|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
|
#143
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
"Byron Forbes" wrote:
, Poutnik says... says... KW wrote: A few years ago, you have agreed with the late Van Flandern on simple acceleration does not manifest time dilation as shown in any centrifuge. So, what is the problem? Why go back to bull****? Why such wishy-washy crap? Running out of options to justify your religious belief in SR is more likely the case. shrug Are insulting class words really your strongest argument ? What does SR have to do with acceleration ? And, concerning GR, time speed dependence on gravity acceleration can be manifested by any precise atomic clocks. "Byron Forbes" wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox "Other explanations account for the effects of acceleration. Einstein, Born and Møller invoked gravitational time dilation to explain the aging based upon the effects of acceleration." The relevance to SR is that GR TD exists to try to cover up the hopelessness of SR TD. Einstein had a lot of fun with all this. He must have had a good ole laugh to himself as he bull****ted the world and still does to this day. bhahahahahahahahahahaha..................... hanson wrote: ahahaha... Right. Einstein so did. Einstein, in his own words, just a year before he folded his relativity tent, closed his umbrella, kicked the bucket and finally puffed and bit the grass,.... Einstein wrote, in 1954, to his Jewish friend Besso: |||AE:||| "as far as the laws of mathematics refer to |||AE:||| reality, they are not certain; and as far as they |||AE:||| are certain, they do not refer to reality." |||AE:||| "why would anyone be interested in getting exact |||AE:||| solutions from such an ephemeral set of equations?" |||AE:||| "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be |||AE:||| based on the field concept, i. e., on continuous |||AE:||| structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire |||AE:||| castle in the air, [my] gravitation theory included." |||AE:||| "If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber". |||AE:||| ... [and I would make blouses instead (see link)] http://tinyurl.com/Blouse-Plumber-Einstein So, that then is the end of Einstein's infamous fantasy career-journey which concludes, long last, with what most enlightened folks have suspected for a long time, if not outright from the start, that: ====== SR is short for STUPID RANT and ====== ===== GR is just a GULLIBLE RECITATION ==== Einstein flagellated himself & came clean (1), after he was used by the Zios for their own, to them then noble political agenda. (2) http://tinyurl.com/E-mc2-existed-before-Einstein (1) http://tinyurl.com/How-Einstein-stole-E-mc-2 (1) http://tinyurl.com/Kwublee-views-Einsteins-Theft (1) http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity (2) http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR (2) GR/SR is a useless crock o'****, save it being "a Base", an "al Qaida", for Einstein Dingleberries to worship Albert's sphincter.. although AE said not to do that. --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to --- |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
In , on 09/12/2011
at 06:49 PM, Tom Roberts said: The same holds in SR, but there is no simple description. Sure there is; a straight line between two (timelike separated) points in space-time has a longer interval than any other curve between the two points. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT http://patriot.net/~shmuel Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
"Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... You should also question it rather than swallow all the time. I do. The difference appears to be that I have studied physics and you have not. Which is why you are unfamiliar with basic concepts in physics and mathematics. Like I said, you should study physics if you are interested in it. Point out the flaws in this - Let's say I have 2 identical synchronized clocks initially together at rest. We will now accelerate one away (a1), back (a2) and then slow it to rest again alongside the other (a3). In between a1-a2 and a2-a3 we have 2 periods of constant v that can be as long as we wish so as to make the effects of a1, a2 and a3 (all constant in magnitude and duration) insignificant. So whatever clock we stay with, the result predicted by SR should be that the other slowed down - ridiculous. No. That is not the result predicted by Relativity. Relativity predicts that the clock which moved away and came back will show an earlier time (less time will have elapsed) than the clock which stays in one place. They are not in symmetrical positions, as only one of them remained in the same inertial frame. That is the error. Pleased to help. So we stay with the other observer - how does SR explain that? Explain what? That the stay-at-home twin is older? He uses SR. See how the other clock will now be sped up? Is there an anti TD theory I missed somewhere? I don't know if you have missed any "anti-TD" theories. None of them are correct, as TD is observed (literally) every day in dozens of particle accelerators around te world. Amazing how you seem to have overlooked this little detail for, what, 50 years? What little detail? |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
that is the just the idea, because
atoms have angular (internal) momenta, perfectly real in QM, even though the Schroedinger's cat school will insist taht it is only abstract (but, not Schroedinger's head .-) no need to invoke the sci-fi notion of Gravitational TD to see that oscillations will be effected by gravity/acceleration. thus: it is not true of Ampere's and Weber's electrodynamics, the categorical "need" for an aether; note that they worked a bit before the atomic theory was much, and Weber hypothesized what we now call the electron, as well as what is now known as the "strong force." Ampere's most important hypothesis & experiment is known as the "longitudinal force." |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
In article , says...
"Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Byron Forbes" wrote in message ... You should also question it rather than swallow all the time. I do. The difference appears to be that I have studied physics and you have not. Which is why you are unfamiliar with basic concepts in physics and mathematics. Like I said, you should study physics if you are interested in it. Point out the flaws in this - Let's say I have 2 identical synchronized clocks initially together at rest. We will now accelerate one away (a1), back (a2) and then slow it to rest again alongside the other (a3). In between a1-a2 and a2-a3 we have 2 periods of constant v that can be as long as we wish so as to make the effects of a1, a2 and a3 (all constant in magnitude and duration) insignificant. So whatever clock we stay with, the result predicted by SR should be that the other slowed down - ridiculous. No. That is not the result predicted by Relativity. Relativity predicts that the clock which moved away and came back will show an earlier time (less time will have elapsed) than the clock which stays in one place. They are not in symmetrical positions, as only one of them remained in the same inertial frame. That is the error. Pleased to help. So we stay with the other observer - how does SR explain that? Explain what? That the stay-at-home twin is older? He uses SR. So time can speed up to with SR TD? Never knew that! See how the other clock will now be sped up? Is there an anti TD theory I missed somewhere? I don't know if you have missed any "anti-TD" theories. None of them are correct, as TD is observed (literally) every day in dozens of particle accelerators around te world. Sure they do. How much does time speed up for them? Amazing how you seem to have overlooked this little detail for, what, 50 years? What little detail? There you go again - you missed it again! |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
you haven't presented any hypothesis;
thank you very much! I have presented a hypothesis, abovesville, just in case you feel like participating, dood. There - you missed it again! thus: atoms have angular (internal) momenta, perfectly real in QM, even though the Schroedinger's cat school will insist taht it is only abstract (but, not Schroedinger's head .-) that oscillations will be effected by gravity/acceleration. thus: it is not true of Ampere's and Weber's electrodynamics, the categorical "need" for an aether; note that they worked a bit before the atomic theory was much, and Weber hypothesized what we now call the electron, as well as what is now known as the "strong force." Ampere's most important hypothesis & experiment is known as the "longitudinal force." |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
the GPS myth almost mythbusted
On Aug 21, 3:58*am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Aug 20, 7:37 am, Jerry wrote: On Aug 20, 8:30 am, Poutnik wrote: Satellites do not, but the whole system do. Correct. Bull****. *shrug It is quite amazing how crackpots distort everything that they read. What are you babbling about? *shrug The complete story of why relativistic corrections are needed in GPS is rather long. You need to understand that GPS comprises a Space Segment, a Control Segment, and a User Segment. Nonsense. *Initially, self-styled physicists had laid out a system that suggested relativistic correction if existed, but engineers had outsmarted these idiots and came up with a system that does not require relativistic correction if existed. *shrug Well, from an engineering point of view it's mostly still: Physicists who can't see the difference between GPS and Wireless Telecomm, and Einstein's Electronics design, deserve to work in an elevator. Doctor's who can't see the difference between Holograms. Flash Memory, and QWERTY deserve to do recursive reviews of 1954 DNA Treatises'. In a more thorough analysis, any relativistic correction is basically resetting a counter. *It is merely a software solution and Mr. Wilson had pointed out. *You can fly with cheap oscillations driving your chronological time if you can devise clever ways to synchronize all the satellite chronological time. *System similar to IEEE1588 or NTP should easily suffice, and it is still a software solution. *shrug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE158...ynchronization [snipped unrelated garbage to make Jerry the **** head looks like someone who knew what it is talking about] Among other functions, these ground stations closely monitor the positions of the satellites, and the master control station sends updated ephemerides information to the satellites as they pass over the large ground-antenna stations. Position correction is a statistical issue. *Relativistic error is a few hundred parts per trillion. *Just how would that affect the positions of each satellite when each is moving at much lower speed than the speed of light? *shrug In order to perform their function, THESE GROUND STATIONS NEED PRECISE TIME. How do they set their clocks? Through the GPS itself. Bull****! *Show analysis. *shrug The ability to distribute precise time is an absolutely essential aspect of the GPS system, since without precise time, the earth- based control stations that monitor the satellites' positions and establish "ground truth" for the system cannot perform their function. The requirement in precision timing of the chronological time applies to only the orbiting satellites and no one else. *shrug *Show your analysis otherwise. *shrug Unless the satellites' clocks are synchronized with ground clocks via the GR correction, there is simply no feasible way for them to distribute time around the globe. This is an absolute myth. *Well, He has had enough with these bull****s from someone who does not even understand Snell’s law. *Your pillar of support who has been 24/7 in its vigilance in spreading lies and bull**** (namely Paul Draper, PD, an ex-professor of physics) had choked on that high-school level physics. *You have absolutely no credibility. *shrug [rest of cyber diarrhea snipped] So, **** off. *shrug |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
is the GPS myth unmythbustable? | Koobee Wublee | Astronomy Misc | 57 | August 22nd 11 09:06 AM |
Dynamicist myth | oriel36 | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | September 6th 06 08:03 PM |
Another dynamicist myth | oriel36 | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | September 6th 06 02:44 PM |
Space is just a myth ! | Brian Raab | Astronomy Misc | 3 | October 3rd 04 07:47 PM |