Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #671343 > unrolled thread

2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-02 10:38 +0200
    Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-02 15:12 +0200
      Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-02 15:58 +0200
        Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-07-02 19:05 +0200
          Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-02 19:10 +0200
            Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-04 17:14 +0200
              Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-04 19:51 +0200
                Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-07-05 06:27 +0200
                  Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-07-05 07:12 +0200
                    Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Errol Dudnakov <rode@odr.ru> - 2026-07-07 21:03 +0000
          Re: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC Rayner Balanovsky <vykkrl@osvkov.ru> - 2026-07-03 16:06 +0000
            GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2026-07-08 04:54 +0200
              Re: GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC) Bowen Truhanov <oh@eeooono.ru> - 2026-07-08 13:24 +0000
              Re: GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC) Leo Turbanov <nul@ablrrb.ru> - 2026-07-09 14:00 +0000

#671343 — 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC

Do you understand what these numbers mean? Or are you
too stupid even for that?
That's how we deal with "time" in the real world.
It's a bit different than - how you deal with "time" in
your gedanken delusions.
Where do we get these (or similar) numbers from?
Are the clocks involved somehow? How?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#671346

Den 02.07.2026 10:38, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> Do you understand what these numbers mean? Or are you
> too stupid even for that?
> That's how we deal with "time" in the real world.

The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
The display would obviously not show the seconds with
so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
with 1ns precision.

1 ns time precision is equivalent to 3 metres position
precision, which is the precision of a GPS receiver.

> It's a bit different than - how you deal with "time" in
> your gedanken delusions.
> Where do we get these (or similar) numbers from?
> Are the clocks involved somehow? How?

Of course the time displayed by the receiver is sent
from clocks in GPS SVs. These clocks are showing GPS-time.

GPS-time is the same as UTC but for 18 seconds offset.
So the receiver will subtract 18 seconds from the GPS-time
to display the correct UTC-time.

What was your point?
Doesn't GPS belong to the real world? :-D




-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671349

On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 02.07.2026 10:38, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> Do you understand what these numbers mean? Or are you
>> too stupid even for that?
>> That's how we deal with "time" in the real world.
> 
> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
> with 1ns precision.
> 
> 1 ns time precision is equivalent to 3 metres position
> precision, which is the precision of a GPS receiver.
> 
>> It's a bit different than - how you deal with "time" in
>> your gedanken delusions.
>> Where do we get these (or similar) numbers from?
>> Are the clocks involved somehow? How?
> 
> Of course the time displayed by the receiver is sent
> from clocks in GPS SVs. These clocks are showing GPS-time.

Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
poor trash?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671351

Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>> with 1ns precision.
> 
> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
> poor trash?
> 

So you found this:
  "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
on a calendar?

:-D


-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671352

On 7/2/2026 7:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>>> with 1ns precision.
>>
>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
>> poor trash?
>>
> 
> So you found this:
>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
> on a calendar?
> 
> :-D

No. There are 2 parts here, one is from the
calendar, the other (less significant)
is from a clock.
And as a general rule - time is bound to
the solar cycles, and so are clocks. Without
it they wouldn't be "clocks" anymore.


> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671364

Am Donnerstag000002, 02.07.2026 um 19:10 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/2/2026 7:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>>>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>>>> with 1ns precision.
>>>
>>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
>>> poor trash?
>>>
>>
>> So you found this:
>>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>> on a calendar?
>>
>> :-D
> 
> No. There are 2 parts here, one is from the
> calendar, the other (less significant)
> is from a clock.
> And as a general rule - time is bound to
> the solar cycles, and so are clocks. Without
> it they wouldn't be "clocks" anymore.
> 
> 
NO, please!!!

Time is not bound to clocks and not to our central star!

What we call 'time' is more or less our local impresson of something, 
which is a feature of nature.

Our 'local impression' is most likely not the 'real deal'.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671366

On 7/4/2026 5:14 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am Donnerstag000002, 02.07.2026 um 19:10 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/2/2026 7:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>>>>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>>>>> with 1ns precision.
>>>>
>>>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
>>>> poor trash?
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you found this:
>>>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>> on a calendar?
>>>
>>> :-D
>>
>> No. There are 2 parts here, one is from the
>> calendar, the other (less significant)
>> is from a clock.
>> And as a general rule - time is bound to
>> the solar cycles, and so are clocks. Without
>> it they wouldn't be "clocks" anymore.
>>
>>
> NO, please!!!
> 
> Time is not bound to clocks and not to our central star!

Yes, it is. Surprise!



> What we call 'time' is more or less our local impresson of something, 
> which is a feature of nature.

Oppositely. Your concept of time - Great Mystical
Youdontknowwhat is a impression of what we call
time.
Something like "a perfect rod". Nothing like that
ever existed, but when dealing with real rods
you're getting a concept of that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671372

Am Samstag000004, 04.07.2026 um 19:51 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
> On 7/4/2026 5:14 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am Donnerstag000002, 02.07.2026 um 19:10 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 7/2/2026 7:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>>>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>>>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>>>>>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>>>>>> with 1ns precision.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
>>>>> poor trash?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So you found this:
>>>>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>> on a calendar?
>>>>
>>>> :-D
>>>
>>> No. There are 2 parts here, one is from the
>>> calendar, the other (less significant)
>>> is from a clock.
>>> And as a general rule - time is bound to
>>> the solar cycles, and so are clocks. Without
>>> it they wouldn't be "clocks" anymore.
>>>
>>>
>> NO, please!!!
>>
>> Time is not bound to clocks and not to our central star!
> 
> Yes, it is. Surprise!
> 

You need to distinguish between a measure and a measuring device!

A device is a man-made machine, while the quantity it measures is a 
feature of nature.

Now it makes no sense at all to assume, that nature creates quantities 
for especially for our own species, our own planet or even our own solar 
system.


> 
>> What we call 'time' is more or less our local impresson of something, 
>> which is a feature of nature.
> 
> Oppositely. Your concept of time - Great Mystical
> Youdontknowwhat is a impression of what we call
> time.
> Something like "a perfect rod". Nothing like that
> ever existed, but when dealing with real rods
> you're getting a concept of that.
> 

Our concept of time is usually based on things, which are common to us 
on planet Earth.

But why should nature care about our home planet?

The universe is HUGE and contains zillions of other stars and planets 
and will most likely not create concepts like time individually for each 
planet.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671375

On 7/5/2026 6:27 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am Samstag000004, 04.07.2026 um 19:51 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/4/2026 5:14 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am Donnerstag000002, 02.07.2026 um 19:10 schrieb Maciej Woźniak:
>>>> On 7/2/2026 7:05 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>>>>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>>>>> could be the UTC time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>>>>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with
>>>>>>> so many digits, even if the receiver knows the UTC-time
>>>>>>> with 1ns precision.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar",
>>>>>> poor trash?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So you found this:
>>>>>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>>>>> on a calendar?
>>>>>
>>>>> :-D
>>>>
>>>> No. There are 2 parts here, one is from the
>>>> calendar, the other (less significant)
>>>> is from a clock.
>>>> And as a general rule - time is bound to
>>>> the solar cycles, and so are clocks. Without
>>>> it they wouldn't be "clocks" anymore.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> NO, please!!!
>>>
>>> Time is not bound to clocks and not to our central star!
>>
>> Yes, it is. Surprise!
>>
> 
> You need to distinguish between a measure and a measuring device!
> 
> A device is a man-made machine, while the quantity it measures is a 
> feature of nature.

Nope. Quantity it measures is in most cases
a pure abstract. Time is less abstract than
others - because it's based on counting years
and days.




> Now it makes no sense at all to assume, that nature creates quantities 
> for especially for our own species, our own planet or even our own solar 
> system.
> 

Nope. It's us who create abstracts - we need them
to think with them. Then we create and perform
procedures intended to express them in numbers
somehow, i.e. measurements. When we succeed with
those measurements - it helps our thinking greatly.




>>> What we call 'time' is more or less our local impresson of something, 
>>> which is a feature of nature.
>>
>> Oppositely. Your concept of time - Great Mystical
>> Youdontknowwhat is a impression of what we call
>> time.
>> Something like "a perfect rod". Nothing like that
>> ever existed, but when dealing with real rods
>> you're getting a concept of that.
>>
> 
> Our concept of time is usually based on things, which are common to us 
> on planet Earth.
> 
> But why should nature care about our home planet?

Nature doesn't. But we do. And that's why our time
is bound here.
When a big population arise on Mars - they will probably
bind their time(s?) to Mars. Or maybe they won't, who
can know?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671388

Maciej Woźniak wrote:

> On 7/5/2026 6:27 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Time is not bound to clocks and not to our central star!
>>>
>>> Yes, it is. Surprise!
>>>
>>>
>> You need to distinguish between a measure and a measuring device!
>> 
>> A device is a man-made machine, while the quantity it measures is a
>> feature of nature.
> 
> Nope. Quantity it measures is in most cases a pure abstract.

you mean the length of your dick is pure abstract, not real?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671356

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>
>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC" could be the UTC
>>> time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with so many digits,
>>> even if the receiver knows the UTC-time with 1ns precision.
>> 
>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar", poor trash?
>> 
>> 
> So you found this:
>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
> on a calendar?

speaking the witch, if i may intervene, the local time UTC is irrelevant 
on the receiver, since the time from satellites are taken into account 
disregard local time used. It just need to be the same for all satellites, 
before trilateration; if one satellite time comes later, it just have to 
have the offset subtract accordingly.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671389 — GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC)

The 'nym-shifting troll, having had to switch Usenet providers again after
the /German/ admin, Wolfgang M. Weyand, kicked them from their server
eternal-september.org due to their abuse (which included calling all
/Germans/ "Nazis" *facepalm*), demonstrated their ignorance again as "Rayner
Balanovsky":

> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 02.07.2026 15:58, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
>>> On 7/2/2026 3:12 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>> The subject line "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC" could be the UTC
>>>> time displayed on a GPS receiver.
>>>> The display would obviously not show the seconds with so many digits,
>>>> even if the receiver knows the UTC-time with 1ns precision.
>>>
>>> Ever heard about a thing called "calendar", poor trash?
>>>
>>>
>> So you found this:
>>   "2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC"
>> on a calendar?
> 
> speaking the witch, if i may intervene, the local time UTC is irrelevant 
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
_speaking of which_

> on the receiver, since the time from satellites are taken into account 
> disregard local time used.

False.  The clock of the receiver runs on local time (can use UTC but also
any other time standard compatible with UTC), and based on its own
precision; a local clock bias has to be considered and calculated.  That is
the reason why 3 GNSS satellites are not enough: a fourth navigation
equation is necessary to calculate the fourth variable, the true reception
time, because the local clock bias is the same for all satellites.

And that is the reason why GNSS satellites are not geostationary: if they
were, they would orbit too slowly; one would need too many of them to ensure
that at least 4 of them are for all points on the surface above the local
horizon at all times.

> It just need to be the same for all satellites,

It _cannot_ be the same for all satellites because they have different
orbits.  The very point of GNSS is that the satellites have all _different_
distances from the receiver, thus the times of submission encoded in their
respective signals _differ_ from each other.  The time of submission of a
satellite that was farther away when it submitted the signal is further in
the past because the light-travel delay to its past destination is longer.

The GPS satellites already all have different orbital directions and
slightly different altitudes.  Certainly the GPS, GLONASS, and Galileo
constellations all have different orbital heights and directions, and modern
GNSS receivers can use all of them and more.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#/media/File:GPS24goldenSML.gif>

> before trilateration; if one satellite time comes later, it just have to 
> have the offset subtract accordingly.

False.

Here is how it really works:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Navigation_equations>

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671390 — Re: GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC)

inbreed wanker, half german troll, said Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn puts the 
foot in his mouth once again:

> The 'nym-shifting troll, having had to switch Usenet providers again
> after the /German/ admin, Wolfgang M. Weyand, kicked them from their
>> speaking the witch, if i may intervene, the local time UTC is
>> irrelevant
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> _speaking of which_
> 
>> on the receiver, since the time from satellites are taken into account
>> disregard local time used.
> 
> False.  The clock of the receiver runs on local time (can use UTC but
> also any other time standard compatible with UTC), and based on its own

eat shit and fuck of you irrelevant fool; your shithole country is a 
shithole, and you are a stupid uneducated obsolete it-supporter, spamming 
and polluting the usenet. Go play dolls with your sister somewhere else. 
You repulsive imbecile.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#671395 — Re: GNSS (was: 2026-07-02 15:00:00.000000000 UTC)

illiterate cretin Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> The 'nym-shifting troll, having had to switch Usenet providers again
> after the /German/ admin, Wolfgang M. Weyand, kicked them from their

indeed, gay banana is definitely a stupid obsolete it-supporter, as you 
are; and gay

>> speaking the witch, if i may intervene, the local time UTC is
>> irrelevant
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> _speaking of which_

this half german half russian trying to speak engilsh, proves himself a 
cretin, not knowing the term "speaking the witch"

>> on the receiver, since the time from satellites are taken into account
>> disregard local time used.
> 
> False.  The clock of the receiver runs on local time (can use UTC but
> also any other time standard compatible with UTC), and based on its own

this half german imbecile is not sensing he is saying the same. Last time 
was dresden, this time will be barlin, since they say, they dont like 
visitors. They are going to like that soon after that. 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web