
military knows. In this case, I still call your bluff. As a
physicist working for Lucent, the odds are against you to be involved
with top-secret GPS development. Therefore, you to be demystified:
** FAITH IS THEORY
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** LYING IS TEACHING
<shrug>
hanson
>
"Androcles" <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:>>> <w...@2die4.com> wrote:
who@2die4 wrote:
It is very sad that education cannot make mental illness pretty.
>>
Androcles wrote:
It is irrelevant that you are emotional and hence mentally unstable.
Carry on weeping, it won't change anything.
>
who@2die4 wrote:
QED (and sorry to have offended you by diverting you from your child
storybook fantasy).
>
Androcles, inventor of "=========================" wrote:
You are not sorry, you lying shit. That professed sadness is crocodile
tears. Fuck off and whine somewhere else that isn't a sci newsgroup.
>
hanson wrote:
If "who@2die4" is an Einstein Dingleberry, then it's him "whowilldie4"
the pleasure of dangling in the cozy breeze of the farts from Albert's
sphincter. So, let him choke on it, together with Schelm Wabnigger,
both of whom just do not want to see that:
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
But thanks for the laughs, guys... ahahaha... ahahahanson
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:Itxfl.490043$TT4.54024@attbi_s22...
> Strich.9 wrote:
>> On Jan 24, 10:01 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>>> The problem, Potter, is that you perpetually fail to understand
>>> that gravitation as well as relative velocity cause time dilation
>>> and must be taken into account.
>>
>> UNPROVEN (and illogical)
>
> It's easy to prove (or I should say show) that Potter perpetually
> fails to understand that gravitation as well as relative velocity
> cause time dilation and must be taken into account. The evidence
> is in Potter's posting record.
It appears that Sam Wormley's Pappy
taught him to lie,
or else he has a serious reading comprehension problem.
As can be seen, in many of my posts,
I have described the affects that
the Galileo Effect (Gravity-acceleration)
the Doppler Effect (Velocity),
and the Hubble Effect (Distance)
have on oscillators,
and upon the perceptions of observers.
"The evidence is in Potter's posting record."
not in Sam Wormley's parroting of lies, over and over.
As my Pappy used to say:
"Don't believe lies and hearsay."
"If you want good information
get it from the horse's mouth,
not from a horse's ass."
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com/
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm
RustyJames
> "Sam Wormley" <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote in messagenews:Itxfl.490043$TT4.54024@attbi_s22...
The ring laser interferometer has a laser process that generates two
Eric Gisse
[snip]
Here comes the chronic liar to lend support with no literature
references and no intelligent commentary.
Sam Wormley
Potter, GTR has directly contributed to a $30B+ GPS industry,
benefiting people all over the world. Aviation, shipping, asset
management, survey, mining, agriculture, time dissemination,
communications networks... and on and on!
Bluster on, Potter, bluster some more! Froth at the mouth! Whatever!
Sam Wormley
>
> Almanac data is only 50 bits per second. This data is chipped by two
> frequencies each creating its own broadband signal. One is 1.023MHz
> with 1.57542GHz carrier, the other one is 10.23MHz with 1.2276GHz
> carrier. That is all.
Hardly: http://www.aero.org/publications/crosslink/spring2006/images/news_03.gif
Y.Porat
--------------
shameless lier and parrot moron !!!
and a thief of others credits
GR contributed nothing to it
Y.Porat
-------------------
w...@2die4.com
> <w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
>
> news:743ea70f-bf10-4393...@35g2000pry.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 28, 10:31 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
> > <w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:4584d3cd-b9c3-40e9...@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > It is very sad that education cannot make mental illness pretty.
>
> > It is irrelevant that you are emotional and hence mentally unstable.
> > Carry on weeping, it won't change anything.
>
> QED (and sorry to have offended you by diverting you from your child
> storybook fantasy).
> ===========================================
> You are not sorry, you lying shit. That professed sadness is crocodile
> tears.
> Fuck off and whine somewhere else that isn't a sci newsgroup.
Ja vol, baby! You sure are good at giving orders. And you are very
reasonable and rational....and civilized also. And people really like
you.
Androcles
<w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
news:7f6e009f-2147-46be...@v5g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
The word is "jawohl", shithead, and I have no interest in your pathetic
emotional outbursts, you dumb cunt.
Eric Gisse
John, is this how you are going to spend the rest of your days? Is
this how you wish to be remembered?
hanson
>
"Androcles" <Headm...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote
> <w...@2die4.com> wrote in message
>>>> "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>>>>> <w...@2die4.com> wrote:
>
who@2die4 wrote:
It is very sad that education cannot make mental illness pretty.
>>
It is irrelevant that you are emotional and hence mentally unstable.
Carry on weeping, it won't change anything.
>
QED (and sorry to have offended you by diverting you from your child
storybook fantasy).
>
tears. Fuck off and whine somewhere else that isn't a sci newsgroup.
>
Ja vol, baby! You sure are good at giving orders. And you are very
reasonable and rational....and civilized also. And people really like
you.
>
The word is "jawohl", shithead, and I have no interest in your pathetic
emotional outbursts, you dumb cunt.
>
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Jawohl
>
ahahahaha... Take it easy on the poor dude, Andro. Can't
you see: "Ja vol"... "Oye weh"... "Go Figure"... He is Jewish,
and like most Jews, "to die" is always on their mind, asking, like
he does, their existential question: "who@2die4" ... ahahaha...
Thanks for the laughs, guys!.. Carry on!... ahahahahanson
>
PS:
... but... Andro is right in that:
Eric Gisse
[...]
> PS:
> ... but... Andro is right in that:
> **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
> Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
The designers, specifications, independent experiments, and test
systems indicate otherwise.
hanson
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:41cd5027-2e4b-47b2...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...... but... Androcles is right in that:
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
The designers, specifications, independent experiments,
and test systems indicate otherwise.
>
Eric, when you finally graduate & you'll get, long last, your BSc,
and you'll move to get a paying job... then 2 things will happen:
Your new environment will cure your Einstein Dingleberryism
and you will come to see that
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
hanson
Eric Gisse
> "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:41cd5027-2e4b-47b2...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
> [...]
> PS:
> ... but... Androcles is right in that:
> **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
> Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
> Eric wrote:
>
> The designers, specifications, independent experiments,
> and test systems indicate otherwise.
>
> hanson wrote:
>
> Eric, when you finally graduate & you'll get, long last, your BSc,
> and you'll move to get a paying job... then 2 things will happen:
> Your new environment will cure your Einstein Dingleberryism
> and you will come to see that
> **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
> Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
Why do the designers, specifications, independent experiments, and
test systems indicate otherwise?
Sue...
> On Jan 30, 10:59 pm, "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:41cd5027-2e4b-47b2...@d36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > "hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > PS:
> > ... but... Androcles is right in that:
> > **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
> > Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
> > Eric wrote:
>
> > The designers, specifications, independent experiments,
> > and test systems indicate otherwise.
>
> > hanson wrote:
>
> > Eric, when you finally graduate & you'll get, long last, your BSc,
> > and you'll move to get a paying job... then 2 things will happen:
> > Your new environment will cure your Einstein Dingleberryism
> > and you will come to see that
> > **** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
> > Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
> Why do the designers, specifications, independent experiments, and
> test systems indicate otherwise?
It is probably for the same reason your local
police drives Fords instead of Chevrolets.
A cop in a Ford isn't proof that Chevys are
unserviceable but don't expect anyone at Ford to
go out of their way to drive that point home.
Sue...
Eric Gisse
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA058591
"This report discusses the launch and preliminary results, which
include verification of the relativistic clock effect."
I do not understand the function of the denials.
Sue...
>
> ===
>
> > "This report discusses the launch and preliminary results, which
> > include verification of the relativistic clock effect."
>
> > I do not understand the function of the denials.
>
Results 11 - 19 of 19 for "relativistic clock effect"
Results 1 - 10 of about 110,000 for "meissner effect". (0.07 seconds)
<<discovered the phenomenon in 1933 >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meissner_effect
How old did you say this theory is?
<<Because the media bombard us with nonsense,
it is useful to consider the earmarks of
pseudoscience. The presence of even
--> one <--
of these should arouse great suspicion.
On the other hand, material displaying
none of these flaws might still be pseudoscience, because its
adherents invent new ways to fool themselves every day. >>
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html
Sue...
>
> Sue...
Eric Gisse
Now that the ink has been squirted, the squid can escape.
[snip rest]
Sue...
>
> > > ===
>
> > > > "This report discusses the launch and preliminary results, which
<< include verification of the relativistic clock effect.>>
>
> > > > I do not understand the function of the denials.
>
> > Results 11 - 19 of 19 for "relativistic clock effect"
> > Results 1 - 10 of about 110,000 for "meissner effect".
>
> Now that the ink has been squirted, the squid can escape.
Cat got your tongue ?
How old did you say this theory is?
Results 11 - 19 of 19 for "relativistic clock effect"
Results 1 - 10 of about 110,000 for "meissner effect".
<<discovered the phenomenon in 1933 >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meissner_effect
<<Because the media bombard us with nonsense,
it is useful to consider the earmarks of
pseudoscience. The presence of even
--> one <--
of these should arouse great suspicion.
On the other hand, material displaying
none of these flaws might still be pseudoscience,
because its adherents invent new ways to fool
themselves every day. >>
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html
How old did you say this theory is?
How old did you say this theory is?
Sue...
Tom Potter
"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:04ed6052-3de8-42c9...@v5g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
Hopefully Eric Gisse will start with the basic General Relativity equation
and demonstrate an audit trail showing where the equation is
in the GPS "specifications", and show where the designers
and computer programmers actually used General Relativity.
No doubt the term "relativity" has been used generically
to indicate the Doppler Effect and the Galileo Effect
but as can be seen, none of the General Relativity Cultists
or Gurus have ever demonstrated an actual instance where
General Relativity was used.
A couple of the Gurus on the taxpayer dole
make the claim that General Relativity was and is
essential to the GPS System, but any system engineer
knows that if you know what the constants are
and what the factors are, it is a simple matter
to compensate for them, and what you call these
adjustments is more politics and hype than reality,
and any system engineer knows that if there are
uncontrollable variables in the system (Like weather)
it is necessary to monitor and compensate for them
if you want to obtain greater accuracy.
I will be looking forward to seeing Gisse
start with the basic General Relativity equation
and show the audit trail to the hardware and software.
No doubt the frequency of oscillators is affected by
acceleration (Altitude),
but Galileo and Newton knew this centuries ago,
and no doubt if an observer has a velocity with respect to
a frequency source, it will affect what he observes,
but Doppler knew this decades ago.
Tom Potter
>"Eric Gisse" <jow...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:e06326de-c04e-455e...@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I am pleased to see that Eric Gisse,
who claim to be a high school grad
is interested in "intelligent commentary".
Considering that Gisse claims that General Relativity
was and is essential to the GPS System,
hopefully he will start with the basic General Relativity equation,
and provide references to ACTUAL hardware and computer programs
that use the equation, and show why this cannot be done
with simple offsets and factors.
I must point out that using the same unproven
reference paper by some guy on the taxpayer dole,
is not proof of anything, except feathering his nest,
and clinging to the generic use of "relativity effects"
in various publications
to indicate the Doppler Effect and the Galileo Effect
is also proof of nothing, except the term "relativity"
has been vastly over hyped by the mass media.
General Relativity Cultists cling to the generic phrase "relativity effects"
like Christians cling to "For God so loved the world...",
and Muslims cling to "God is great.",
and Jews cling to "Trust me."
When a General Relativity Cultists
sees or hears the phrase "relativity effect"
they accept it as fact, and no proof is required.
Tom Potter
"Sam Wormley" <swor...@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:S3cgl.548247$yE1.138790@attbi_s21...
> Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
>> Listen again. Since a GPS receiver can obtain the almanac data from
>> at least four satellites, the receiver can generate a set of four
>> equations with four unknowns. The unknowns can be solved to identify
>> the space and time information. It now makes no difference if the
>> satellites are synchronized with the ground stations as long as the
>> satellites are all synchronized which is much an easier task to
>>
> Hey Koobee, I take it you've never owned a GPS receiver. Four locked
> and tracked satellites does not guarantee a PVT solution. Also, I've
> pointed out to you if the time up there is different from the time
> down here, the GPS does work worth shit.
>
> Get a life.. get an education... read before spewing... Oh and you
> appear kinda stoooped, like an uneducated hillbilly, going around
> shrugging all the time.
It is interesting to see that Sam Wormley
is ignorant of what his "betters",
those Alabama "hillbillies",
are doing with the GPS system.
As can be seen from the web site below,
these "hillbillies" are using GPS to
map flood planes, traffic lights, power lines, gas lines,
fire stations, fire hydrants, hospitals, traffic cams, railroads, etc.
and are even mapping the layout of schools
and public buildings so they can respond to fires,
tornados, terrorism, and other emergencies.
Hopefully Sammy will provide references
to what his state and his school is doing along these lines.
Perhaps they are so consumed with General Relativity babble,
that they do not have the time and money
to do useful things for mankind.
I might also point out that the "Hillbilly" gal that heads the project
is better looking than Miss America.
I was surprised to see that Sammy does not know
how an Earth bound GPS receiver can determine
the system time, and its' location from data
transmitted by four satellites.
I would explain this in detail, step by step,
but why waste my time when a General Relativity Cultist
puts more faith in the phrase "relativity effect"
than they do in a logical sequence of steps.
When a General Relativity Cultist
sees or hears the term "relativity effect"
they accept it as fact.
--
Tom Potter
http://tdp1001.spaces.live.com/
http://www.tompotter.us/misc.html
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
Satellite #1 transmits system time and its' location in orbit.
As it takes between
t this point, the GPS receiver knows the time within
Eric Gisse
> >"Eric Gisse" <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:e06326de-c04e-455e...@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> >On Jan 29, 7:17 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >[snip]
>
> >Here comes the chronic liar to lend support with no literature
> >references and no intelligent commentary.
>
> I am pleased to see that Eric Gisse,
> who claim to be a high school grad
> is interested in "intelligent commentary".
>
> Considering that Gisse claims that General Relativity
> was and is essential to the GPS System,
> hopefully he will start with the basic General Relativity equation,
> and provide references to ACTUAL hardware and computer programs
> that use the equation, and show why this cannot be done
> with simple offsets and factors.
It /is/ done with an offset in the frequency of the transmitted
signal, you stupid fuck.
[snip]
Sue...
>
> I do not understand the function of the denials.
Don't take it professionally, It is strictly personal.
I am not willing to argue that Einstein's GR didn't
contribute something to GPS. It was likely the best
but certainly not the only tool.
Tom Potter's earlier post well describes numerous other
crank interpretations that have tried to ride GPS's
coat-tails and Rory Coker's page offers sound advice
how that sort of conflation has to be viewed by a
scientist. There is no *comprehensive* relativity that
embraces every ambiguous or absurd interpretation
of the past 100 years so don't take on its defence with
knee-jerk advocacy.
You don't have to clear the mine-field. Just get
across it in one piece.
Kind regards,
Sue...
hanson
>
"hanson" <han...@quick.net> wrote:
[...]
PS: ... but... Androcles is right in that:
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
Eric wrote:
The designers, specifications, independent experiments,
and test systems indicate otherwise.
>
hanson wrote:
Eric, when you finally graduate & you'll get, long last, your BSc,
and you'll move to get a paying job... then 2 things will happen:
Your new environment will cure your Einstein Dingleberryism
and you will come to see that
>
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
>
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>
Why do the designers, specifications, independent experiments,
and test systems indicate otherwise?
>
... ahahaha... because the few that so are simply spec-writers,
fresh out of college... encouraged to do that to learn about
their company's products and services... The rest are Einstein
Dingleberries, like Ashby, who hope to get some credit AFTER
the fact, a typical Jewish MO, familiar from way back to Einstein
and Meissner, both prodigies of the Zio propaganda machine.
>
Eric, when you finally graduate & you'll get, long last, your BSc,
and you'll move to get a paying job... then 2 things will happen:
Your new environment will cure your Einstein Dingleberryism
and you will come to see that
>
**** GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ****
>
Not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations....
>