Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #420688 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-27 06:49 +1000 |
| Last post | 2017-06-05 00:49 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 159 — 37 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-05-27 06:49 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Ckeho Baùkora <unukn@owyqar.og> - 2017-05-26 21:01 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-26 15:49 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Ckeho Baùkora <unukn@owyqar.og> - 2017-05-27 09:20 +0000
Re: GPS Again. dancouriann@gmail.com - 2017-05-26 15:50 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-26 17:58 -0500
GPS Again. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-26 16:14 -0700
GPS Again. "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-26 16:38 -0700
Re: GPS Again. xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-05-26 16:25 -0700
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-27 00:18 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-26 19:51 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Ckeho Baùkora <unukn@owyqar.og> - 2017-05-27 10:37 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 09:57 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2017-05-30 20:52 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Rivers <erwm@weicnne.ac> - 2017-05-30 19:17 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 15:23 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Helmut Wabnig <hwabnig@.- --- -.dotat> - 2017-05-30 22:53 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Schwanenflügel <erwm@wanenf.oa> - 2017-05-30 20:59 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-05-31 00:42 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-05-30 19:03 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-05-30 21:30 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-05-30 19:01 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Ernest Rivers <erwm@weicnne.ac> - 2017-05-30 19:15 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-09 11:37 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Jim Limey <eeug@dnne.ri> - 2017-06-09 14:32 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-09 12:51 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-09 18:52 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-10 09:23 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-10 11:23 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-10 11:21 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Kitubu Nkyaku <akntuu@buwkau.kk> - 2017-06-10 10:42 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 19:38 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Nými Icelulózy <ejienm@wzsfwe.ul> - 2017-06-16 11:30 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-16 10:40 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 11:11 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 21:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-11 12:31 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-10 22:40 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-10 23:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-11 05:14 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-10 22:16 +0200
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-11 07:19 +1000
Re: GPS Again. xxein1x1@gmail.com - 2017-06-10 16:11 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-10 18:32 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-11 14:43 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-13 07:50 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Lolek Atoru <oitiruc@rwuca.oa> - 2017-06-13 20:56 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 09:25 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-13 17:02 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 12:36 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-13 20:04 -0700
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 04:43 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-14 20:11 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 14:47 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-06-11 22:35 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 15:44 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 18:03 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 19:00 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 11:39 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 02:33 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-11 22:42 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 23:27 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 04:47 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 08:20 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 17:18 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2017-06-15 10:06 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Kotovanich Nzerovu <ivhvruo@wovewvw.ev> - 2017-06-15 17:30 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 18:15 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 22:32 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 20:48 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-13 01:52 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-13 19:57 -0400
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-14 00:46 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-12 09:58 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 15:08 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 10:37 -0500
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 17:21 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 17:40 +0000
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 18:05 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 18:19 +0000
Re: GPS Again. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-06-12 19:16 +0000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-12 19:43 +0000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-12 18:25 -0400
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-12 18:45 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 10:35 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-12 11:05 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-11 23:29 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-12 20:12 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-12 13:54 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Selina Dieter <uiueeits@wlwtwstd.ci> - 2017-06-12 12:47 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:13 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 12:59 +1000
Re: GPS Again. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-12 23:03 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-13 04:22 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-06-13 13:00 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-13 13:32 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 10:09 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 09:34 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Серг ио <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 18:42 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-14 12:40 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-14 04:06 +0000
Re: GPS Again. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-14 01:20 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 23:19 -0500
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-13 23:46 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-14 20:07 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-14 09:17 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-17 08:26 +1000
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-16 20:40 -0400
Re: GPS Again. Ecembre Abin <umueuu@eibbwaw.ee> - 2017-06-17 08:05 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-17 22:20 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-06-17 07:58 -0500
Re: GPS Again. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-06-14 17:06 -0400
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-05-31 09:58 +1000
Re: GPS Again. "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-05-27 07:36 +0200
Re: GPS Again. "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-05-28 10:57 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 07:02 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-01 09:00 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-31 23:42 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-01 19:36 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-01 05:33 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> - 2017-06-02 19:51 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-03 05:10 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-04 08:08 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-03 15:27 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-04 08:50 +1000
Re: GPS Again. pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-06-03 19:37 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 07:09 +0200
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-04 16:06 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Prudence Youngs <usue@weuem.ge> - 2017-06-04 11:11 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 14:23 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Prudence Youngs <usue@weuem.ge> - 2017-06-04 12:33 +0000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-04 18:17 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-04 05:06 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Prudence Youngs <usue@weuem.ge> - 2017-06-04 12:12 +0000
Re: GPS Again. anne <0140519@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 05:32 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-05 08:48 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-04 16:09 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-05 11:12 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-04 19:24 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-05 16:38 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-05 04:49 -0700
Re: GPS Again. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-05 05:53 -0700
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-06 08:38 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-05 20:30 -0700
Re: GPS Again. Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 15:00 +0200
Re: GPS Again. Prudence Youngs <usue@weuem.ge> - 2017-06-04 11:10 +0000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 13:25 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-05 08:46 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-04 23:13 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-05 11:16 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-05 09:26 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-06 08:46 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-05 23:17 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-07 10:11 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 03:04 +0000
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-07 14:58 +1000
Re: GPS Again. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-07 12:17 -0500
Re: GPS Again. "HGW..." <hgw@....> - 2017-06-08 09:06 +1000
Re: GPS Again. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-06-05 00:49 +0000
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 04:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ohqcoh$bh$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #422513 |
"HGW..." <hgw@....> writes: >In the real world, there are no 'relativity effects'. No, Ralph, your fantasy world without relativity is not "the real world". The real world has a GPS system that depends on general relativity to work at all. >What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count rather than light >speed is clearly a far better way to operate the GPS system. Ralph, I know that you, as a non-scientist, don't understand error bars and error analysis at all, but real scientists analyze all potential sources of error and come up with an overall error analysis. That's what you saw there. Maybe you should learn about error bars/analysis when you try to learn something about physics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 01:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <90b22e00-d5e2-434f-a2c4-c3dba51c81b1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #422528 |
W dniu środa, 14 czerwca 2017 06:06:45 UTC+2 użytkownik Michael Moroney napisał: > "HGW..." <hgw@....> writes: > > >In the real world, there are no 'relativity effects'. > > No, Ralph, your fantasy world without relativity is not "the real world". > The real world has a GPS system that depends on general relativity to > work at all. A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. GPS clocks show it clearly - time, as defined by your idiot guru himself is galilean with the precision of an acceptable error.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 23:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohqdg7$12v2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422513 |
On 6/13/2017 9:40 PM, HGW... wrote:
> On 14/06/17 09:42, Серг ио wrote:
>> On 6/13/2017 6:34 PM, HGW... wrote:
>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh, shifting ground. Either the wavelength is absolute, or it's not.
>>>> You cannot have a moderately absolute wavelength.
>>>
>>> The absolute wavelength will very slightly decrease to a new absolute
>>> length as the signals slow in the atmosphere. The changes are easy to
>>> calculate from each satellite's ephemeris.
>>
>> wavelength also changes due to its orbitle velocity and relitivity
>> effects.
> In the real world, there are no 'relativity effects'.
>
>> additionally;
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System
>>
>>
>> source Effect (meters)
>> Signal arrival C/A ±3
>> Signal arrival P(Y) ±0.3
>> Ionospheric effects ±5
>> Ephemeris errors ±2.5
>> Satellite clock errors ±2
>> Multipath distortion ±1
>> Tropospheric effects ±0.5
>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R C/A ±6.7
>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R P(Y) ±6.0
>
> What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count
like counting knots in a rope?
> rather than light
> speed is clearly a far better way to operate the GPS system.
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-13 23:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohqf3g$14t6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422531 |
On 6/13/2017 11:19 PM, Sегg iо wrote:
> On 6/13/2017 9:40 PM, HGW... wrote:
>> On 14/06/17 09:42, Серг ио wrote:
>>> On 6/13/2017 6:34 PM, HGW... wrote:
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, shifting ground. Either the wavelength is absolute, or it's
>>>>> not. You cannot have a moderately absolute wavelength.
>>>>
>>>> The absolute wavelength will very slightly decrease to a new
>>>> absolute length as the signals slow in the atmosphere. The changes
>>>> are easy to calculate from each satellite's ephemeris.
>>>
>>> wavelength also changes due to its orbitle velocity and relitivity
>>> effects.
>> In the real world, there are no 'relativity effects'.
>>
>>> additionally;
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System
>>>
>>>
>>> source Effect (meters)
>>> Signal arrival C/A ±3
>>> Signal arrival P(Y) ±0.3
>>> Ionospheric effects ±5
>>> Ephemeris errors ±2.5
>>> Satellite clock errors ±2
>>> Multipath distortion ±1
>>> Tropospheric effects ±0.5
>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R C/A ±6.7
>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R P(Y) ±6.0
>>
>> What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count
>
Arrr... the same the way the pirates of yester-year would find their
position, tie a knotted rope to each island, and have a sub-pirate walk
the rope and count the knots. then figger out the position on the mighty
sea....arrr...
>
>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the GPS
>> system.
>>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 20:07 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ohr1pr$2i2$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422534 |
On 14/06/17 14:46, Sегg iо wrote:
> On 6/13/2017 11:19 PM, Sегg iо wrote:
>>>> source Effect (meters)
>>>> Signal arrival C/A ±3
>>>> Signal arrival P(Y) ±0.3
>>>> Ionospheric effects ±5
>>>> Ephemeris errors ±2.5
>>>> Satellite clock errors ±2
>>>> Multipath distortion ±1
>>>> Tropospheric effects ±0.5
>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R C/A ±6.7
>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R P(Y) ±6.0
>>>
>>> What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count
>>
>
> Arrr... the same the way the pirates of yester-year would find their
> position, tie a knotted rope to each island, and have a sub-pirate walk
> the rope and count the knots. then figger out the position on the mighty
> sea....arrr...
>
>>
>>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the
>>> GPS system.
The system doesn't need to worry much about any of those now that it
uses wavelength instead of light
>>>
>>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sегg iо <invalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 09:17 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ohrgia$s89$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422544 |
On 6/14/2017 5:07 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote:
> On 14/06/17 14:46, Sегg iо wrote:
>> On 6/13/2017 11:19 PM, Sегg iо wrote:
>
>>>>> source Effect (meters)
>>>>> Signal arrival C/A ±3
>>>>> Signal arrival P(Y) ±0.3
>>>>> Ionospheric effects ±5
>>>>> Ephemeris errors ±2.5
>>>>> Satellite clock errors ±2
>>>>> Multipath distortion ±1
>>>>> Tropospheric effects ±0.5
>>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R C/A ±6.7
>>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R P(Y) ±6.0
>>>>
>>>> What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count
>>
>> Arrr... the same the way the pirates of yester-year would find their
>> position, tie a knotted rope to each island, and have a sub-pirate walk
>> the rope and count the knots. then figger out the position on the mighty
>> sea....arrr...
>>
>>>
>>>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the
>>>> GPS system.
>
> The system doesn't need to worry much about any of those now that it
> uses wavelength instead of light
it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system.
but it doesn't count wavelengths.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 08:26 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi1lts$bfk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422553 |
On 15/06/17 00:17, Sегg iо wrote: >>>> >>>>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the >>>>> GPS system. >> >> The system doesn't need to worry much about any of those now that it >> uses wavelength instead of light > > > it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system. > but it doesn't count wavelengths. Sorry, that's what the latest systems use...and it is much better. Think about it instead of raving about out of date stuff... > --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-16 20:40 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <59447a74$0$1262$c3e8da3$1cbc7475@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #422755 |
On 6/16/2017 6:26 PM, HGW... wrote: > On 15/06/17 00:17, Sегg iо wrote: > >>>>> >>>>>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the >>>>>> GPS system. >>> >>> The system doesn't need to worry much about any of those now that it >>> uses wavelength instead of light >> >> >> it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system. >> but it doesn't count wavelengths. > > Sorry, that's what the latest systems use...and it is much better. Think > about it instead of raving about out of date stuff... >> > > Yeah, Sergio, don't you know it doesn't matter if you know how stuff works, the important thing with science AND software is to always have the latest version!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ecembre Abin <umueuu@eibbwaw.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 08:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oi2nrc$1hg3$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422755 |
HGW... wrote: >> it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system. >> but it doesn't count wavelengths. > > Sorry, that's what the latest systems use...and it is much better. Think > about it instead of raving about out of date stuff... What carrier frequencies are there. You may mostly count ticks, not cm. Even those after proper BPF, amplifier and a very FAST counter/comparator. That's how we do Physics, my dear friend, Dr. HGW. In my opinion, hardly achievable, since the GPS signal is VERY WEAK compared to all the other EM NOISE surrounding it. You, and your dear friend, Dr. Silvia Elses, don't know much Physics, I'm surprised to experience. But good point to arise, since there are alot of morons around here not knowing ehat they are talking about. Thanks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW, DSc." <HG@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 22:20 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <oi36nr$6j5$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422776 |
On 17/06/17 18:05, Ecembre Abin wrote: > HGW... wrote: > >>> it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system. >>> but it doesn't count wavelengths. >> >> Sorry, that's what the latest systems use...and it is much better. Think >> about it instead of raving about out of date stuff... > > What carrier frequencies are there. You may mostly count ticks, not cm. > Even those after proper BPF, amplifier and a very FAST counter/comparator. > That's how we do Physics, my dear friend, Dr. HGW. In my opinion, hardly > achievable, since the GPS signal is VERY WEAK compared to all the other EM > NOISE surrounding it. > > You, and your dear friend, Dr. Silvia Elses, don't know much Physics, I'm > surprised to experience. But good point to arise, since there are alot of > morons around here not knowing ehat they are talking about. Thanks. When I said it counts wavelengths, I didn't mean it 'actually counts them'. There are better ways, which I outlined before. It is actually quite easy to do, the only real problem being that the receiving clock discrepancy must be known very accurately. There are ways to do that, one of which is to use a ground base.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sегgi о <iinvalid@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-17 07:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <oi391i$9ni$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #422790 |
On 6/17/2017 7:20 AM, HGW, DSc. wrote: > On 17/06/17 18:05, Ecembre Abin wrote: >> HGW... wrote: >> >>>> it uses the UHF band, and agree that it is not an optical system. >>>> but it doesn't count wavelengths. >>> >>> Sorry, that's what the latest systems use...and it is much better. Think >>> about it instead of raving about out of date stuff... >> >> What carrier frequencies are there. You may mostly count ticks, not cm. >> Even those after proper BPF, amplifier and a very FAST >> counter/comparator. >> That's how we do Physics, my dear friend, Dr. HGW. In my opinion, hardly >> achievable, since the GPS signal is VERY WEAK compared to all the >> other EM >> NOISE surrounding it. >> You, and your dear friend, Dr. Silvia Elses, don't know much Physics, I'm >> surprised to experience. But good point to arise, since there are alot of >> morons around here not knowing ehat they are talking about. Thanks. > > When I said it counts wavelengths, I didn't mean it 'actually counts > them'. There are better ways, which I outlined before. It is actually > quite easy to do, the only real problem being that the receiving clock > discrepancy must be known very accurately. There are ways to do that, > one of which is to use a ground base. > not to worry, there are already tiny GPS units in your cellphone, that has already been solved.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj@nobody.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-14 17:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5941a56b$0$44644$c3e8da3$76a7c58f@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #422534 |
On 6/14/2017 12:46 AM, Sегg iо wrote:
> On 6/13/2017 11:19 PM, Sегg iо wrote:
>> On 6/13/2017 9:40 PM, HGW... wrote:
>>> On 14/06/17 09:42, Серг ио wrote:
>>>> On 6/13/2017 6:34 PM, HGW... wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, shifting ground. Either the wavelength is absolute, or it's
>>>>>> not. You cannot have a moderately absolute wavelength.
>>>>>
>>>>> The absolute wavelength will very slightly decrease to a new
>>>>> absolute length as the signals slow in the atmosphere. The changes
>>>>> are easy to calculate from each satellite's ephemeris.
>>>>
>>>> wavelength also changes due to its orbitle velocity and relitivity
>>>> effects.
>
>>> In the real world, there are no 'relativity effects'.
>>>
>>>> additionally;
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> source Effect (meters)
>>>> Signal arrival C/A ±3
>>>> Signal arrival P(Y) ±0.3
>>>> Ionospheric effects ±5
>>>> Ephemeris errors ±2.5
>>>> Satellite clock errors ±2
>>>> Multipath distortion ±1
>>>> Tropospheric effects ±0.5
>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R C/A ±6.7
>>>> 3 σ R {\displaystyle \ 3\sigma _{R}} \ 3\sigma_R P(Y) ±6.0
>>>
>>> What is that supposed to prove? The use of wave count
>>
>
> Arrr... the same the way the pirates of yester-year would find their
> position, tie a knotted rope to each island, and have a sub-pirate walk
> the rope and count the knots. then figger out the position on the mighty
> sea....arrr...
>
>>
>>> rather than light speed is clearly a far better way to operate the
>>> GPS system.
>>>
>>
>
This is where the expression: "Better to walk the rope rather than walk
the plank!" comes from. (or was that Planck?)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-31 09:58 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ogl0ve$c74$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #421057 |
On 31/05/17 00:57, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 5/27/17 5/27/17 - 5:37 AM, Ckeho BaÚkora wrote: >> Tom Roberts wrote: >>> The GPS receiver's position calculation is based on the OBSERVATION that >>> the vacuum speed of light is isotropically c relative to the ECI >>> coordinates. The entire path is not in vacuum, so there are corrections >>> for ionospheric and atmospheric effects. >> >> The receivers are working only, >> and only, on the DATA received from the satellites. NOT on the speeds of >> the signals carrying IT. > > The algorithm does depend on the speed of the signals relative to the > ECI. From the data stream the receiver can determine the satellite's > position and the GPS time when a given timing mark was transmitted. > Using that information for 4 (or more) satellites, plus knowledge of the > speed of light relative to the ECI, plus its measured receive time for > the timing marks, the receiver calculates its position in the ECI. It > then transforms this to the rotating-earth coordinates for reporting to > the user. > > If the wrong speed were used (such as Wilson's fantasy of > c+V_satellite), the position calculation would yield the wrong answer. I'm sure the operators have woken up to the fact that the signals take a little longer when the satellites are rising than when they are falling. The signals take ~85 MILLI-seconds to reach ground level and never arrive simultaneously...so there is plenty of opportunity to include fudge factors that might make Einstein look good. Besides, I have been informed by a person who actually knows something about GPS that triangulation is only a preliminary guide and that the actual positioning process uses a complicated method involving phase relationships. > Like so many others around here, you need to LEARN something about the > subject before attempting to write about it. It is USELESS to just make > stuff up and pretend it is true. > > Tom Roberts --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-27 07:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ogb38l$seh$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #420688 |
Den 26.05.2017 22.49, skrev HGW, DSc.: > Do GPS signals travel at c in the ECI frame or c in the receiver's > instantaneous frame? The algorithms assume the latter. Why don't the two > alternatives produce different answers? https://paulba.no/div/Is_c_invariant.pdf -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-28 10:57 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ogd78t$apk$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #420717 |
On 27/05/17 15:36, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 26.05.2017 22.49, skrev HGW, DSc.: >> Do GPS signals travel at c in the ECI frame or c in the receiver's >> instantaneous frame? The algorithms assume the latter. Why don't the >> two alternatives produce different answers? > https://paulba.no/div/Is_c_invariant.pdf :) ....This must be your funniest......it beats both your light clock and your Sagnac... You have just proved that both lengths and times are absolute...and that light is ballistic. Thanks for going to so much roundabout trouble but we actually knew it already. ......One wonders if all Norwegians are as stupid as Paul Andersen.... --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-31 07:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <24a5eb62-2907-4d65-a285-a3f58bd11052@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #420688 |
El viernes, 26 de mayo de 2017, 16:48:44 (UTC-4), HGW, DSc. escribió: > Do GPS signals travel at c in the ECI frame or c in the receiver's > instantaneous frame? The algorithms assume the latter. Why don't the two > alternatives produce different answers? On the GPS ECI we have a SINGLE 1905R stationary system (a 1686 Newtonian center of mass one with all the corresponding equations (including gravitational ones) holding good, where according to the 1905R second postulate all GPS signals broadcasted from the operative satellites travel at the same constant isotropic velocity c, not depending at all on any source or receiver velocities. The algorithms use that c, not taking into account any receiver (or source) instantaneous frame, whatever you mean by that. The extraordinary accuracy of GPS operation is (since 1977) a huge experimental support for 1905R, shared then also by 1686NM, including Newton's gravitational law and three Axioms, and the two added 1905R Postulates (different from the today SR ones). RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-01 09:00 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ognhuq$977$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #421191 |
On 01/06/17 00:02, Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato wrote: > El viernes, 26 de mayo de 2017, 16:48:44 (UTC-4), HGW, DSc. escribió: >> Do GPS signals travel at c in the ECI frame or c in the receiver's >> instantaneous frame? The algorithms assume the latter. Why don't the two >> alternatives produce different answers? > > On the GPS ECI we have a SINGLE 1905R stationary system (a 1686 Newtonian center > of mass one with all the corresponding equations (including gravitational ones) > holding good, where according to the 1905R second postulate all GPS signals > broadcasted from the operative satellites travel at the same constant isotropic > velocity c, not depending at all on any source or receiver velocities. The > algorithms use that c, not taking into account any receiver (or source) > instantaneous frame, whatever you mean by that. > > The extraordinary accuracy of GPS operation is (since 1977) a huge experimental > support for 1905R, shared then also by 1686NM, including Newton's gravitational > law and three Axioms, and the two added 1905R Postulates (different from the > today SR ones). It has nothing to do with 1905. The fundamental criteria are that all the orbiting clocks are in absolute synch and their ephemeres are accurately known. For extreme accuracy, small corrections are applied to the signal arrival times depending on whether the satellites are rising or falling, proving BaTh. That is a very simple correction. You wont be informed of that because the CIA and NASA don't want the rest of the world to know that the signal speed is source dependent and that Einstein's theory is bullshit from start to finish. > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) > --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-31 23:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ognkcb$cbb$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #421264 |
HGW... <hgw@....> wrote: > > It has nothing to do with 1905. The fundamental criteria are that all > the orbiting clocks are in absolute synch and their ephemeres are > accurately known. For extreme accuracy, small corrections are applied to > the signal arrival times depending on whether the satellites are rising > or falling, proving BaTh. That is a very simple correction. > > You wont be informed of that because the CIA and NASA don't want the > rest of the world to know that the signal speed is source dependent and > that Einstein's theory is bullshit from start to finish. > Wow. Such nuttery goodness. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "HGW..." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-01 19:36 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <ogon71$1qp3$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #421272 |
On 01/06/17 09:42, Odd Bodkin wrote: > HGW... <hgw@....> wrote: > >> >> It has nothing to do with 1905. The fundamental criteria are that all >> the orbiting clocks are in absolute synch and their ephemeres are >> accurately known. For extreme accuracy, small corrections are applied to >> the signal arrival times depending on whether the satellites are rising >> or falling, proving BaTh. That is a very simple correction. >> >> You wont be informed of that because the CIA and NASA don't want the >> rest of the world to know that the signal speed is source dependent and >> that Einstein's theory is bullshit from start to finish. >> > > Wow. Such nuttery goodness. Go away Bodkin. This stuff is way beyond you.... --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-01 05:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <16d13770-bfa0-4b89-b4f3-f10779d03b2f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #421307 |
On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 3:36:36 AM UTC-6, HGW... wrote: > > On 01/06/17 09:42, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > > HGW... <hgw@....> wrote: > > > > > > It has nothing to do with 1905. The fundamental criteria are that all > > > the orbiting clocks are in absolute synch Completely false and vacuous assertion. They are APPROXIMATELY in sync. > and their ephemeres are accurately known. For extreme accuracy, small > corrections are applied to the signal arrival times depending on whether > the satellites are rising or falling, proving BaTh. That is a very simple > correction. BaTh is bull plop, as confirmed by all valid experimental evidence as well as theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%e2%80%93Einstein_relation#de_Broglie_relation Lambda = h/p, which shows that lambda cannot be invariant since p is not constant. Anyone who doesn't have baloney for brains knows this. > > > You wont be informed of that because the CIA and NASA don't want the > > > rest of the world to know that the signal speed is source dependent and > > > that Einstein's theory is bullshit from start to finish. > > > Demented conspiracy "theorist" :-))) > > Wow. Such nuttery goodness. > > Go away Bodkin. This stuff is way beyond you.... Go away Ralphie-boy. Reality is way beyond you....
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web