Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #422201 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-11 06:39 +1000 |
| Last post | 2017-06-14 13:19 +1000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 72 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-11 06:39 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-10 18:15 -0700
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-11 19:26 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 20:05 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-11 20:34 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-11 11:38 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 10:19 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Mikko <mikko.levanto@outlook.com> - 2017-06-14 13:14 +0300
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 07:19 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-15 12:47 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 19:59 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-16 11:48 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 08:53 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 08:59 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-17 02:19 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 15:05 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-18 03:35 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-19 08:13 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-17 12:34 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 15:06 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-17 17:02 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-17 22:27 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-17 09:49 -0500
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 21:38 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 10:14 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-12 12:11 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 20:14 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 13:05 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 13:16 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-14 12:07 +0200
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 07:14 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-15 11:57 +0200
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-15 20:27 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 12:06 -0700
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 12:23 -0700
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 08:52 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-17 15:23 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-17 22:40 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-18 19:57 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-19 08:10 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-19 11:45 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-19 06:02 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-19 18:44 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-06-19 03:17 -0700
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-19 20:22 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-19 12:49 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-19 18:39 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-19 22:46 -0500
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-20 20:20 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 11:20 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-21 08:48 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-06-14 15:03 -0700
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-15 08:58 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 03:54 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 20:17 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Lolek Atoru <oitiruc@rwuca.oa> - 2017-06-13 20:58 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-12 09:20 -0500
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 14:29 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 14:22 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 11:42 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-16 22:22 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Ecembre Abin <umueuu@eibbwaw.ee> - 2017-06-17 08:37 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-17 19:37 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-13 09:13 -0500
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:35 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 19:40 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-13 11:07 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-13 16:13 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 13:18 +1000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 04:31 +0000
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-13 19:49 +0200
Re: The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 13:19 +1000
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 06:39 +1000 |
| Subject | The BIG GPS Accuracy Breakthrough Explained. |
| Message-ID | <ohhlb5$1gcv$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
Have you ever wondered why the latest GPS receivers have become so accurate? The reason is that the system no longer uses light speed in its Nav calculations. It actually works by establishing the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier wave to directly determine satellite/receiver distance. Since wavelength is absolute, as emphasized in BaTh, this provides a much more accurate system with actual arrival phasing of the 19cm wavelength enabling resolutions in the cm range. In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered null and void.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-10 18:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9cd75139-efe9-4151-bece-e7db1f855687@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422201 |
On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 2:38:02 PM UTC-6, HGW, DSc. wrote: > Have you ever wondered why the latest GPS receivers have become so accurate? > The reason is that the system no longer uses light speed in its Nav > calculations. It actually works by establishing the number of > wavelengths in the signal carrier wave to directly determine > satellite/receiver distance. > Since wavelength is absolute, as emphasized in BaTh, this provides a > much more accurate system with actual arrival phasing of the 19cm > wavelength enabling resolutions in the cm range. > > In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully > supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered > null and void. Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 19:26 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohj2cn$1bnc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422212 |
On 11/06/17 11:15, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 2:38:02 PM UTC-6, HGW, DSc. wrote: >> Have you ever wondered why the latest GPS receivers have become so accurate? >> The reason is that the system no longer uses light speed in its Nav >> calculations. It actually works by establishing the number of >> wavelengths in the signal carrier wave to directly determine >> satellite/receiver distance. >> Since wavelength is absolute, as emphasized in BaTh, this provides a >> much more accurate system with actual arrival phasing of the 19cm >> wavelength enabling resolutions in the cm range. >> >> In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully >> supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered >> null and void. > > Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for > questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go > about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier? Surprisingly easily actually. That's why they do it....and they get mm accuracy...as against about 3m using constant signal speed. Maybe someone in a high place has been reading my messages and woke up. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 20:05 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eq4ivhFibtuU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #422233 |
On 11/06/2017 7:26 PM, HGW... wrote: > On 11/06/17 11:15, Gary Harnagel wrote: >> On Saturday, June 10, 2017 at 2:38:02 PM UTC-6, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>> Have you ever wondered why the latest GPS receivers have become so >>> accurate? >>> The reason is that the system no longer uses light speed in its Nav >>> calculations. It actually works by establishing the number of >>> wavelengths in the signal carrier wave to directly determine >>> satellite/receiver distance. >>> Since wavelength is absolute, as emphasized in BaTh, this provides a >>> much more accurate system with actual arrival phasing of the 19cm >>> wavelength enabling resolutions in the cm range. >>> >>> In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully >>> supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered >>> null and void. >> >> Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for >> questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go >> about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier? > > Surprisingly easily actually. Care to provide more detail? Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 20:34 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohj6bm$1i65$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422235 |
On 11/06/17 20:05, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 11/06/2017 7:26 PM, HGW... wrote: >>>> >>>> In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully >>>> supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered >>>> null and void. >>> >>> Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for >>> questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go >>> about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier? >> >> Surprisingly easily actually. > > Care to provide more detail? Wel I can't tell you exactly how it is done becasue it is top secret, for obvious reasons....but as I said to Paul, it is quite easy in principle. The main reuirement is that all the clocks are in close absolute synch and the receiver clock error is accurately known. Then, all the receiver has to know is which numbered wave arrived at the instant a particular numbered wave was emitted. Subtract one numbers from the other and you have number of wavelengths in he path at the instant. If number 10000000000 arrived at the instant number 10000300000 was emitted, according to the receiver's corrected clock time, then the path length at that instant was just the difference..Multiply that by 19.xxxxxxxxx cms and you know the distance. There is an easy way to do that by just monitoring the difference in phases...receivers have memories and can predict what is likely to happen, particularly if the receiver is not moving quickly. > > Sylvia. > --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-11 11:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohja3g$1nnh$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422237 |
HGW... <hgw@....> wrote: > On 11/06/17 20:05, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 11/06/2017 7:26 PM, HGW... wrote: > >>>>> >>>>> In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully >>>>> supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered >>>>> null and void. >>>> >>>> Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for >>>> questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go >>>> about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier? >>> >>> Surprisingly easily actually. >> >> Care to provide more detail? > > Wel I can't tell you exactly how it is done becasue it is top secret, > for obvious reasons.... And you have a telephone in the heel of your shoe.... -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-12 10:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohkmn3$1u3o$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422240 |
On 11/06/17 21:38, Odd Bodkin wrote: > HGW... <hgw@....> wrote: >>>>>> In light of this improved technique, there is no doubt that GPS fully >>>>>> supports BaTh and that all arguments to the contrary are now rendered >>>>>> null and void. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for this great contribution to science. Pardon me for >>>>> questioning such an erudite presentation, but just how does one go >>>>> about measuring the number of wavelengths in the signal carrier? >>>> >>>> Surprisingly easily actually. >>> >>> Care to provide more detail? >> >> Wel I can't tell you exactly how it is done because it is top secret, >> for obvious reasons.... > > And you have a telephone in the heel of your shoe.... Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you care to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it says quite clearly that "the details are secret". --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@outlook.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 13:14 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <mikko.levanto-B54A5B.13145214062017@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> |
| In reply to | #422289 |
In article <ohkmn3$1u3o$1@gioia.aioe.org>, "HGW..." <hgw@....> wrote: > Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you care > to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it says > quite clearly that "the details are secret". There is no such part in Wikipedia. Mikko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 07:19 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohs95b$8ur$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422547 |
On 14/06/17 20:14, Mikko wrote: > In article <ohkmn3$1u3o$1@gioia.aioe.org>, "HGW..." <hgw@....> wrote: >> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you care >> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it says >> quite clearly that "the details are secret". > > There is no such part in Wikipedia. Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. > Mikko >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 12:47 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eqeaqlFpqf5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #422591 |
On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: > On 14/06/17 20:14, Mikko wrote: >> In article <ohkmn3$1u3o$1@gioia.aioe.org>, "HGW..." <hgw@....> wrote: >>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you care >>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it says >>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >> >> There is no such part in Wikipedia. > > Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was > certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to > find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. > >> Mikko >> > Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia article was it? Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-15 19:59 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohtlmu$455$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422610 |
On 15/06/17 12:47, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you care >>>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it says >>>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >>> >>> There is no such part in Wikipedia. >> >> Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was >> certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to >> find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. >> >>> Mikko >>> >> > > Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia > article was it? I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be able to find it yourself. > Sylvia. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 11:48 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eqgrnoFd38kU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #422614 |
On 15/06/2017 7:59 PM, HGW, DSc. wrote: > On 15/06/17 12:47, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: > >>>>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you >>>>> care >>>>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it >>>>> says >>>>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >>>> >>>> There is no such part in Wikipedia. >>> >>> Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was >>> certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to >>> find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. >>> >>>> Mikko >>>> >>> >> >> Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia >> article was it? > > I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and > that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to > know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be > able to find it yourself. I thought you'd come back with that. What strange browser are you using that does not provide a history? I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it there yourself). Prove otherwise. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 08:53 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi1nht$dfi$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422682 |
On 16/06/17 11:48, Sylvia Else wrote: >>> >>> Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia >>> article was it? >> >> I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and >> that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to >> know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be >> able to find it yourself. > > I thought you'd come back with that. What strange browser are you using > that does not provide a history? > > I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it there > yourself). Prove otherwise. > > Sylvia. so you want me to find it for you, eh? Do you have your apology ready? --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 08:59 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi1nrt$dqf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422682 |
On 16/06/17 11:48, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 15/06/2017 7:59 PM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >> On 15/06/17 12:47, Sylvia Else wrote: >>> On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >> >>>>>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you >>>>>> care >>>>>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it >>>>>> says >>>>>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >>>>> >>>>> There is no such part in Wikipedia. >>>> >>>> Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was >>>> certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to >>>> find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. >>>> >>>>> Mikko >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia >>> article was it? >> >> I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and >> that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to >> know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be >> able to find it yourself. > > I thought you'd come back with that. What strange browser are you using > that does not provide a history? > > I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it there > yourself). Prove otherwise. > > Sylvia. Here is one reference to secrecy: Quote: "There are four signals available for civilian use. In order of date of introduction, these are: L1 C/A, L2C, L5 and L1C.[1] L1 C/A is also called the legacy signal and is broadcast by all satellites. The other signals are called modernized signals and not broadcast by all satellites. In addition, there are restricted signals, also broadcast to the general public, but whose encoding is secret and are intended to be used only by authorized parties. Nonetheless, some limited use of restricted signals can be made by civilians without access to the secret encoding details; this is called codeless and semi-codeless access, and is officially supported" --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 02:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi23ip$2fb$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #422760 |
"HGW..." <hgw@....> writes: >> I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it there >> yourself). Prove otherwise. >> >> Sylvia. >Here is one reference to secrecy: >Quote: >"There are four signals available for civilian use. In order of date of >introduction, these are: L1 C/A, L2C, L5 and L1C.[1] L1 C/A is also >called the legacy signal and is broadcast by all satellites. The other >signals are called modernized signals and not broadcast by all >satellites. In addition, there are restricted signals, also broadcast to >the general public, but whose encoding is secret and are intended to be >used only by authorized parties. Nonetheless, some limited use of >restricted signals can be made by civilians without access to the secret >encoding details; this is called codeless and semi-codeless access, and >is officially supported" Ralph, that's the encrypted precision P(Y) military code that's been part of the GPS since the beginning. Nothing new there, and certainly nothing foolish like numbering the carrier wave or whatever foolishness you dreamed up in your desperate attempt to salvage DirtyBaThWater, Ralph! The encrypted P(Y) code is transmitted in quadrature on the L1 and L2 carriers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 15:05 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi2da2$152e$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422765 |
On 17/06/17 12:19, Michael Moroney grovelingly apologized to me for not believing what I said.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-18 03:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi4se4$1aj$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #422768 |
"HGW..." <hgw@....> writes: >On 17/06/17 12:19, Michael Moroney grovelingly apologized to me for not >believing what I said. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you are getting more and more delusional every day. First you think you are a physicist, then you think the GPS somehow retroactively implemented some super secret high accuracy system that somehow you know about and the US allows China to manufacture GPS systems with this sooper secret, then you believe that when I point out that "secret" GPS reference is a military system in place since the beginnings of the GPS system is somehow "grovelingly apologizing" to you. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, you had better see a good shrink before it's too late!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-19 08:13 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi6tu4$1g76$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422877 |
On 18/06/17 13:35, Michael Moroney wrote: > "HGW..." <hgw@....> writes: > >> On 17/06/17 12:19, Michael Moroney grovelingly apologized to me for not >> believing what I said. > > Henry George Wilson, you are getting more and more delusional every > day. First you think you are a physicist, then you think the GPS somehow > retroactively implemented some super secret high accuracy system that > somehow you know about and the US allows China to manufacture GPS > systems with this sooper secret, then you believe that when I point out > that "secret" GPS reference is a military system in place since the > beginnings of the GPS system is somehow "grovelingly apologizing" to > you. > > Henry George Wilson, you had better see a good shrink before it's too > late!!!! I am a good shrink. That's why I feel sorry for people like you, born with intellectual deficiencies. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 12:34 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <eqjiqbF1j69U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #422760 |
On 17/06/2017 8:59 AM, HGW... wrote: > On 16/06/17 11:48, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 15/06/2017 7:59 PM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>> On 15/06/17 12:47, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>> >>>>>>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you >>>>>>> care >>>>>>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it >>>>>>> says >>>>>>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no such part in Wikipedia. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was >>>>> certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to >>>>> find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. >>>>> >>>>>> Mikko >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia >>>> article was it? >>> >>> I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and >>> that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to >>> know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be >>> able to find it yourself. >> >> I thought you'd come back with that. What strange browser are you >> using that does not provide a history? >> >> I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it >> there yourself). Prove otherwise. >> >> Sylvia. > > Here is one reference to secrecy: > Quote: > "There are four signals available for civilian use. In order of date of > introduction, these are: L1 C/A, L2C, L5 and L1C.[1] L1 C/A is also > called the legacy signal and is broadcast by all satellites. The other > signals are called modernized signals and not broadcast by all > satellites. In addition, there are restricted signals, also broadcast to > the general public, but whose encoding is secret and are intended to be > used only by authorized parties. Nonetheless, some limited use of > restricted signals can be made by civilians without access to the secret > encoding details; this is called codeless and semi-codeless access, and > is officially supported" > That is clearly NOT talking about a mechanism for numbering wavelengths, but a system that was originally intended to allow the military to get metre-level (not millimetre level) accuracy, while the civilian use was limited to a much less accurate system. However, it is no longer used. I doubt the military would have a use for millimetre level accuracy. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 15:06 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi2dcb$152e$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422766 |
On 17/06/17 12:34, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/06/2017 8:59 AM, HGW... wrote: >> On 16/06/17 11:48, Sylvia Else wrote: >>> On 15/06/2017 7:59 PM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>>> On 15/06/17 12:47, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>> On 15/06/2017 7:19 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>> Bodkin, I know that all physics seems like magic to you but if you >>>>>>>> care >>>>>>>> to consult Wikipedia, you will possibly find the the part where it >>>>>>>> says >>>>>>>> quite clearly that "the details are secret". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no such part in Wikipedia. >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe Roberts, in a mad panic, has asked them to remove it....It was >>>>>> certainly there three days ago. I don't think you have even tried to >>>>>> find it. Maybe you are just another dopey indoctrinated dingleberry. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mikko >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Wikipedia maintains a history of changes, so which specific Wikipedia >>>>> article was it? >>>> >>>> I don't know... you know what Wiki is like, you click on one link and >>>> that takes you to another and then you see something else you want to >>>> know about and you and up not quite sure where you are. You should be >>>> able to find it yourself. >>> >>> I thought you'd come back with that. What strange browser are you >>> using that does not provide a history? >>> >>> I dispute that the alleged content ever existed (unless you put it >>> there yourself). Prove otherwise. >>> >>> Sylvia. >> >> Here is one reference to secrecy: >> Quote: >> "There are four signals available for civilian use. In order of date of >> introduction, these are: L1 C/A, L2C, L5 and L1C.[1] L1 C/A is also >> called the legacy signal and is broadcast by all satellites. The other >> signals are called modernized signals and not broadcast by all >> satellites. In addition, there are restricted signals, also broadcast to >> the general public, but whose encoding is secret and are intended to be >> used only by authorized parties. Nonetheless, some limited use of >> restricted signals can be made by civilians without access to the secret >> encoding details; this is called codeless and semi-codeless access, and >> is officially supported" >> > > That is clearly NOT talking about a mechanism for numbering wavelengths, > but a system that was originally intended to allow the military to get > metre-level (not millimetre level) accuracy, while the civilian use was > limited to a much less accurate system. However, it is no longer used. > > I doubt the military would have a use for millimetre level accuracy. You will find other references to secret stuff. You didn't even look before.. You are a pathetic wimp. > Sylvia. > --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 4 [1] 2 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web