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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #377939 > unrolled thread

The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met

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

Contents

  The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-05 12:36 +0100
    Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-03-05 07:23 -0800
    Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met HGW <hgw@...> - 2016-03-06 09:42 +1100
      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Helene Swanhild <helenes@gardenclosure.org> - 2016-03-05 23:02 +0000
        Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-05 15:27 -0800
          Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Helene Swanhild <helenes@gardenclosure.org> - 2016-03-05 23:31 +0000
      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-05 15:26 -0800
      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-06 13:14 +0100
        Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Henry Wilson <HGW@home.com> - 2016-03-07 19:09 +0000
          Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-07 22:15 +0100
            Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Henry Wilson <HGW@home.com> - 2016-03-08 19:08 +0000
              Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-09 20:46 +0100
                Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met HGW <hw@...> - 2016-03-10 08:08 +1100
                  Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-10 14:25 +0100
                    Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Henry Wilson <HGW@home.com> - 2016-03-12 19:07 +0000
                      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-12 14:48 -0800
                        Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Iephthae Sparrow <yvosp@gideoncloud.net> - 2016-03-13 14:08 +0000
                      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-13 09:52 +0100
                        Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Iephthae Sparrow <yvosp@gideoncloud.net> - 2016-03-13 12:00 +0000
                          Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-13 14:14 +0100
                            Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Iephthae Sparrow <yvosp@gideoncloud.net> - 2016-03-13 13:45 +0000
                          Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-13 13:15 -0500
                            Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Iephthae Sparrow <yvosp@gideoncloud.net> - 2016-03-13 18:58 +0000
                              Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-14 11:07 -0500
                                Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Iephthae Sparrow <yvosp@gideoncloud.net> - 2016-03-14 17:45 +0000
                                  Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-14 11:03 -0700
                                Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met HGW <HGW@home.com> - 2016-03-15 05:49 +1100
    Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-03-05 23:29 -0800
      Re: The challenge Ralph Rabbidge aka Henry Wilson never met "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-03-06 13:13 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#378816

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> On 13.03.2016 13:00, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
>  > []
> 
> It doesn't help to change your name,
> the trolling idiot is recognized anyway.
> 
> One can but wonder what kind of mental disturbance make a person
> constantly change his name and write nonsense only.
> 
> plonk

Excuse me, Plonk?

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

#378850

On 3/13/16 3/13/16   7:00 AM, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
>>    But the satellite is monitored by ground stations, and the clock error
>>    is measured. The error, called the "clock offset",
>>    is uploaded to the satellite typically once a day.
>>    The satellite will transmit this "clock offset" together with the
>>    "clock time". The correction is made in the receiver, the corrected
>>    "reported time" = "clock time"-"clock offset".
>
> Fine, you just gave the proof that no relativistic corrections take place.
> This is pure software engineering.

This is no "proof" at all, and only to idiots like yourself (who don't actually 
understand the GPS and have not investigated at all) would think so. There is 
PHYSICS underlying the software.

Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and the quantities involved are quite different:
    Rate modification to the satellite clocks: ~38 us/day
    Typical satellite clock offset variation:  1-3 ns/day
These differ by more than a factor of 10,000.

The relativistic correction is required in the GPS documents, so we know for 
sure that it _IS_ performed. Moreover, its presence is OBSERVABLE: if the 
relativistic correction was not applied, the clock offset of every satellite 
would have to decrease systematically by 38 us/day. THIS IS NOT OBSERVED.

	I repeat: this is the GPS system, not some fools' GUESSES
	about how they would design such a system. That is, this
	includes the GPS requirement that GPS time remain within
	1us of UTC modulo leap seconds. The GPS is more than just
	a geo-positioning system....


Stupid and ignorant GUESSES by idiots like you are not useful.


Tom Roberts

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

#378860

Tom Roberts wrote:

> On 3/13/16 3/13/16   7:00 AM, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
>> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>>>    But the satellite is monitored by ground stations, and the clock
>>>    error is measured. The error, called the "clock offset",
>>>    is uploaded to the satellite typically once a day.
>>>    The satellite will transmit this "clock offset" together with the
>>>    "clock time". The correction is made in the receiver, the corrected
>>>    "reported time" = "clock time"-"clock offset".
>>
>> Fine, you just gave the proof that no relativistic corrections take
>> place.
>> This is pure software engineering.
> 
> This is no "proof" at all, and only to idiots like yourself (who don't
> actually understand the GPS and have not investigated at all) would
> think so. There is PHYSICS underlying the software.

Why are you calling me an idiot, when I am doing GPS every day etc. GPS is 
pure software engineering. What is been said for years, you realize just 
now, that there are indeed NO relativistic corrections done at the level 
of SV segment (space vehicle, the satellite). Paul Bullshit Andersen is 
perfectly correct, there are offsets due to various DRIFTS, so the 
subtraction would be PRESENT in any case, Relativity concerns or not, from 
an Engineering software implementation. End of story, live with it.

> Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and the quantities involved are quite
> different:
>     Rate modification to the satellite clocks: ~38 us/day Typical
>     satellite clock offset variation:  1-3 ns/day
> These differ by more than a factor of 10,000.

Cut the crap, various drifts are there, inspite of relativity, existent or 
not. Koobee Woobee said from the beginning that is a software concern.

> Stupid and ignorant GUESSES by idiots like you are not useful.
> Tom Roberts

Yes, proofably you are, not knowing how the engineering stuff is done in 
the field.

Assume no Relativity Effects takes place. Same algorithms and module would 
be used. Unchanged from what is actually used TODAY.

Hopefully you just got a lesson in GPS you never gonna forget.

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

#378949

On 3/13/16 3/13/16 - 1:58 PM, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
> Tom Roberts wrote:
>> On 3/13/16 3/13/16   7:00 AM, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
>>> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>>     But the satellite is monitored by ground stations, and the clock
>>>>     error is measured. The error, called the "clock offset",
>>>>     is uploaded to the satellite typically once a day.
>>>>     The satellite will transmit this "clock offset" together with the
>>>>     "clock time". The correction is made in the receiver, the corrected
>>>>     "reported time" = "clock time"-"clock offset".
>>> Fine, you just gave the proof that no relativistic corrections take
>>> place.
>>> This is pure software engineering.
>> This is no "proof" at all, and only to idiots like yourself (who don't
>> actually understand the GPS and have not investigated at all) would
>> think so. There is PHYSICS underlying the software.
>
> Why are you calling me an idiot,

Because you demonstrate your idiocy with everything you write, including this.


> What is been said for years, you realize just
> now, that there are indeed NO relativistic corrections done at the level
> of SV segment (space vehicle, the satellite).

This is JUST PLAIN FALSE. As I said before: LOOK IN THE GPS DOCUMENTS.

	Only an idiot would not bother to do that. Hence the label
	applies to you.


>> Physics is a QUANTITATIVE science, and the quantities involved are quite
>> different:
>>      Rate modification to the satellite clocks: ~38 us/day Typical
>>      satellite clock offset variation:  1-3 ns/day
>> These differ by more than a factor of 10,000.
>
> various drifts are there, inspite of relativity, existent or
> not.

Yes, at the level of 1-3 ns/day; NOT at a level 10,000 times greater, 38 us/day, 
which _IS_ the relativistic correction. Your innumeracy is both idiotic and 
HOPELESS.


> Assume no Relativity Effects takes place. Same algorithms and module would
> be used.

That is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, because I am discussing the GPS, not some fantasy 
system you think you could design. In the GPS, relativistic corrections are 
REQUIRED, and they are IMPLEMENTED.

	[Don't expect me to continue until you say something sensible.]


Tom Roberts

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

#378956

Tom Roberts wrote:

>> Assume no Relativity Effects takes place. Same algorithms and module
>> would be used.
> 
> That is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, because I am discussing the GPS, not some
> fantasy system you think you could design. In the GPS, relativistic
> corrections are REQUIRED, and they are IMPLEMENTED.
> 
> 	[Don't expect me to continue until you say something sensible.]

You are an imbecile mister. I did GPS since you wear diapers. Even Paul 
Bullshit Andersen told you that the offset subtraction is done at receiver 
level, aka in you smart phone etc, not at SV level (satellites). You are a 
cretin, I must admit. The satellites know nothing about relativity 
corrections, they get the offset and this is it.

And btw, there are drifts larger than the postulated relativity effects, ie 
temp difference from Sun then going behind in shadow. All electronics and 
physics are subjected to such drifts etc. You know nothing about physics, 
engineering, software and embedded system. Get yourself an education, man.

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

#378961

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 2:45:22 PM UTC-3, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:
> Tom Roberts wrote:
> 
> >> Assume no Relativity Effects takes place. Same algorithms and module
> >> would be used.
> > 
> > That is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, because I am discussing the GPS, not some
> > fantasy system you think you could design. In the GPS, relativistic
> > corrections are REQUIRED, and they are IMPLEMENTED.
> > 
> > 	[Don't expect me to continue until you say something sensible.]
> 
> You are an imbecile mister. I did GPS since you wear diapers. Even Paul 
> Bullshit Andersen told you that the offset subtraction is done at receiver 
> level, aka in you smart phone etc, not at SV level (satellites). You are a 
> cretin, I must admit. The satellites know nothing about relativity 
> corrections, they get the offset and this is it.
> 
> And btw, there are drifts larger than the postulated relativity effects, ie 
> temp difference from Sun then going behind in shadow. All electronics and 
> physics are subjected to such drifts etc. You know nothing about physics, 
> engineering, software and embedded system. Get yourself an education, man.

So says the large CRT TV set mover imbecile...so it must be true! 

What a funny moron he is!

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

#378969

On 15/03/16 03:07, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 3/13/16 3/13/16 - 1:58 PM, Iephthae Sparrow wrote:

>
>> What is been said for years, you realize just
>> now, that there are indeed NO relativistic corrections done at the level
>> of SV segment (space vehicle, the satellite).
>
> This is JUST PLAIN FALSE. As I said before: LOOK IN THE GPS DOCUMENTS.

The GPS documents include a a statement about the necessity for a 'GR 
correction'. That merely provides another perfect example of how the 
name Einstein managed to get associated with yet another technological 
breakthrough when it had nothing whatsoever to do with the thing. The 
rate at which the clocks run is quite arbitrary. The only criterion is 
that all the orbiting clock rates and readings are in absolute synch 
with each other..Their individual rates are initially software adjusted 
to bring them into line with the ground standard, after which only a 
small additional daily offset is required..

> Tom Roberts
>

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

#377983

On Saturday, March 5, 2016 at 3:36:58 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> Henry Wilson has made a lot of claims about the GPS.
> 
> Among them are:
> "The system works perfectly well without any 'GR correction'."

That is very correct.  Mr. Wilson had pointed out that time synchronization is merely a software implementation.  See the link below that demystifies the mythic role of GR plaguing the establishment of science.  <shrug>

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/NzdAzmnYrzw/I1f89-WIBAAJ

See how much smarter engineers are over self-styled physicists?  <shrug>

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

#377990

On 06.03.2016 08:29, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> On Saturday, March 5, 2016 at 3:36:58 AM UTC-8, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
>> Henry Wilson has made a lot of claims about the GPS.
>>
>> Among them are:
>> "The system works perfectly well without any 'GR correction'."
>
> That is very correct.  Mr. Wilson had pointed out that time synchronization is merely a software implementation.  See the link below that demystifies the mythic role of GR plaguing the establishment of science.  <shrug>
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/NzdAzmnYrzw/I1f89-WIBAAJ
>
> See how much smarter engineers are over self-styled physicists?  <shrug>

<shrug>

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web