the GPS myth almost mythbusted

.... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHA....
--[ Koobee W 15 : Einstein Dingleberries 0 ]--

"jcon", the Selfcon wrote:
- train wrote:
-- Koobee Wublee wrote:



Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #1 wrote:
The correction was not done initially,
but later these smart engineers realized
there is need to introduce it.
It does not matter in what part on system it is done.

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #2 wrote:
Not quite. Scientists (of course) knew the
correction would be needed,

KW wrote:
The correction might be needed if acquiring GPS
almanac information from only 3 satellites. shrug
What GR predicts is also predicted by other hypotheses.
One example is to allow the speed of light to vary
according to the following to the first order.

C(r) = c0 (1 – G M / c^2 / r)

At higher altitude, the speed of light is higher.
Thus, any mechanisms that scores time goes
faster by almost exactly what GR predicts. shrug

However, the killer is the SR part --- namely this
7usec stuff. This amount should apply equally to
both the satellites and the receiver. In actual applications,
the necessary correction is only done one way.
|||||||| Thus, GPS definitively proves GR wrong. ||||||
shrug

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #2 wrote:
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
Ashby makes a rather unfortunate statement in the paper.
he says the GPS system "can no longer be used to test
general relativity".

hanson wrote:
"unfortunate statement"... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA...
What is unfortunate is that you got indoctrinated and
accepted without any reservation to worship Albert's
Sphincter becoming one of his Einstein Dingleberries.

KW wrote:
Given Ashby the benefit of the doubt, he actually
understood that GPS does not prove the validity
of GR since he said it in the first paragraph that
by acquiring almanac data from 4 satellites, the
critical time information as measure in satellite time
can be solved every time. shrug
Synchronization is basically done by resetting a
time-keeping counter. It is done so for obvious
reasons in which Professor Ashby
has mentioned later in the article. shrug

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #2 wrote:
This is often misinterpreted to mean that the
relativistic corrections are not important.

KW wrote:
Are you kidding? Einstein Dngleberries still believe
in the myth that relativistic effect is needed in GPS
Have you not read the posts
from these Einstein Dingleberries? shrug

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #2 wrote:
They are.

KW wrote:
No, they are not. Prof. Ashby disagrees with you. shrug

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #2 wrote:
The statement simply means that because the system if
frequently synchronized, it cannot improve
on the tests which were initially done.

KW wrote:
The relativistic effect only accounts for 450 parts per trillion of
error. There are other parameters that account far more than that.
Since synchronization of time, regardless how oscillation frequency
varies, is done through software algorithm such as IEEE1588 as an
example, there is really no need to make sure each oscillator achieves
a 450 parts-in-a-trillion of accuracy. Do you know how expensive to
achieve and test for that are? shrug
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_Time_Protocol

hanson wrote:
Elsewhere & IIRC, Ashby himself said in his
DESCRIBING GPS, that SR/GR corrections,
are # 26 out of 27 on a list of identified possible
corrections. Hence SR/GR = BFD, or more succinctly:
====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ======
===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ====

Pathetic Einstein Dingleberry #3 wrote:
Imagine if SRT was not known, the theory was not ever proposed or
accepted. Assume the then bumbling SRT - deprived scientists of the
era manage to launch a GPS system.
Would they ever get it to work? That is, could we make a GPS system
work if we ignored SRT corrections? Software can do wonders you know,
we can fudge almost anything.

"-jc" wrote:
General Relativity is the dominant correction, and since this
is one of the only "practical" applications of GR, I suppose
we could have been simply scratching our heads about
Mercury's orbit for the last hundred years and been really
surprised when *just* the SR corrections weren't enough.

hanson wrote:
Mercury's orbit can and was described perfectly
and simpler, and gave the same results as SR.
Google for it. Don't just be a lamenting Dingleberry
See for example
http://www.wbabin.net/tsolkas/tsolkas5.pdf
wherein it says:
|||| The difference of 43´´/century with astronomic
|||| observations as regards the advance of Mercury’s
|||| perihelion is MOT attributed to the curvature of
|||| space-time around the Sun, as the Theory of
|||| Relativity erroneously maintains. [but can be
|||| explained by old-fashioned Newtonian physics]

-jc wrote:
The answer is yes, they could have gotten GPS to work with
a number of ad hoc corrections, just like Ptolemy's epicycles
did a pretty good job of describing the observed positions
of the planets.

hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA.. "jc" are you Junior Conrad,
or J. Contessa?, aand a Sibling of Einstein Dingleberry
# 1, # 2 & # 3, with you saying the stupid things above?...
... ahaha...
You obviously have NEVER worked in a physics lab, nor
did you have an engineering job ever and whatsoever.
Let me give it to you simply:
|||| -- Theories are STORIES. Theories do NOTHING --

Let me give you a respective example:
Any high school student or engineer, can glean, for
this particular situation, in 1 fell swoop, in ONE SINGLE
STEP, in good, old Newtonian ways, and show that

||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c^2 *86400 = 38 microsec/day ----
||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c *86400 = 11.2... km drift /day ----
|||||
where m_e = mass of earth and h being the Space vehicle
height above the earth surface, which is corrected by standard
industrial ways by classical methods devoid of any SR/GR.
http://tinyurl.com/622an2 or http://tinyurl.com/57asbg
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm

|||||||| ---- GPS NEVER NEEDED neither SR nor GR ---- |||||||||
||||| not for its design, manufacturing, testing nor operations. |||||
||||| ------------ GPS was in operation LONG before ----------- |||||
||||| Einstein Dingleberries came along to nuzzle into the |||||
||||| show, hoping to get some credit away from Newton. |||||
||||| Albert's SR/GR is the Kosher Tax levied onto academia |||||

It is beyond reason & rhyme why Einstein Dingleberries, like
you, do come back over and over again and try to nuzzle in,
in their fetish & obsession to sell & proselytize their REL-igion...
like here, where you 3 ED dudes are upfront & center,
spreading your bull****, lies & hysteria in

http://tinyurl.com/Proof-of-Relativity, that arose out of the
cause which the eminent Jewish Scholar HW Rosenthal
explains in the seminal
http://tinyurl.com/The-HW-Rosenthal-interview-XT
wherein he makes you belief that "Jewish **** don't stink!"

Read it and it may dawn on you why Jews laugh at you
and say: "Goyim!... Goyim!.. Goyim!"... "Go figure!"

Meanwhile in the REAL world it has been like this for
the last 50 years:

||| mil/indust. Eng, R&D..............."does NOT need REL ****"
||| *.edu and grantology ..............."does use REL. -- No ****"
||| Promo, Sales & Movies........."loves REL by the ****load"
||| Jews defend it as cultural heritage whether "REL is **** or not"

Thanks for the laughs, you splendid EDs. Now listen to
KW, who has the tune right. ahahaha... ahahahanson

On Aug 23, 8:53 pm, Poutnik wrote:
In article ab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

--
Poutnik

i hear that they have a relativity switch, so
to speak, in their gps satellites,

you see, the self-styled were not so sure!!!

good bye

On 8/23/11 2:06 PM, Ike Richter wrote:
On Aug 23, 8:53 pm, wrote:
In articleab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

--
Poutnik

i hear that they have a relativity switch, so
to speak, in their gps satellites,

you see, the self-styled were not so sure!!!

good bye

Just the first demonstration satellite, Ike! In a way it
was to prove a point to folks like you.

On 23/08/2011 19:53, Poutnik wrote:
In articleab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

True enough I suppose. You could do all of the GR & SR corrections in
the GPS receivers but there are a lot more of them and additional
information would have to be broadcast down from each of the satellites.

The Russian GLONASS satellites were deliberately put into much more
circular orbits to minimise some of the GR terms. This is dissected in
various reports by NPL some are now online at Tycho USNO.

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/1995/Vol%2027_13.pdf

It could all have been done by iterative empirically fitted engineering
corrections without any understanding of why beyond "that it works" but
scientists would then be looking for the root cause.

Regards,
Martin Brown

On Aug 23, 9:09 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 8/23/11 2:06 PM, Ike Richter wrote:



On Aug 23, 8:53 pm, wrote:
In articleab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

--
Poutnik

i hear that they have a relativity switch, so
to speak, in their gps satellites,

you see, the self-styled were not so sure!!!

good bye

Just the first demonstration satellite, Ike! In a way it
was to prove a point to folks like you.

are you saying that the others are switch free?

no wonder they need so much corrections

On Aug 23, 9:19 pm, Martin Brown
wrote:
On 23/08/2011 19:53, Poutnik wrote:

In articleab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

True enough I suppose. You could do all of the GR & SR corrections in
the GPS receivers but there are a lot more of them and additional
information would have to be broadcast down from each of the satellites.

The Russian GLONASS satellites were deliberately put into much more
circular orbits to minimise some of the GR terms. This is dissected in
various reports by NPL some are now online at Tycho USNO.

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/1995/Vol%2027_13.pdf

It could all have been done by iterative empirically fitted engineering
corrections without any understanding of why beyond "that it works" but
scientists would then be looking for the root cause.

Regards,
Martin Brown

exactly, thanks

really; after all, given a circular orbit as suggested,
it would just be a simple constant of proportionality,
although mostly due to gravitational & speed redshifts.

It could all have been done by iterative empirically fitted *engineering
corrections without any understanding of why beyond "that it works" but

On Aug 23, 9:54 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 8/22/11 8/22/11 - 7:48 PM, train wrote:

Imagine if SRT was not known, the theory was not ever proposed or
accepted. Assume the then bumbling SRT - deprived scientists of the
era manage to launch a GPS system.
Would they ever get it to work?

They could not even conceive the notion, as they would have no radio nor any
electronics

This is a total bull****. When Tesla and then Marconi discovered
wireless transmission and receiving, they certainly did not have SR or
GR in mind. It seems you have failed at technical analyses to
perpetuate your myths, and now you are resorting to lies. shrug

-- it would be like asking whether alchemists could invent modern
plastics, metal alloys, and modern medicines.

Alchemists finally got their chance in science. They have created new
elements from old, no? shrug

Furthermore, there are infinite transforms that satisfy the null
results of the MMX but do not satisfy the principle of relativity and
satisfy the following famous equation that gives (E = m c^2). shrug

** m’ = m / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Claiming only SR works is just very ignorant. shrug

Because without SR, one could not have Maxwell's equations,

Bull****! Maxwell’s equations work fine without SR. Maxwell’s
equations also work fine without satisfying the principle of
relativity. shrug

so developing electric and electronic components would
have to be done without any underlying theory

Nonsense! Coulomb, Ampere, Faraday, Maxwell, Weber, Heaviside, and
many others did just that before SR came along. shrug

-- alchemy instead of chemistry;

The derogatory term ‘alchemy’ is best describing the development of
differential geometry after Christoffel. shrug

astrology instead of astronomy. Hopeless.

You are totally clueless. You don’t know what you are talking about.
You are a zealous believer of the cult known as SR and GR. shrug

The modern technical world depends on the underlying theoretical basis of the
phenomena involved. Electricity and magnetism are essential aspects of current
technology, and SR is an essential aspect of understanding how they work.

SR is not needed. There are infinity other transforms that satisfy
the null results of the MMX that also predict some sorts of time
dilation of what you have observed in the labs. SR’s time dilation is
just silly, stupid, and comical. shrug

Modern physics would actually be better off with the stupidity in SR
and GR. shrug

On 8/23/11 2:24 PM, Ike Richter wrote:
On Aug 23, 9:09 pm, Sam wrote:
On 8/23/11 2:06 PM, Ike Richter wrote:



On Aug 23, 8:53 pm, wrote:
In articleab1ff57d-444b-40d0-83b2-70c57e1f5af1
@x14g2000prn.googlegroups.com, says...

the fact is that the satellites does not need
relativity corrections, good bye

While being corrected, they do not need correction,
it is obvious.

--
Poutnik

i hear that they have a relativity switch, so
to speak, in their gps satellites,

you see, the self-styled were not so sure!!!

good bye

Just the first demonstration satellite, Ike! In a way it
was to prove a point to folks like you.

are you saying that the others are switch free?

no wonder they need so much corrections

That's another misunderstanding on your part. Correction are for
Atomic clock steering, not relativistic corrections. Relativistic
corrections are engineered into the satellites and receivers.

The proper treatment
of relativistic effect on satellite clock is discussed in this work
by Neil Ashby, "Relativity in the Global Positioning System"
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/...age=node5.html

On Aug 23, 7:27 am, jcon wrote:
On Aug 22, 7:48 pm, train wrote:

Imagine if SRT was not known, the theory was not ever proposed or
accepted. Assume the then bumbling SRT - deprived scientists of the
era manage to launch a GPS system.

Would they ever get it to work? That is, could we make a GPS system
work if we ignored SRT corrections? Software can do wonders you know,
we can fudge almost anything.

It's very difficult to imagine a world in which we've been studying
Maxwell's
Equations for over a century and still don't have Special Relativity.

It is actually very easy to imagine so once you have finally
understood SR and then GR. You could then see the silliness in these
conjectures full of self-contradictions. shrug

On the other hand, General Relativity is the dominant correction,
and since this is one of the only "practical" applications of GR, I

GR is basically the set of field equations first derived by Hilbert.
It is based on manmade mathematical artifacts that have no physical
and tangible meanings in physics. GR is totally bull**** at heart.
It was no wonder that Hilbert walked away from it and allowed Einstein
the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar to claim full credit.
shrug

suppose we could have been simply scratching our heads about
Mercury's orbit for the last hundred years and been really
surprised when *just* the SR corrections weren't enough.

Mercury’s orbital anomaly can easily be ‘fixed’ with a modification to
Newtonian gravitational potential. Gerber was the first to do so.
Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar did not have
differential geometry in mind in 1915 when he also pulled out a
modified version of the Newtonian gravitational potential to explain
Mercury’s orbital anomaly. shrug

When the buffoons claim triumph on GR, they actually meant the
Schwarzschild metric which is merely one of the infinite numbers of
solutions that degenerate into Newtonian law of gravity. Any other
metric would not have given that particular answer. shrug

Some solutions that degenerate into Newtonian law of gravity at weak
spacetime and short distances actually predict the accelerated
expansion of the universe but at a price that these no longer can
explain Mercury’s orbital anomaly necessary as the second order
effect. shrug

GR is capable of predicting just about anything possible where
Einstein Dingleberries are totally mesmerized by a hypothesis that can
predict just about anything, but true scholars of physics would call
GR rightfully completely bull****! shrug

The answer is yes, they could have gotten it to work with
a number of ad hoc corrections, just like Ptolemy's epicycles
did a pretty good job of describing the observed positions
of the planets.

Besides, the so called 43 arcseconds per century of perihelion advance
is not definitive. In reality, the observed amount is actually 5600.
5025 can be accounted for as the wobbling of earth’s rotational axis.
532 is claimed due to gravitational contributions to other planets.
That leaves 43 unaccounted for. This is assuming precession of
earth’s rotational axis is constant throughout the 22,500 years which
it takes to complete one cycle. The number 532 has never been
substantiated, and it was never examined more carefully after some
self-styled physicists came out claiming GR’s triumph. Notice that
there are no error bars to this number 532. Tom has a hard-on on
these error bars, but when coming down to something that can show GR
wrong, all of a sudden he is impotent to error bars. shrug

The bottom line is that anything about SR and GR is total bull****.
These myths must be busted, and they will be busted one day. shrug