Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #393756 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-26 06:22 +1000 |
| Last post | 2016-10-07 13:52 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 436 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-26 06:22 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-26 11:20 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 19:50 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-09-26 21:43 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-26 06:42 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-26 02:40 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-26 20:17 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-26 05:37 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-27 03:37 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-26 12:08 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 08:34 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-27 03:56 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-26 13:16 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-27 08:29 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-27 12:16 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-09-28 06:31 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-27 15:20 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-28 14:06 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-28 09:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 15:17 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-29 08:59 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 09:48 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-09-30 11:58 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-01 08:40 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-01 07:36 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-02 18:02 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-02 08:10 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-03 09:18 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-03 11:15 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 07:24 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-04 17:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 08:04 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-06 11:21 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-07 08:19 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-27 15:03 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-28 14:14 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 07:51 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 15:22 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 10:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:08 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 10:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-01 08:50 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 05:38 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 07:41 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 05:40 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 08:18 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 09:31 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-07 09:47 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 13:40 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-08 04:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-08 10:12 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-08 15:28 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-09 09:39 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-09 11:44 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-10 05:32 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-10 18:55 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-11 09:06 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-11 01:03 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-11 18:24 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-09 17:43 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-10 05:36 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-11 04:36 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-11 23:07 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Scott <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-11 21:20 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-11 15:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-12 09:16 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-12 15:00 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-12 06:12 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-11 23:23 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:53 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-13 13:33 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 12:04 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-14 11:25 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-14 02:44 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 07:03 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-14 15:09 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-15 05:04 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-14 19:04 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-15 06:31 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 12:01 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 08:23 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 03:46 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-18 09:03 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 19:44 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-18 01:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 23:26 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-18 16:52 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-19 10:30 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-20 03:55 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-19 19:38 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 05:50 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-20 10:21 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-20 15:48 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-20 23:56 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 16:59 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-20 15:46 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-15 00:51 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-15 00:45 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-16 05:16 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-15 14:06 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-15 12:19 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-16 06:31 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 12:37 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-17 10:12 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-17 09:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-17 10:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 08:32 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 03:51 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 19:48 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 23:32 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-16 00:56 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-16 01:05 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 21:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-16 11:16 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 07:49 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-14 19:57 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 14:02 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-15 05:06 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 15:02 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-17 02:34 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 20:56 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 08:06 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-18 10:06 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-18 19:45 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-18 13:30 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-18 13:43 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-19 07:45 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 23:43 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-19 11:18 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-20 03:48 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-19 21:22 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-20 09:58 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 03:36 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 09:42 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 04:24 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-20 17:28 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 10:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 20:05 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-21 14:32 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Jim Barthel <jimbart@portlanportal.info> - 2016-10-21 13:51 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-22 04:17 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 08:28 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-21 06:30 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 08:25 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-21 06:28 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-22 04:20 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-21 12:37 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-22 10:42 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-21 20:04 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-22 09:44 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Dwain Foster <dwainbwe@tyrellysite.org> - 2016-10-22 12:44 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-22 19:56 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 08:54 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-24 10:59 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-24 16:05 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-24 11:25 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-24 18:30 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-24 12:05 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-24 23:34 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 06:44 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-25 19:49 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 06:57 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-25 20:02 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 20:43 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Walter Bautista <wabau@outlookbay.org> - 2016-10-26 14:51 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Walter Bautista <wabau@outlookbay.org> - 2016-10-26 14:56 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-26 04:17 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-27 04:36 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-25 22:22 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Walter Bautista <wabau@outlookbay.org> - 2016-10-25 20:48 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-25 14:05 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 20:46 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-10-25 16:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 03:57 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-20 21:03 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-20 23:59 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 20:12 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-21 02:18 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-18 22:44 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 11:26 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 12:30 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-14 21:38 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 13:06 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 13:27 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 13:36 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 13:42 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-15 00:56 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 06:16 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-15 15:40 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 13:39 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-14 15:01 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 16:05 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 06:20 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 06:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-15 16:30 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 08:08 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 08:31 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-15 10:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 10:56 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-15 13:58 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 14:02 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-16 11:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-16 18:08 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-16 18:09 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-16 19:30 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-17 00:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-17 14:51 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-17 10:45 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 15:12 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 15:55 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 03:40 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-18 04:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 15:14 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 16:28 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 15:04 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 15:49 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 20:48 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-19 13:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 13:24 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-19 14:08 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-19 14:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 13:37 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-22 13:50 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 14:02 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-23 06:56 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-23 11:33 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-23 13:55 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 13:43 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-24 14:33 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 20:54 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-26 08:13 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-27 04:56 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-26 12:09 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-23 15:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 13:54 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 16:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 22:41 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 22:52 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-19 23:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-20 08:22 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-21 04:06 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 13:55 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-22 15:12 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-23 07:29 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-23 11:25 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 09:39 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-24 14:28 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-24 13:06 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-24 20:07 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-24 15:23 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-24 20:34 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 07:09 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-25 20:16 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-26 19:50 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-26 14:26 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-27 05:00 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 16:13 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-24 22:35 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Edgar König <edgko@edgarkoenig.info> - 2016-10-24 20:47 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 15:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 15:52 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-24 18:29 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-25 06:16 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-25 06:34 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-25 09:57 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-25 11:14 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-26 04:22 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-25 15:44 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-26 11:13 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-27 05:11 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-26 23:23 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Walter Bautista <wabau@outlookbay.org> - 2016-10-26 22:10 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-26 15:15 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-27 21:57 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 16:28 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-29 20:34 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-29 14:27 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-30 11:29 +0100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-31 05:01 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-10-26 17:39 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 05:01 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 06:20 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Walter Bautista <wabau@outlookbay.org> - 2016-10-27 14:23 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 13:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-27 22:40 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-27 16:33 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-28 09:34 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-27 10:12 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-27 23:04 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 13:49 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-24 15:16 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 13:07 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 13:52 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-16 00:58 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 09:15 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 10:18 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-17 03:11 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-15 15:16 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 09:22 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 10:05 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 13:18 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-15 13:58 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-16 01:00 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 09:19 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 11:47 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-16 19:35 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-17 11:20 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-17 09:46 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-17 14:43 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-17 14:57 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Scott <scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-17 15:46 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-17 02:49 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 11:42 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 05:17 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 11:50 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-16 12:19 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 23:31 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 14:45 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-18 12:34 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-18 15:09 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-19 11:27 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-12 15:32 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-12 06:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-12 09:30 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-12 19:25 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 09:08 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-13 13:40 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-13 01:28 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 19:35 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-13 05:35 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 06:29 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-13 14:41 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 20:21 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-10-15 05:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-13 16:19 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 06:34 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-14 03:59 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 20:23 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 13:50 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 12:48 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 06:11 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-12 19:55 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 09:15 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-13 01:33 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-12 19:03 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 00:28 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-13 11:12 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-13 09:57 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-13 14:08 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-13 14:10 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. sdf <sdf@sdf.sdf> - 2016-10-15 02:23 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-15 01:02 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-16 17:56 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-16 21:37 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-17 10:03 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-17 04:25 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. ScottPN <Scott@oe0vgk3s.info> - 2016-10-17 11:41 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 11:44 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-13 19:43 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 04:00 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-10-13 14:58 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 06:43 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 13:32 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-13 16:18 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 20:27 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-14 04:06 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-15 05:20 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-13 16:03 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-13 13:59 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-14 06:22 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-15 11:42 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-15 12:08 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-15 13:53 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 18:10 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 21:28 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 15:30 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 23:06 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-29 20:25 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 04:35 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:17 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-30 02:21 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-30 02:54 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-01 06:25 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-09-30 16:54 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-02 04:47 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-02 01:02 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-02 18:05 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-03 00:50 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 07:50 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-05 02:13 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-05 11:23 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-05 15:52 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 08:30 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-06 03:55 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-06 20:03 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-06 20:21 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-06 16:23 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-07 09:15 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-07 09:59 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-08 21:44 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-08 22:02 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-09 09:58 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-09 11:06 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-10 06:14 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-10 08:21 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-10 11:52 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-11 20:29 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-10 10:23 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-11 09:20 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-10 19:02 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-11 19:04 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-11 00:53 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-11 20:14 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-06 08:28 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-06 03:58 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-03 19:48 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-10-03 19:50 +0000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-05 09:06 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-10-05 10:59 +0200
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> - 2016-10-06 20:13 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-10-07 08:07 -0500
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-28 23:13 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 23:17 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-28 23:43 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-29 04:44 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-09-30 10:21 +1000
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-06 11:53 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-07 09:24 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. alsor@interia.pl - 2016-10-07 06:52 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. HGW <hw@....> - 2016-10-08 10:05 +1100
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 11:35 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 11:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 12:38 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 13:46 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 13:47 -0700
Re: Why GPS Supports BaTh and Refutes Einstein. numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 13:52 -0700
Page 17 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 22 Next page →
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-19 11:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nu7eak$2sh$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #396063 |
On 19.10.2016 00:09, Thomas wrote: > On Tuesday, 18 October 2016 10:34:36 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> On 17.10.2016 23:45, Thomas wrote: See Thomas "prove me wrong": >>> The receiver doesn't calculate the position wrong. You are. The position >>> is calculated by using timing DIFFERENCES to different satellites. >>> If you have two timings t1 and t2 wrong by the same relative factor df/f >>> then the associated path difference x1-x2=c*(t1-t2) is also wrong by >>> the same factor df/f. For the GPS satellites, the path is of the order >>> of 20000 km. So for a drift of 1ms/day (10^-3/86400 = 1.16*10^-8) >>> the position will be wrong by 20000*1.16*10^-8 km = 23 cm. Even this >>> is well within the GPS accuracy of about 5m (which, as I mentioned earlier, >>> is not determined by the ranging error but by the ephemeris error associated >>> with a 1 ms clock error (the satellite moves about 5m in 1 ms). :-D >> >> I won't even bother to comment on this. >> Everybody but you will see for themselves how nonsensical it is, >> and you have proven to be a a crank who will never listen to reason. >> >>> You should really make an effort to learn how GPS actually works, rather than >>> insisting on making false claims here just because it suits your ideology. >> >> SIC!!!! >> >> 'nuff said! >> > > Your non-comment speaks for itself. As soon as somebody proves you wrong you are lost for words. > :-D -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 15:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ntle26$d45$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #395426 |
On 11.10.2016 23:20, Scott wrote:
> Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
> Too late. The Chinese GPS system, as specified, does not need performing
> fictive corrections for the sake of Relativity, a theory.
> https://www.wired.com/2016/06/rocket-launch-brings-china-one-step-closer-gps/
>
> I beg you to reconsider.
>
Han Chunhao, Cai Zhiwu, Lin Yuting, Liu Li,
Xiao Shenghong, Zhu Lingfeng, and Wang Xianglei:
"Time Synchronization and Performance of BeiDou
Satellite Clocks in Orbit"
http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijno/2013/371450.pdf
<<
2. Time Model of Satellite Clocks
---------------------------------
Considering the large-scale spacetime involved
(about 1 × 105 km in space and several days,
even several months or years in time) and
the precision requirements (1 m, even 1 cm,
1 mm level), the GNSS data process must be dealt
with under the framework of relativity and
quantum theory.
. . .
The relativistic effect must be taken into account
for the evaluation of clock performance. If not,
the stability of frequency will be influenced.
>>
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 06:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e610e8ff-f639-4e78-8066-f97a60052a14@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395479 |
W dniu środa, 12 października 2016 15:32:56 UTC+2 użytkownik Paul B. Andersen napisał: > On 11.10.2016 23:20, Scott wrote: > > Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > > > Too late. The Chinese GPS system, as specified, does not need performing > > fictive corrections for the sake of Relativity, a theory. > > https://www.wired.com/2016/06/rocket-launch-brings-china-one-step-closer-gps/ > > > > I beg you to reconsider. > > > > Han Chunhao, Cai Zhiwu, Lin Yuting, Liu Li, > Xiao Shenghong, Zhu Lingfeng, and Wang Xianglei: > "Time Synchronization and Performance of BeiDou > Satellite Clocks in Orbit" > > http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijno/2013/371450.pdf > << > 2. Time Model of Satellite Clocks > --------------------------------- > Considering the large-scale spacetime involved > (about 1 × 105 km in space and several days, > even several months or years in time) and > the precision requirements (1 m, even 1 cm, > 1 mm level), the GNSS data process must be dealt > with under the framework of relativity and > quantum theory. > . . . > The relativistic effect must be taken into account > for the evaluation of clock performance. If not, > the stability of frequency will be influenced. > Surely, the shit assuming synchronization of clocks "unproper" is absolutely necessary to synchronize them properly. Samely, as loving a neighbour requires burning him at the stake.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 09:30 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntjp5n$4rn$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395423 |
On 12/10/16 08:07, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 11.10.2016 06:36, Michael Moroney wrote: >> "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: > 31 57642.1087 -248644.1 > 31 57671.3059 -243315.0 -2.1 > > 32 57642.0087 +110775.6 > 32 57671.992 +149202.7 -15.3 > -------------------------------------- > > Note the following: All the clocks are 'way off' sync. > some are more than half a millisecond off sync. > That is because the SV-clocks never are adjusted while > the SV is in service, it is the parameter "clock-offset" > that is corrected when needed. This parameter tells how much > the SV clock is off sync. The clock reading together > with the 'clock offset' are transmitted from the SVs, > and the correction is done in the receiver. That's called a software correction. It is quite easy to handle. The big correction is done after the clock is sent into orbit and before put into service. The offsets you have mentioned are those added to the big one. > Since the SV clocks not are corrected, we can see how > stable they are by seeing how much the error has changed > during 29 days. This is shown in the fourth entry above. > Note that these are the _measured_ rate errors > of the clocks which are corrected by 4.4647E-10. > The average error for all the clocks is 0.54E-12, > the rms error is 4.63E-12. > This is as expected, given the precision of the clocks. Very misleading figures. 600 us in one month is a lot...and we don't know what the offset was the previous month.. The GR error is around 48us a day. 15ps/sec is not all that small. It is 1.3us per day > Since all the errors are less than 1% of the GR-correction, > we can conclude that this month of data show that the GR-correction > is correct well within 1%. The GR correction is a one off thing. It has nothing to do with these figures. > Since the average error is approximately 0.1% of the GR-correction > it could be tempting to claim that the GR-correction is correct > to within 0.1%. One month of data is probably not statistically > significant to make such a claim. > However, we have 35 years of data from the GPS, and these data > confirm the GR correction to be correct to much better than 0.1%. > --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 19:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ntlrlh$98f$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #395431 |
On 12.10.2016 00:30, HGW wrote: > On 12/10/16 08:07, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> >> The satellites are monitored by 15 monitoring stations. >> These stations will compare the time reported by the satellites >> with the correct time, and calculate the error. This error >> is the "clock offset" which is uploaded to the satellites >> from one of four ground antennas. >> Each satellite is tracked for 13 minutes 20 - 30 times every day, >> but because of the positions of the ground stations and >> the orbits of the satellites, each satellite will every day >> have a period of at least 10 hours when no measurement is made, >> and during which no update of the 'clock-offset' is possible. >> >> The data measured by the monitoring stations can be found at: >> http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/gps_datafiles.html >> >> This is a tiny excerpt of the measured data in the period >> MJD57642(09-11-2016) to MJD57671(10-10-2016), that is 29 days. >> I have shown two measurements for each SV, separated >> by 29 days. >> >> The first entry (PRN) identifies the SV by its PRN number, >> the second entry (MJD) is the Julian day the measurement is done, >> and the third entry (GPS-SATCL) is how much the SV clock is off sync >> with GPS time, in nanoseconds. This is the "clock offset". >> The fourth entry (SLOPE) is the average rate error of the SV clock >> in parts per 10^12. >> >> PRN MJD GPS-SATCL SLOPE >> NS PS/S >> 1 57642.1309 -33528.5 >> 1 57671.5726 -36749.8 +1.3 >> >> 2 57642.642 -554170.7 >> 2 57671.8587 -541630.1 -5.0 >> >> 3 57642.1976 +86403.0 >> 3 57671.6281 +91750.5 -2.1 >> >> 5 57642.7281 +91777.4 >> 5 57671.9142 +85394.0 +2.5 >> >> 6 57642.5865 -244939.7 >> 6 57671.792 -257790.0 +5.1 >> >> 7 57642.3642 -428138.1 >> 7 57671.517 -420596.7 -3.0 >> >> 8 57642.342 +31376.5 >> 8 57671.5059 +34971.4 -1.4 >> >> 9 57642.3087 -204107.7 >> 9 57671.7476 -222531.6 +7.4 >> >> 10 57642.0087 +95940.2 >> 10 57671.992 +106590.8 -4.3 >> >> 11 57642.1198 +663749.5 >> 11 57671.5504 +666573.5 -1.1 >> >> 12 57642.0642 -388530.9 >> 12 57671.992 -389182.8 +0.3 >> >> 13 57642.0087 +42981.2 >> 13 57671.9476 +48637.4 -2.3 >> >> 14 57642.0642 +34429.2 >> 14 57671.992 +39449.0 -2.0 >> >> 15 57642.0087 +326826.1 >> 15 57671.992 +330410.4 -1.4 >> >> 16 57642.2309 -5779.0 >> 16 57671.4059 -10412.0 +1.8 >> >> 17 57642.5087 +202575.8 >> 17 57671.7142 +201220.5 +0.5 >> >> 18 57642.0087 -556430.6 >> 18 57671.992 -565822.2 +3.7 >> >> 19 57642.5531 +523211.2 >> 19 57671.7476 +521926.8 +0.5 >> >> 20 57642.0087 -434952.7 >> 20 57671.992 -440155.7 +2.1 >> >> 21 57642.0087 +531767.8 >> 21 57671.992 +532695.4 -0.4 >> >> 22 57642.1642 -248372.6 >> 22 57671.6059 -222427.0 -10.4 >> >> 23 57642.2531 +189478.5 >> 23 57671.7031 +192895.6 -1.4 >> >> 24 57642.0087 +22956.3 >> 24 57671.992 +24401.2 -0.6 >> >> 25 57642.0976 +243472.1 >> 25 57671.792 +261211.3 -7.1 >> >> 26 57642.1865 +467119.3 >> 26 57671.3504 +484295.0 -6.9 >> >> 27 57642.0087 -137690.0 >> 27 57671.9698 -150252.2 +5.0 >> >> 28 57642.4531 -551216.5 >> 28 57671.6281 -558292.4 +2.8 >> >> 29 57642.2198 -651279.6 >> 29 57671.9142 -648109.9 -1.3 >> >> 30 57642.4087 -149821.6 >> 30 57671.8587 -153629.8 +1.5 >> >> 31 57642.1087 -248644.1 >> 31 57671.3059 -243315.0 -2.1 >> >> 32 57642.0087 +110775.6 >> 32 57671.992 +149202.7 -15.3 >> -------------------------------------- >> >> Note the following: All the clocks are 'way off' sync. >> some are more than half a millisecond off sync. >> That is because the SV-clocks never are adjusted while >> the SV is in service, it is the parameter "clock-offset" >> that is corrected when needed. This parameter tells how much >> the SV clock is off sync. The clock reading together >> with the 'clock offset' are transmitted from the SVs, >> and the correction is done in the receiver. > > That's called a software correction. It is quite easy to handle. Of course this is the "software correction", there is no other. > The big > correction is done after the clock is sent into orbit and before put > into service. The offsets you have mentioned are those added to the big > one. > >> Since the SV clocks not are corrected, we can see how >> stable they are by seeing how much the error has changed >> during 29 days. This is shown in the fourth entry above. >> Note that these are the _measured_ rate errors >> of the clocks which are corrected by 4.4647E-10. >> The average error for all the clocks is 0.54E-12, >> the rms error is 4.63E-12. >> This is as expected, given the precision of the clocks. > > Very misleading figures. 600 us in one month is a lot...and we don't > know what the offset was the previous month.. The GR error is around > 48us a day. 15ps/sec is not all that small. It is 1.3us per day You have singled out PRN 32, which is much worse than any other SV. This is a bit strange, since it is the newest SV in the constellation. It is a Block IIF and was launched February 5, 2016. When I look at the data, PRN 32 has been running slow by ~ -15E-12 the whole month. It's running on Rb standard. Maybe they should switch standard? (There are two Rb and one Cs standard in a IIF SV) PRN 32 (SVN 70) is not representative for the GPS SVs, so if we consider it a freak and take it out of the averaging process, we get: The average error for all the SV clocks but PRN 32 is -0.01E-12, the rms error is 3.79E-12. >> Since all the errors are less than 1% of the GR-correction, >> we can conclude that this month of data show that the GR-correction >> is correct well within 1%. > > The GR correction is a one off thing. It has nothing to do with these > figures. Quite. The frequency standards are built according to specification, which is 4.4647E-10 slower than the SI-standard. http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200H.pdf The fact that the SV clocks are off sync and that the rate error is in the order of 3E-12 show that the clocks are not adjusted after launch, neither in rate nor phase. >> Since the average error is approximately 0.1% of the GR-correction >> it could be tempting to claim that the GR-correction is correct >> to within 0.1%. One month of data is probably not statistically >> significant to make such a claim. >> However, we have 35 years of data from the GPS, and these data >> confirm the GR correction to be correct to much better than 0.1%. >> -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 09:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntmc9g$7b0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395497 |
On 13/10/16 04:25, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 12.10.2016 00:30, HGW wrote: >> The GR correction is a one off thing. It has nothing to do with these >> figures. > > Quite. > The frequency standards are built according to specification, > which is 4.4647E-10 slower than the SI-standard. > http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200H.pdf > > The fact that the SV clocks are off sync and that the rate error > is in the order of 3E-12 show that the clocks are not adjusted > after launch, neither in rate nor phase. Do you really think GPS engineers are stupid? Naturally, the clock rates are checked immediately after launch and a coarse offset correction applied. After that, only very minor corrections are needed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 13:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ntnrqr$t11$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #395521 |
On 13.10.2016 00:08, HGW wrote:
> On 13/10/16 04:25, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> On 12.10.2016 00:30, HGW wrote:
>
>>> The GR correction is a one off thing. It has nothing to do with these
>>> figures.
>>
>> The frequency standards are built according to specification,
>> which is 4.4647E-10 slower than the SI-standard.
>> http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200H.pdf
>
> Do you really think GPS engineers are stupid?
No. That's why they will build the SVs according to specification.
http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200H.pdf
<<
3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan
----------------------
. . .
The SV carrier frequency and clock rates
- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -
are offset to compensate for relativistic effects.
The clock rates are offset by ∆ f/f = - 4.4647E-10,
equivalent to a change in the P-code chipping rate of
10.23 MHz offset by a ∆ f = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
The nominal carrier frequencies (f0) shall be
1575.42 MHz, and 1227.6 MHz for L1 and L2,
respectively.
>>
Nothing more to discuss.
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 01:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntmo0r$jc0$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #395431 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 12/10/16 08:07, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >> Note the following: All the clocks are 'way off' sync. >> some are more than half a millisecond off sync. >> That is because the SV-clocks never are adjusted while >> the SV is in service, it is the parameter "clock-offset" >> that is corrected when needed. This parameter tells how much >> the SV clock is off sync. The clock reading together >> with the 'clock offset' are transmitted from the SVs, >> and the correction is done in the receiver. >That's called a software correction. It is quite easy to handle. The big >correction is done after the clock is sent into orbit and before put >into service. The offsets you have mentioned are those added to the big >one. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, so you should be able to show us where in the source code this adjustment would be made, Ralph. What's that, Ralph? You can't, Ralph? Ralph Rabbidge, why is that, Ralph? Ralph Rabbidge, perhaps you don't know that it was physically impossible to change the clock rate of the first generation of GPS satellites, Ralph. Ralph Rabbidge, the one exception is the very first prototype GPS satellite, Ralph Rabbidge. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, the GPS scientists had largely the same argument, whether the GPS clock needed to be pre-adjusted, Ralph. As a compromise, Ralph, that satellite (and only that one, Ralph) was launched with a programmable clock where the 38 microsecond adjustment could be turned off or on, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Ralph, they ran the satellite with the adjustment turned off, Ralph, for weeks, while monitoring the satellite, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Guess what, Ralph? Ralph, they saw that the satellite clock was running too fast, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge. Ralph, then they switched the 38 microsecond adjustment on, Ralph, and left it that way ever since, Ralph, and every satellite launched since then has the 38 microsecond/day adjustment, Ralph, and it can't be turned off or on like you foolishly claim, Ralph. So Ralph, you are arguing about a problem that has been solved for decades, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HGW <hw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 19:35 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntnh1f$1jn4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395528 |
On 13/10/16 12:28, Michael Moroney wrote: ... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that dingleberries make a habit of fiddling the results of experiments to make them appear to support Einstein. --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 05:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e6f02997-36ce-47a1-ad55-5f3bc3c261f6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395549 |
On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 2:36:01 AM UTC-6, HGW wrote: > > ... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that > Ralphie-boy makes a habit of fiddling the results of variable star data to > make them appear to support his refuted DirtyBaThWater. “When you point your finger at someone, anyone, it is often a moment of judgement. We point our fingers when we want to scold someone, point out what they have done wrong. But each time we point, we simultaneously point three fingers back at ourselves.” – Christopher Pike
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 06:29 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <nton9q$35e$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395564 |
On 13/10/16 23:35, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 2:36:01 AM UTC-6, HGW wrote: >> >> ... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that >> Henrie-boy makes a habit of fiddling the results of variable star data to >> make them appear to support his refuted DirtyBaThWater. > > “When you point your finger at someone, anyone, it is often a moment of > judgement. We point our fingers when we want to scold someone, point > out what they have done wrong. But each time we point, we simultaneously > point three fingers back at ourselves.” – Christopher Pike Hey Rat brain, maybe Einstein's fairies were born after your god thing screwed jesus christ's mother.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 14:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <35ecede9-f33f-4741-a394-38e800acb849@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395584 |
On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 1:29:02 PM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: > > On 13/10/16 23:35, Gary Harnagel wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 2:36:01 AM UTC-6, HGW wrote: > > > > > > ... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that > > > Ralphie-boy makes a habit of fiddling the results of variable star data > > > to make them appear to support his refuted DirtyBaThWater. > > > > “When you point your finger at someone, anyone, it is often a moment of > > judgement. We point our fingers when we want to scold someone, point > > out what they have done wrong. But each time we point, we simultaneously > > point three fingers back at ourselves.” – Christopher Pike > > Hey Rat brain, Hey lame brain > maybe Einstein's fairies were born after your god thing > screwed jesus christ's mother. My but you have a filthy mind. Typical of a kooky crackpot atheist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 20:21 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntq82m$5ft$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395593 |
On 14/10/16 08:41, Gary Harnagel wrote: > On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 1:29:02 PM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. wrote: >>>> Hey Rat brain, > > Hey lame brain > >> maybe Einstein's fairies were born after your god thing >> screwed jesus christ's mother. > > My but you have a filthy mind. Typical of a kooky crackpot atheist. They lizard brain, if jesus christ is the son of your god thing, she must have been screwed by him...don't you reckon? ...or don't you understand biology either... It would have been funny to watch...the god thing being invisible and her moaning and groaning....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-15 05:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <237dc661-e5f8-4efc-8387-0d3d8946c634@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395615 |
On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 3:21:29 AM UTC-6, HGWilson, DSc. proves he has a filthy mind: > > They lizard brain, if jesus christ is the son of your god thing, she > must have been screwed by him...don't you reckon? ...or don't you > understand biology either... > It would have been funny to watch...the god thing being invisible and > her moaning and groaning.... Typical of an abysmally-stupid, lying atheist who BELIEVES refuted crap like BaTh.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-13 16:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntoc69$94f$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #395549 |
HGW <hw@....> writes: >On 13/10/16 12:28, Michael Moroney wrote: >... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that >dingleberries make a habit of fiddling the results of experiments to >make them appear to support Einstein. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, so no comment how the early GPS satellites were launched with no way to adjust their frequency even if they wanted to, Ralph? Or, about the very first prototype where the GR modification could be switched on or off, Ralph? And they ran with it off for a few weeks, Ralph, before concluding it was wrong, Ralph, before switching on the GR correction and leaving it that way, Ralph Rabbidge?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 06:34 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntonl1$4hu$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395574 |
On 14/10/16 03:19, Michael Moroney wrote: > HGW <hw@....> writes: > >> On 13/10/16 12:28, Michael Moroney wrote: >> ... a lot of incomprehensible nonsense that amounts to an admission that >> dingleberries make a habit of fiddling the results of experiments to >> make them appear to support Einstein. > > Dr Wilson, so no comment how the early GPS satellites were > launched with no way to adjust their frequency even if they wanted to, > Dr Wilson? Or, about the very first prototype where the GR modification > could be switched on or off, Dr Wilson? And they ran with it off for a few > weeks, Dr Wilson, before concluding it was wrong, Dr Wilson, before switching > on the GR correction and leaving it that way, Dr Wilson? .....Our decrepit little irish bottle washer does not even understand what software correction means....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 03:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ntpl7b$lu0$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #395585 |
"HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: >On 14/10/16 03:19, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Dr Wilson, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, so you really do want me to post your fake photoshopped diploma for everyone to laugh at, don't you, Ralph. Ralph Malcolm, you never did answer why your fake diploma has the name "Henry M. Wilson" instead of the fake name you now post under, "Henry G. Wilson", Ralph. Mr. Rabbidge, whose diploma did you use when you photoshopped it, Ralph? >> so no comment how the early GPS satellites were >> launched with no way to adjust their frequency even if they wanted to, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, still no answer to this, Ralph? >> Ralph? Or, about the very first prototype where the GR modification >> could be switched on or off, Ralph? Or this, Ralph? >> And they ran with it off for a few >> weeks, Ralph, before concluding it was wrong, Ralph, before switching >> on the GR correction and leaving it that way, Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge? Or this, Ralph?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 20:23 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <ntq86i$5ft$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #395608 |
On 14/10/16 14:59, Michael Moron-y proved he is an insult to human intelligence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas <thomas.smid@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 13:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e25198be-49a7-47f8-8626-ec969431f3c4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395423 |
On Tuesday, 11 October 2016 21:07:43 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > On 11.10.2016 06:36, Michael Moroney wrote: > > "HGWilson, DSc." <hgw@....> writes: > > > >> Idiot! Even Paul Andersen knows that every signal contains its source's > >> drift away from absolute GPS time. > > > > Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, the total drift is rather small compared to the > > lifetime of the satellites, Ralph. Ralph Malcolm Rabbidge, as you know, > > Ralph, the GPS satellite time is never adjusted, Ralph, instead the error > > is also broadcast, Ralph Rabbidge. Ralph, the 38 microsecond clock rate > > difference per day would cause the error to accumulate larger and larger, > > Ralph, but it does not do that, Ralph. So Ralph, what is your excuse why > > the GPS satellite time error doesn't grow larger and larger, Ralph Malcolm > > Rabbidge? > > > > As an apropos to what you write above, I have written > the following about the precision of the clocks in GPS satellites. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The satellites are monitored by 15 monitoring stations. > These stations will compare the time reported by the satellites > with the correct time, and calculate the error. This error > is the "clock offset" which is uploaded to the satellites > from one of four ground antennas. > Each satellite is tracked for 13 minutes 20 - 30 times every day, > but because of the positions of the ground stations and > the orbits of the satellites, each satellite will every day > have a period of at least 10 hours when no measurement is made, > and during which no update of the 'clock-offset' is possible. > > The data measured by the monitoring stations can be found at: > http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/gps_datafiles.html > > This is a tiny excerpt of the measured data in the period > MJD57642(09-11-2016) to MJD57671(10-10-2016), that is 29 days. > I have shown two measurements for each SV, separated > by 29 days. > > The first entry (PRN) identifies the SV by its PRN number, > the second entry (MJD) is the Julian day the measurement is done, > and the third entry (GPS-SATCL) is how much the SV clock is off sync > with GPS time, in nanoseconds. This is the "clock offset". > The fourth entry (SLOPE) is the average rate error of the SV clock > in parts per 10^12. > > PRN MJD GPS-SATCL SLOPE > NS PS/S > 1 57642.1309 -33528.5 > 1 57671.5726 -36749.8 +1.3 > > 2 57642.642 -554170.7 > 2 57671.8587 -541630.1 -5.0 > > 3 57642.1976 +86403.0 > 3 57671.6281 +91750.5 -2.1 > > 5 57642.7281 +91777.4 > 5 57671.9142 +85394.0 +2.5 > > 6 57642.5865 -244939.7 > 6 57671.792 -257790.0 +5.1 > > 7 57642.3642 -428138.1 > 7 57671.517 -420596.7 -3.0 > > 8 57642.342 +31376.5 > 8 57671.5059 +34971.4 -1.4 > > 9 57642.3087 -204107.7 > 9 57671.7476 -222531.6 +7.4 > > 10 57642.0087 +95940.2 > 10 57671.992 +106590.8 -4.3 > > 11 57642.1198 +663749.5 > 11 57671.5504 +666573.5 -1.1 > > 12 57642.0642 -388530.9 > 12 57671.992 -389182.8 +0.3 > > 13 57642.0087 +42981.2 > 13 57671.9476 +48637.4 -2.3 > > 14 57642.0642 +34429.2 > 14 57671.992 +39449.0 -2.0 > > 15 57642.0087 +326826.1 > 15 57671.992 +330410.4 -1.4 > > 16 57642.2309 -5779.0 > 16 57671.4059 -10412.0 +1.8 > > 17 57642.5087 +202575.8 > 17 57671.7142 +201220.5 +0.5 > > 18 57642.0087 -556430.6 > 18 57671.992 -565822.2 +3.7 > > 19 57642.5531 +523211.2 > 19 57671.7476 +521926.8 +0.5 > > 20 57642.0087 -434952.7 > 20 57671.992 -440155.7 +2.1 > > 21 57642.0087 +531767.8 > 21 57671.992 +532695.4 -0.4 > > 22 57642.1642 -248372.6 > 22 57671.6059 -222427.0 -10.4 > > 23 57642.2531 +189478.5 > 23 57671.7031 +192895.6 -1.4 > > 24 57642.0087 +22956.3 > 24 57671.992 +24401.2 -0.6 > > 25 57642.0976 +243472.1 > 25 57671.792 +261211.3 -7.1 > > 26 57642.1865 +467119.3 > 26 57671.3504 +484295.0 -6.9 > > 27 57642.0087 -137690.0 > 27 57671.9698 -150252.2 +5.0 > > 28 57642.4531 -551216.5 > 28 57671.6281 -558292.4 +2.8 > > 29 57642.2198 -651279.6 > 29 57671.9142 -648109.9 -1.3 > > 30 57642.4087 -149821.6 > 30 57671.8587 -153629.8 +1.5 > > 31 57642.1087 -248644.1 > 31 57671.3059 -243315.0 -2.1 > > 32 57642.0087 +110775.6 > 32 57671.992 +149202.7 -15.3 > -------------------------------------- > > Note the following: All the clocks are 'way off' sync. > some are more than half a millisecond off sync. > That is because the SV-clocks never are adjusted while > the SV is in service, it is the parameter "clock-offset" > that is corrected when needed. This parameter tells how much > the SV clock is off sync. The clock reading together > with the 'clock offset' are transmitted from the SVs, > and the correction is done in the receiver. > > Since the SV clocks not are corrected, we can see how > stable they are by seeing how much the error has changed > during 29 days. This is shown in the fourth entry above. > Note that these are the _measured_ rate errors > of the clocks which are corrected by 4.4647E-10. > The average error for all the clocks is 0.54E-12, > the rms error is 4.63E-12. > This is as expected, given the precision of the clocks. > > Since all the errors are less than 1% of the GR-correction, > we can conclude that this month of data show that the GR-correction > is correct well within 1%. > > Since the average error is approximately 0.1% of the GR-correction > it could be tempting to claim that the GR-correction is correct > to within 0.1%. One month of data is probably not statistically > significant to make such a claim. > However, we have 35 years of data from the GPS, and these data > confirm the GR correction to be correct to much better than 0.1%. The millisecond offset you quoted is between the satellite clocks and ground clocks. The accuracy of GPS depends on the offset of the satellite clocks AMONGST EACH OTHER however, and this is kept within 20 ns by re-synchronizing the satellite as often as required. See chapter 4.6 of the official GPS documentation for more http://www.georeferencial.com.br/old/material_didatico/entire_GPS.pdf . These corrections are applied regardless of the nature of the satellites de-synchronization. Specific corrections for Relativity do mot come into this at all (the document doesn't even mention Relativity once).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-12 12:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bf74ea5e-7c38-4062-bbda-e6d32e778076@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #395188 |
El sábado, 8 de octubre de 2016, 9:29:00 (UTC-4), Paul B. Andersen escribió: > On 08.10.2016 01:12, HGW wrote: > > On 08/10/16 03:31, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote: > >> > >> What is denoted reception instant t on > >> the system of Newtonian equations > > "Newtonian equations"? > Yes, Newtonian equations; with more precision, 1686 Newtonian Mechanics (1686NM) equations. The today denoted GPS ECI is a 1686NM Center of Mass (CM) system, already introduced by 1905 Einstein as a 1905R stationary system where Newtonian equations hold good (precisely the unique type of system where he defines a relative time to it), at the end of Section 4 of his Jun30 paper. The CM concept is pretty much old, developed already since 1686NM Corollary IV (denoted then *center of gravity*, even before the introduction of the *gravity force* concept). I am very interested to interchange ideas with you about the relationship among 1686NM CM systems, 1905R stationary systems and today SR inertial systems. > >> that the receptor resolves is an unknown to find with > >> a single possible value, depending on the coded and > >> decoded data in the continuous signal containing the > >> precise positions (x_i, y_i, z_i) at time t_i of the involved > >> (at least 4) i satellites. > >> I repeat for you the system of equations: > >> > >> (x-x_i)^2+ (y-y_i)^2+ (z-z_i)^2= (ct-ct_i)^2 > > Right. Here we have Euclidean geometry and Cartesian (space) coordinates (x, y, z) (in 1905R, time t is NOT yet a coordinate). > And I will emphasise what may be implicit in the above: > Since the receiver knows the exact position of an SV [*] > at any time of the SV clock, the SV position is a function of t_i. In total agreement with 1905 Einstein. > So the equation could be written: > > c(t-t_i) = sqrt((x-x_i(t_i))^2+ (y-y_i(t_i)^2+ (z-z_i(t_i))^2) > > The only parameter the receiver will need from each SV [*] > to calculate the current time and position (t,x,y,z) is > the time of emission of the signal it is receiving at the GPS-time t. > > [*] The receiver will have to receive a number of data from > the SV, the ephemeris parameters to calculate the precise > position of the SV at the time t_i, the clock offset, and > the ionospheric parameters to calculate the ionospheric delay. > These data are transmitted with 12.5 minute period. But they > are updated typically once a day, so the only parameter > the receiver has to receive continuously (by counting PRN chips) > to calculate the time t and position (x,y,z) is the time > of transmission t_i. > Exactly. We are in total agreement. > >> > >> As you can see, your arriving events at different instants > >> (with supposed huge milliseconds apart) > >> in the receptor do not exist at all in the GPS. > >> The unique velocity that appears in the receptor software > >> is the signal isotropic velocity c; > >> the satellite velocity v (changing direction continuously) > >> does not appear on any part. > > > > Yes, The receiver clock time is not important....which proves the GR > > 'rate correction' is totally unnecessary and bogus. > > This is really remarkable! :-D > > For several years Ralph Malcom Rabbidge has been repeating > the incredible stupidity that the fact that no precise clock > in the receiver is needed proves that the SV clock rates do > not have to be adjusted by the factor 4.4647E-10. > What kind of down-under upside-down logic is behind this > nonsensical conclusion? :-D > > The simple fact is that for the GPS to work, all the SV clocks > have to be synchronous to the GPS coordinated time to within 100ns. > (The sync error is generally much less than 100ns). > It is an irrefutable fact that if the SV clock rate weren't > adjusted down by 4.4647E-10, they would drift off sync by > more than 100ns few minutes after each correction, which is > done typically once a day. > > You must live in Wonderland to think that the existence > or non existence of a clock in a receiver can affect > the sync of the SV clocks! :-D > We continue in total agreement. > -- > Paul > > https://paulba.no/ RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 17 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web