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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380005 > unrolled thread

Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks !

Started byRafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com>
First post2016-03-23 17:14 -0700
Last post2016-04-09 12:45 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 117 — 16 participants

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 17:14 -0700
    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 06:16 -0700
      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Yves Hrodland <yvesh24@wisenetworking.org> - 2016-03-24 14:00 +0000
        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 07:35 -0700
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Yves Hrodland <yvesh24@wisenetworking.org> - 2016-03-24 15:19 +0000
      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 14:41 -0700
        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 15:32 -0700
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Yves Hrodland <yvesh24@wisenetworking.org> - 2016-03-24 22:56 +0000
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Yves Hrodland <yvesh24@wisenetworking.org> - 2016-03-24 22:57 +0000
    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-25 11:34 -0500
      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 15:56 -0700
        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 07:00 -0700
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-29 20:36 +0200
        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-29 11:35 -0500
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-03-29 12:03 -0500
          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 16:39 -0700
            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 17:00 -0700
              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 09:08 +0200
                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-04-02 01:17 -0700
                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 12:55 +0200
                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-04-02 01:18 -0700
            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-02 14:08 -0500
              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-02 21:56 +0200
                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-04-02 20:06 +0000
                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-03 23:58 -0700
              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 16:47 -0700
                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 04:44 -0700
                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 12:01 -0700
                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 12:29 -0700
                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-06 23:10 -0700
                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 14:13 -0700
                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 15:59 -0700
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-07 23:17 -0700
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! nero <oldogf@yahoo.it> - 2016-04-08 23:57 -0700
                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 00:08 -0500
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! HGW <HGW@....> - 2016-04-08 21:23 +1000
                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 11:28 -0500
                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-08 22:34 +0200
                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-10 11:38 +1000
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 14:02 -0700
                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 21:25 -0500
                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-09 09:06 +0200
                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 16:33 -0700
                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 16:50 -0700
                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-11 23:01 -0700
                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 06:58 -0700
                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 07:36 -0700
                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-13 16:38 +0200
                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-13 08:28 -0700
                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-13 19:13 +0200
                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 17:44 -0700
                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-13 19:09 -0700
                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-13 23:03 -0700
                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-13 19:02 -0700
                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-13 23:09 -0700
                                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-14 04:48 -0700
                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-14 05:04 -0700
                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 14:40 -0700
                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-13 15:51 -0700
                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-13 19:11 -0400
                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-13 23:18 -0700
                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-14 00:22 -0700
                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 10:06 -0700
                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-14 14:16 -0400
                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 04:58 -0700
                                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-15 09:33 -0400
                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 18:10 -0700
                                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 20:03 -0700
                                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 07:08 -0700
                                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 08:45 -0700
                                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 10:53 -0700
                                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 13:33 -0700
                                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 04:07 -0700
                                                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 04:28 -0700
                                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-19 05:16 -0700
                                                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 14:36 -0700
                                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 14:09 -0700
                                                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-19 15:27 -0700
                                                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-19 16:40 -0700
                                                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-19 19:33 -0700
                                                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-19 21:45 -0500
                                                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-19 23:23 -0700
                                                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-20 06:06 -0700
                                                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-20 16:50 +0200
                                                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 14:35 -0700
                                                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 16:28 -0700
                                                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-20 22:26 -0500
                                                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-20 23:36 -0700
                                                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-21 17:04 -0700
                                                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 07:19 -0700
                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-16 08:19 +0200
                                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-14 13:21 -0700
                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 00:37 -0700
                                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 15:11 -0700
                                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 21:40 -0700
                                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 22:25 -0700
                                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-15 05:16 -0700
                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 11:23 -0500
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-08 22:32 +0200
                          Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-10 13:16 +1000
                            Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-09 21:15 -0700
                              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 10:32 -0700
                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 21:37 -0700
                                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 17:51 -0700
                                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-04-11 22:47 -0700
                                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-04-12 00:45 -0700
                                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-04-12 01:10 -0700
                                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! HGW <hw@...> - 2016-04-12 09:12 +1000
              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 21:35 -0700
              Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:36 -0700
                Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 06:42 -0700
                  Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-07 07:34 -0700
                    Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-04-08 11:04 -0500
                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-04-08 22:29 +0200
                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-09 07:19 -0700
                      Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-09 07:39 -0700
                        Re: Einsteinian Simultaneity and syncronism : no thanks ! kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-09 12:45 -0700

Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →


#381182

FromTom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
Date2016-04-08 21:25 -0500
Message-ID<g9GdnaWfkbCZ9ZXKnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#381176
On 4/8/16 4/8/16   4:02 PM, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> El viernes, 8 de abril de 2016, 1:09:01 (UTC-4), tjrob137  escribió:
>> On 4/7/16 4/7/16   4:13 PM, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
>>> [... repeating the same errors]
>> It seems to me that you have confused yourself by MISTAKENLY thinking that the
>> ECI coordinates of the GPS are coordinates as Einstein discussed in "1905R" --
>> THEY AREN'T. The ECI coordinates are related, in that the speed of light in
>> vacuum is isotropically c wrt them, but THAT IS AS FAR AS THEY GO.
>
> The GPS ECI space coordinates ARE the 1905R [...] ones

No, THEY ARE NOT. As I pointed out the PoR does not apply in them.

You seem to understand that at different locations a Cs133 oscillator oscillates 
at different rates relative to these coordinates [#]. That DIRECTLY shows that 
Einstein's first postulate (the PoR) does not apply. And if the PoR does not 
apply, none of "1905R" applies, either.

	[#] Even though it always oscillates at 9,192,631,770 Hz.
	NOTE THE DIFFERENCE IN PHRASING: Here I mentioned only the
	oscillator, so nothing else can be involved; in this case that
	means a measurement using a co-moving and co-located instrument
	(i.e. in the SV). But the rate RELATIVE TO THE ECI COORDINATES is
	quite different and involves the oscillator AND THE COORDINATES; in
	this case, due to the way the ECI coordinates are defined, that
	means that the measuring instrument is ON THE GEOID measuring not
	the oscillator but SIGNALS FROM IT.

GR applies, and in GR the PoR applies only locally, so all is well. But in SR 
(or "1905R") the PoR must apply everywhere (globally), and it fails.


> [...] Does NOT exist at all in the GPS any transmission or reception of a 10.23 MHz
> SIGNAL (or any close value, either lesser or greater than it).

(sigh) Why do you just make stuff up and pretend it is true?

The GPS documents mention 10.23 MHz in many places -- it is the P-Code chipping 
rate WHEN MEASURED ON THE GEOID. That is the rate at which P-Code chips are 
received, and is most definitely a signal frequency. And it is the primary 
frequency from which all others are determined by integral multiples (other code 
chipping rates and the carrier frequencies).

	But in the satellite the P-code chipping rate is
	10.2299999954326 MHz AS THE DOCUMENT SAYS.
	(Note phrasing: this is a measurement IN THE SV.)

Right after this you attempt to MODIFY the quote from a GPS document in order to 
make it fit your pre-conceived notions. That is invalid. The document was 
discussing an OPERATIONAL SV, and you claimed it only applies "when still at 
ground before the launching". YOU ARE WRONG, and this is the same misconception 
you have had all along.


Tom Roberts

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


#381204

FromMaciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
Date2016-04-09 09:06 +0200
Message-ID<nea9m8$h4d$1@node1.news.atman.pl>
In reply to#381182

Użytkownik "Tom Roberts"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:g9GdnaWfkbCZ9ZXKnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com...


|[#] Even though it always oscillates at 9,192,631,770 Hz.

in the dreams of a brainwashed moron.

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


#381403

FromRafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-11 16:33 -0700
Message-ID<bee1ac96-ff82-4463-861e-d11d59c1880b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381182
El viernes, 8 de abril de 2016, 22:25:11 (UTC-4), tjrob137  escribió:
> On 4/8/16 4/8/16   4:02 PM, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> > El viernes, 8 de abril de 2016, 1:09:01 (UTC-4), tjrob137  escribió:
> >> On 4/7/16 4/7/16   4:13 PM, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> >>> [... repeating the same errors]
> >> It seems to me that you have confused yourself by MISTAKENLY thinking that the
> >> ECI coordinates of the GPS are coordinates as Einstein discussed in "1905R" --
> >> THEY AREN'T. The ECI coordinates are related, in that the speed of light in
> >> vacuum is isotropically c wrt them, but THAT IS AS FAR AS THEY GO.
> >
> > The GPS ECI space coordinates ARE the 1905R [...] ones
> 
> No, THEY ARE NOT. As I pointed out the PoR does not apply in them.
>
I will repeat to you again what the 1905R PoR says, as appears in the
Introduction of the June 30 paper:

[ ...the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames
of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good. ]

You know well that in 1905 the mechanics is the Newtonian one. You have the
right to criticize 1905 Einstein wrong when selecting the holding good of the 
equations of Newtonian mechanics as the starting point of his new 1905R theory; 
but you have NOT the right to lie maintaining that 1905R and today SR are the 
same theory.

You can claim that the SR PoR (whatever you think it is) does NOT apply with
the GPS ECI coordinates, but you have no right at all to lie saying the same 
for the 1905R PoR.

It is already a very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT (since at least 1977)
that ALL GPS receptors resolve all the time very accurately systems of 
Newtonian equations with Euclidean geometry, Cartesian space coordinates and 
the time defined by 1905 Einstein that show simultaneously ALL operative GPS 
clocks synchronized by the selected by design 10.2300000000000 MHZ frequency, 
including the satellite ones and the ones at the rotating Earth's geoid.

IOW, that 1905R applies in the GPS ECI stationary system with Gravity present
(see how that system is introduced by 1905 Einstein near the end of Section 4 
of his June 30 paper), and NOT the today SR with Gravity excluded from it since 
1916 Einstein. It is not only me saying that, but a very well established 
EXPERIMENTAL FACT since 1977 after the launching of the first operative GPS 
satellite and the posterior very accurate successful operation of the system 
until today.
 
> You seem to understand that at different locations a Cs133 oscillator oscillates 
> at different rates relative to these coordinates [#]. That DIRECTLY shows that 
> Einstein's first postulate (the PoR) does not apply. And if the PoR does not 
> apply, none of "1905R" applies, either.
>
It is already an EXPERIMENTAL FACT since 1977 that a Cs oscillator oscillates
at different rates (depending on velocity and also on gravitational potential) 
relative to a 1905R stationary system (as it is the GPS ECI one).

This was precisely the cause for the 1980 BIPM official declaration specifying
that in his 1967 previous unit time second definition, the Cs atom must be in 
the rotating Earth's geoid physical condition.

That DIRECTLY shows that it is then the SR first postulate (the PoR) the one
that does NOT apply in a GPS ECI explained by SR-GR, and NOT AT ALL the 1905R 
PoR that applies already as an EXPERIMENTAL FACT since 1977 in a GPS ECI
explained by 1905R.

And if the SR PoR does not apply, none of SR applies, either.
 
> 	[#] Even though it always oscillates at 9,192,631,770 Hz.

A totally FALSE assertion, as we know already since 1977. It only oscillates at
that frequency in the rotating Earth's geoid physical condition, as appears in 
the 1980 BIPM official declaration.

> 	NOTE THE DIFFERENCE IN PHRASING: Here I mentioned only the
> 	oscillator, so nothing else can be involved; in this case that
> 	means a measurement using a co-moving and co-located instrument
> 	(i.e. in the SV). But the rate RELATIVE TO THE ECI COORDINATES is
> 	quite different and involves the oscillator AND THE COORDINATES; in
> 	this case, due to the way the ECI coordinates are defined, that
> 	means that the measuring instrument is ON THE GEOID measuring not
> 	the oscillator but SIGNALS FROM IT.
>
You introduce here a "measuring at a distance"(not present at all in 1905R),
assuming that the oscillator is not only a clock part (an essential one, 
indeed), but being also a transmitter part, with a SIGNAL arising from it and 
received on other places.

I am sorry, the SIGNAL frequency that you are here talking about jointly with
its reception in another place DO NOT EXIST AT ALL in the GPS ECI, the cause
for your failing to point any reference to it in the GPS documentation.

> GR applies, and in GR the PoR applies only locally, so all is well. But in SR 
> (or "1905R") the PoR must apply everywhere (globally), and it fails.
>
No, in GR the SR PoR applies only locally, so all is NOT well (the local SR
time inside the satellites is totally useless in the GPS ECI, disappearing when 
the relativistic modification is applied). But in 1905R (without "  ") the 
1905R PoR  applies everywhere (globally, ALL the GPS ECI), and it NOT fails, as 
the very accurate in all GPS receptor systems of 1905R Newtonian equations 
resolution put out of any doubt.

> 
> > [...] Does NOT exist at all in the GPS any transmission or reception of a 10.23 MHz
> > SIGNAL (or any close value, either lesser or greater than it).
> 
> (sigh) Why do you just make stuff up and pretend it is true?
> 
> The GPS documents mention 10.23 MHz in many places -- it is the P-Code chipping 
> rate WHEN MEASURED ON THE GEOID. That is the rate at which P-Code chips are 
> received, and is most definitely a signal frequency. And it is the primary 
> frequency from which all others are determined by integral multiples (other code 
> chipping rates and the carrier frequencies).
>
Of course, 10.23 MHz is the 1905R defined time synchronization frequency (and
as such present by design in ALL operative ECI clocks), and used for many other 
things inside the satellites (including the P-code chipping rate in the 
modulation and demodulation processes in the transmitters and receptors 
respectively); BUT NEVER appears as a transmitted, measured or received SIGNAL 
in ANY place of the GPS ECI, including the rotating Earth's geoid.

> 	But in the satellite the P-code chipping rate is
> 	10.2299999954326 MHz AS THE DOCUMENT SAYS.
> 	(Note phrasing: this is a measurement IN THE SV.)
>
A complete misunderstanding from your part. The 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency
only appears showed by the non-operative modified clock IN THE SV when it is 
still at ground before the launching. Once operative in orbit, the frequency 
INCREASES (an EXPERIMENTAL FACT since 1977) to the 10.2300000000000 MHz 
necessary to implement the 1905R clock time synchronization , having then no 
possibility at all to be the P-code chipping rate of 10.2299999954326 MHz in 
any operative modulation or demodulation inside the orbiting satellite.
 
> Right after this you attempt to MODIFY the quote from a GPS document in order to 
> make it fit your pre-conceived notions. That is invalid. The document was 
> discussing an OPERATIONAL SV, and you claimed it only applies "when still at 
> ground before the launching". YOU ARE WRONG, and this is the same misconception 
> you have had all along.
>
You are the unique one here misinterpreting the GPS documentation, in order to
make it fit your false pre-conceived notions about SR-GR having no problem at 
all describing GPS ECI, accumulating many contradictions that you had been 
totally unable to explain, some ones simply ignoring them. I will mention here 
again only one that is exceptionally simple:

The arithmetical impossibility to derive the carrier frequencies L1= 1575.42
MHz and L2=1227.6 MHz from 10.2299999954326 MHz.

The carrier frequencies of the communication channels are the UNIQUE REAL
SIGNAL frequencies that are transmitted and received in all the GPS ECI.

I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful
resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with 
Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a 
very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R.

RVHG (Rafael  Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
 
> 
> Tom Roberts

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


#381406

Frompaparios <paparios@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-11 16:50 -0700
Message-ID<937f75ea-9eb5-4c60-8065-dfae2c1b730a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381403
El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 20:33:23 (UTC-3), Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato  escribió:
<SNIP> the same repetitive misrepresentations of how the GPS system works.
 
> I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful
> resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with 
> Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a 
> very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R.
> 
> RVHG (Rafael  Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
>  


I have checked the IS-GPS-200 official documentation and nowhere the word 1905R or SR 1905R or even 1905 is found. So what are you talking about?

The only references to relativity are the word "relativistic effect" and "relativistic correction".

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


#381420

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2016-04-11 23:01 -0700
Message-ID<c5c61aef-470e-425c-8af0-41c1b91158d2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381406
W dniu wtorek, 12 kwietnia 2016 01:50:42 UTC+2 użytkownik paparios napisał:


> The only references to relativity are the word "relativistic effect" and "relativistic correction".

Your Shit's "standards" has actually forbidden
this "relativistic" correcton, because it's
preventing your insane guru's prophecies of
"relativistic effects" from happening.
But GPS engineers are sane people. How could 
they think anyone is THAT stupid?

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


#381511

FromRafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-13 06:58 -0700
Message-ID<c22c74b5-50e5-4131-9133-a9ace6f7944d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381406
El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 19:50:42 (UTC-4), paparios  escribió:
> El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 20:33:23 (UTC-3), Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato  escribió:
> <SNIP> the same repetitive misrepresentations of how the GPS system works.
>  
> > I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful
> > resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with 
> > Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a 
> > very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R.
> > 
> > RVHG (Rafael  Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
> >  
> 
> 
> I have checked the IS-GPS-200 official documentation and nowhere the word 1905R or SR 1905R or even 1905 is found. So what are you talking about?
> 
> The only references to relativity are the word "relativistic effect" and "relativistic correction".

You are commenting the last paragraph of a post that I send to Tom. He knows the meaning of 1905R, because we had been debating about it years in this group. Read at least the whole post (much better including the previous ones) if you want a fruitful participation in that debate.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

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


#381513

Frompaparios <paparios@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-13 07:36 -0700
Message-ID<7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381511
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 10:58:41 AM UTC-3, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 19:50:42 (UTC-4), paparios  escribió:
> > El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 20:33:23 (UTC-3), Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato  escribió:
> > <SNIP> the same repetitive misrepresentations of how the GPS system works.
> >  
> > > I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful
> > > resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with 
> > > Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a 
> > > very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R.
> > > 
> > > RVHG (Rafael  Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
> > >  
> > 
> > 
> > I have checked the IS-GPS-200 official documentation and nowhere the word 1905R or SR 1905R or even 1905 is found. So what are you talking about?
> > 
> > The only references to relativity are the word "relativistic effect" and "relativistic correction".
> 
> You are commenting the last paragraph of a post that I send to Tom. He knows the meaning of 1905R, because we had been debating about it years in this group. Read at least the whole post (much better including the previous ones) if you want a fruitful participation in that debate.
> 
> RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Well, you assert, without any proof, that "I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R."

1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, which are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting clocks.

2) In physics there is no such thing as "1905R". There are two models one is called Special Relativity and the other General Relativity, both of which are part of the Theory of Relativity.

3) For years, several of us have been telling you that the original paper from Einstein has some incorrect parts, such as the end paragraph of section 4. This paper was the beginning of a very long road, involving thousands of physicists, which contributed to consolidate what the actual Theory of Relativity says.

4) Your posts always repeat (and for years) the same erroneous assertions, so snipping all the tired and repeated text is just a service to readers.

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


#381514

FromMaciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
Date2016-04-13 16:38 +0200
Message-ID<nelllq$qde$1@node2.news.atman.pl>
In reply to#381513

Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...

1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, which 
are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting 
clocks.

A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
by The Shit's standards.

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


#381520

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2016-04-13 08:28 -0700
Message-ID<2bb76c6c-06f0-483c-8739-cfc4e3c85460@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381514
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, which 
> > are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting 
> > clocks.
> 
> A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
> Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
> by The Shit's standards.

“If it is not right, do not do it.  If it is not true, do not say it.”
– Marcus Aurelius

So StFU.

“Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain, and most fools do.”
-- Benjamin Franklin

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” 
-- Benjamin Franklin

“There is a higher court than the courts of justice and that is the court
of our conscience.” – Mahatma Ghandi

Apparently, you don't have one.

“A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.” – Goethe

Yours must be quite ugly.

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


#381528

FromMaciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
Date2016-04-13 19:13 +0200
Message-ID<neluom$3m8$1@node2.news.atman.pl>
In reply to#381520

Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:2bb76c6c-06f0-483c-8739-cfc4e3c85460@googlegroups.com...

On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, 
> > which
> > are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting
> > clocks.
>
> A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
> Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
> by The Shit's standards.

|So StFU.
|“There is a higher court than the courts of justice and that is the court
|of our conscience.” – Mahatma Ghandi
|Apparently, you don't have one.
|“A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.” – Goethe
|Yours must be quite ugly.

Rave, moron, and spit. What else canyou do?
Your Shit assumed and announced "proper" way is to
unsynchronize clocks  and make GPS not working, but
nicely symmetrical instead.




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


#381568

FromJanPB <filmart@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-13 17:44 -0700
Message-ID<eb5eb582-eaae-44f6-88f7-0f4784e14d1f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381528
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 10:14:00 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> dyskusyjnych:2bb76c6c-06f0-483c-8739-cfc4e3c85460@googlegroups.com...
> 
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >
> > Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> > dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, 
> > > which
> > > are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting
> > > clocks.
> >
> > A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
> > Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
> > by The Shit's standards.
> 
> |So StFU.
> |“There is a higher court than the courts of justice and that is the court
> |of our conscience.” – Mahatma Ghandi
> |Apparently, you don't have one.
> |“A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.” – Goethe
> |Yours must be quite ugly.
> 
> Rave, moron, and spit. What else canyou do?
> Your Shit assumed and announced "proper" way is to
> unsynchronize clocks  and make GPS not working, but
> nicely symmetrical instead.

Gary and others: feel free to talk back to Maciej but keep in mind you are
not interacting with a sane person. It's interesting to engage him if you are 
into pathologies of the human mind (my little hobby), but not for anything 
science related.

--
Jan

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


#381578

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2016-04-13 19:09 -0700
Message-ID<81f0b6f8-309e-43df-b698-652ce21a1b84@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381568
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 6:44:41 PM UTC-6, JanPB wrote:
>
> Gary and others: feel free to talk back to Maciej but keep in mind you are
> not interacting with a sane person. It's interesting to engage him if you are 
> into pathologies of the human mind (my little hobby), but not for anything 
> science related.
> 
> --
> Jan

Yeah, and I fear that "HGW" and Seto and the 'nym-shifting troll are in the
same boat.  And then there are the religious and anti-religious extremes:

"Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same
as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source
... They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres."
 -- Albert Einstein

Gary

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


#381592

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2016-04-13 23:03 -0700
Message-ID<a239ff5a-34dd-4305-9a11-abde9a18e66f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381568
W dniu czwartek, 14 kwietnia 2016 02:44:41 UTC+2 użytkownik JanPB napisał:
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 10:14:00 AM UTC-7, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> > Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> > dyskusyjnych:2bb76c6c-06f0-483c-8739-cfc4e3c85460@googlegroups.com...
> > 
> > On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> > >
> > > Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> > > dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...
> > > >
> > > > 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, 
> > > > which
> > > > are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting
> > > > clocks.
> > >
> > > A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
> > > Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
> > > by The Shit's standards.
> > 
> > |So StFU.
> > |“There is a higher court than the courts of justice and that is the court
> > |of our conscience.” – Mahatma Ghandi
> > |Apparently, you don't have one.
> > |“A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.” – Goethe
> > |Yours must be quite ugly.
> > 
> > Rave, moron, and spit. What else canyou do?
> > Your Shit assumed and announced "proper" way is to
> > unsynchronize clocks  and make GPS not working, but
> > nicely symmetrical instead.
> 
> Gary and others: feel free to talk back to Maciej but keep in mind you are
> not interacting with a sane person.

Gary and others: Listen to your GURU!!!!
And obey, as good relativistic morons should.

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


#381576

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2016-04-13 19:02 -0700
Message-ID<82a7c7ee-b0af-44ec-9f38-9eadb63094e2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381528
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 11:14:00 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "Gary Harnagel"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
> dyskusyjnych:2bb76c6c-06f0-483c-8739-cfc4e3c85460@googlegroups.com...
> >
> > On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-6, Maciej Woźniak wrote:
> >
> > Użytkownik "paparios"  napisał w wiadomości grup
> > dyskusyjnych:7962d32c-7b18-4808-871a-fc75ffe3e2a0@googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, 
> > > which
> > > are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting
> > > clocks.
> >
> > A lie, as expected from relativistic trash.
> > Those "relativistic" corrections are strictly forbidden
> > by The Shit's standards.
> 
> |So StFU.

The quote that came before this must have cut dishonest Wozzie-boy to the
core so he cut it.  Allow me to replace it:

“If it is not right, do not do it.  If it is not true, do not say it.” 
– Marcus Aurelius 

> |“There is a higher court than the courts of justice and that is the court
> |of our conscience.” – Mahatma Ghandi
> |Apparently, you don't have one.
> |“A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.” – Goethe
> |Yours must be quite ugly.
> 
> Rave, moron, and spit. What else canyou do?

I can see right through your façade to your basic stupidity.  We all see
Wozzie the cow chewing his moldy old cud instead of putting effort in
rational thinking.

> Your Shit assumed and announced "proper" way is to
> unsynchronize clocks  and make GPS not working, but
> nicely symmetrical instead.

"By denying scientific principles, one may maintain any paradox."
-- Galileo Galilei

And Wozzie-boy certainly is a reality-denier.

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


#381595

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2016-04-13 23:09 -0700
Message-ID<c2ffff25-15ee-49a7-874b-494e8df1c619@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381576
W dniu czwartek, 14 kwietnia 2016 04:02:14 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:

> And Wozzie-boy certainly is a reality-denier.

It's actually you who had to announce 
GPS clocks as not real, because they don't match
The Shit.

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


#381617

FromGary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com>
Date2016-04-14 04:48 -0700
Message-ID<47ebb8f3-ac9d-418b-a439-0eeb131e23e7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381595
On Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 12:09:17 AM UTC-6, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
>
> W dniu czwartek, 14 kwietnia 2016 04:02:14 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> >
> > And Wozzie-boy certainly is a reality-denier.
> 
> It's actually you who had to announce 
> GPS clocks as not real, because they don't match
> The Shit.

So yell and spit.  What else can a reality-denier like you do?

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


#381623

Frommlwozniak@wp.pl
Date2016-04-14 05:04 -0700
Message-ID<49f28ba3-807b-4673-86db-d0d063dc8f2d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381617
W dniu czwartek, 14 kwietnia 2016 13:48:31 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2016 at 12:09:17 AM UTC-6, mlwo...@wp.pl wrote:
> >
> > W dniu czwartek, 14 kwietnia 2016 04:02:14 UTC+2 użytkownik Gary Harnagel napisał:
> > >
> > > And Wozzie-boy certainly is a reality-denier.
> > 
> > It's actually you who had to announce 
> > GPS clocks as not real, because they don't match
> > The Shit.
> 
> So yell and spit.  What else can a reality-denier like you do?

It's actually you who had to announce 
GPS clocks as not real, because they don't match
The Shit.

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


#381554

FromRafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-13 14:40 -0700
Message-ID<a0cff518-a195-46c7-be22-96eff1752ee2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381513
El miércoles, 13 de abril de 2016, 10:36:45 (UTC-4), paparios  escribió:
> On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 10:58:41 AM UTC-3, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> > El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 19:50:42 (UTC-4), paparios  escribió:
> > > El lunes, 11 de abril de 2016, 20:33:23 (UTC-3), Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato  escribió:
> > > <SNIP> the same repetitive misrepresentations of how the GPS system works.
> > >  
> > > > I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful
> > > > resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with 
> > > > Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a 
> > > > very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R.
> > > > 
> > > > RVHG (Rafael  Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I have checked the IS-GPS-200 official documentation and nowhere the word 1905R or SR 1905R or even 1905 is found. So what are you talking about?
> > > 
> > > The only references to relativity are the word "relativistic effect" and "relativistic correction".
> > 
> > You are commenting the last paragraph of a post that I send to Tom. He knows the meaning of 1905R, because we had been debating about it years in this group. Read at least the whole post (much better including the previous ones) if you want a fruitful participation in that debate.
> > 
> > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
> 
> Well, you assert, without any proof, that "I challenge you to explain using SR-GR the already mentioned very successful resolution of systems of Newtonian equations in all GPS receptors with Cartesian space coordinates and 1905R defined time, since 1977 until today a very well established EXPERIMENTAL FACT supporting 1905R."
>
Without any proof? What mean then for you the continuous resolving of
Newtonian equations in the 1905R physical conditions with extraordinary 
accuracy by all GPS receptors since already almost four decades?

> 1) The way GPS was designed and works, uses relativistic corrections, which are based on SR-GR spacetime effects on received signals from orbiting clocks.
>
The systems of equations that all GPS receptors resolve are NOT SR-GR ones, BUT
Newtonian equations with Euclidean geometry, Cartesian space coordinates and
the time defined by 1905 Einstein, what implies ALL GPS operative clocks 
showing simultaneously the SAME ECI time with the SAME 10.23 MHz synchronizing 
frequency.
 
Does not exist at all in the operative GPS any satellite clock transmitting any
signal of frequency 10.2299999954326 MHz and received at ground or in any other 
place (I challenge you to point where in the GPS document that is described). 
The clock is NOT a transmitter, and the transmitters have not a carrier with
that frequency (or any other close to it).

Yes, 1905R (NOT SR) predicts that moving clocks run slower and GR predicts that
higher clocks run faster, knowledge used to design the adequate relativistic 
corrections with the purpose to 1905R synchronize all operative clocks with the 
SAME 10.23 MHz frequency.
 
> 2) In physics there is no such thing as "1905R". There are two models one is called Special Relativity and the other General Relativity, both of which are part of the Theory of Relativity.
> 
1905R denotes the two Einstein's Relativity papers of that year, where anybody
can confirm reading only Section 1 of the June 30 paper that we have there 
Newtonian equations with Euclidean geometry, Cartesian space coordinates and 
the time defined by 1905 Einstein, IOW, the physical conditions corresponding 
to the systems of equations that all GPS receptors resolve every instant of ECI 
time, establishing as an EXPERIMENTAL FACT that since 1977, 1905R (but NOT SR) 
describes very well GPS ECI.

> 3) For years, several of us have been telling you that the original paper from Einstein has some incorrect parts, such as the end paragraph of section 4. This paper was the beginning of a very long road, involving thousands of physicists, which contributed to consolidate what the actual Theory of Relativity says.
>
If 1905R has some incorrect parts (surely you are including here the presence
of Gravity), how can explain you then that 1905R are so good describing GPS ECI 
and NOT SR? The locality that SR has in GR is totally useless in GPS ECI, 
because the local SR time in a satellite disappears after the relativistic 
correction that implements the unique 1905R ECI time simultaneously showed by 
all GPS operative clocks. 

> 4) Your posts always repeat (and for years) the same erroneous assertions, so snipping all the tired and repeated text is just a service to readers.

Let us see who is the one here repeating for years the same erroneous
assertions, as the not existence of 1905R that anybody can confirm simply 
reading the historical texts freely available anywhere.

Are you able to negate the existence of the system of Newtonian equations that
in this same ECI instant all GPS receptors of the world are resolving, and
making the same continuously since already almost four decades with 
extraordinary accuracy?

Convince yourself, putting out Gravity from 1905R in 1916 (a consequence of
accepting some years before Minkowski's space-time free of bodies?) was perhaps
not the best alternative, or at least not the unique one.

1905 Einstein has a lot to say yet in Physics today.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

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


#381562

Frompaparios <paparios@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-13 15:51 -0700
Message-ID<3f5a57d5-63f1-489a-89bb-9724f8cd19a0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#381554
El miércoles, 13 de abril de 2016, 18:40:37 (UTC-3), Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato  escribió:

Same old nonsensical stuff.

> 
> 1905 Einstein has a lot to say yet in Physics today.
> 
> RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Einstein 1905 papers are extraordinary in the they launched several new lines of thoughts, such as Quantum Mechanics and Relativity, but they are not what today it is understood as Quantum Mechanics neither they are what today it is understood as Relativity. You have more than 110 years of science to catch...

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


#381564

FromTom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
Date2016-04-13 19:11 -0400
Message-ID<iYqdndkf7-WgT5PKnZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#381554
On 4/13/16 4/13/16   5:40 PM, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote:
> the continuous resolving of
> Newtonian equations in the 1905R physical conditions with extraordinary
> accuracy by all GPS receptors since already almost four decades?

I am repeatedly amazed at your ability to ignore the obvious: Newton's laws DO 
NOT HOLD GOOD in the ECI coordinates of the GPS. The easiest to see is the first 
law: in these coordinates a free object does NOT move in a uniform straight 
line, it moves in a circle [#], with period 1 year and radius ~ 93 million miles.

	[#] close enough.

Attempting to apply "1905R" to the GPS is absurd, because the coordinates are 
not valid, and you must violate the first postulate (Cs atoms to NOT oscillate 
at the same frequency at all altitudes, implying the laws of physics are NOT the 
same).


> Does not exist at all in the operative GPS any satellite clock transmitting any
> signal of frequency 10.2299999954326 MHz [...]

Repeating a falsehood does not make it true. The GPS documents refute your 
claim, as does basic knowledge of either how the GPS works or of GR. In 
particular, the GPS satellites transmit P-code chips at 10.2299999954326 MHz [*] 
-- AS REQUIRED BY THE GPS SPECIFICATIONS DOCUMENTS.

	[*] NOTE MY PHRASING. It implies ONLY the satellite clock
	is involved. In this case that means that the frequency is
	measured via a co-located and co-moving instrument (i.e.
	in the SV). Yes, the COORDINATE RATE of that satellite clock
	is 10.23 MHz, and the rate of SIGNALS from the satellite
	clock received on the geoid is also 10.23 MHz. But NEITHER
	of those is the rate of the clock itself.


Tom Roberts

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


Page 3 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 6  Next page →

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


csiph-web