NO Relativity Theory needed for GPS

On Apr 26, 8:37 pm, "Peter Webb" wrote:
"hanson" wrote:

Nowhere in these links below, academic or industrial,
or govt, is there any word about relativity:
http://www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/
http://www.maps-gps-info.com/gps-accuracy.html
http://www.igage.com/mp/GPSAccuracy.htm
http://www.nasm.si.edu/gps/spheres.html
http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/01/04/new-gps-system-boosts-accuracy-t....
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/02/enhancing-gps.html

None of them mention Newton's laws of motion, either.

Just how dumb can Peter get? Newton’s law is not in question here.
shrug

Why would you think that a Garmin GPS brochure would talk about General
Relativity?

If they applied relativity, they will mention it in their algorithm.
shrug

Their algorithm is very certainly covered in the “navigation equation”
section of the following link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS

If you possess knowledge in algebra, you should have no problem figure
out what it is saying. Notice there is no relativity coming into play
in the algorithm. shrug

Only some few papers written by kikes, make a big
deal about the vanishing to non-existent role that
SR/GR is supposed to play in GPS...

Why didn't you Google "GPS relativity", if you wanted to find out who has
written papers on this.

When I do this, these are the first few links I get:

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/...Unit5/gps.html

Not Jewish.

Professor of astronomy at Ohio State.

It is sad a professor would blindly repeat garbage like that without
investigating further and understanding the subject better. shrug

Is the Darb still in Ohio State?

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/gps-relativity.asp

Not Jewish.

Physics Professor at Maryland U.

Oh, another self-styled physicist. shrug

http://www.physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm

Not Jewish.

Physics professor at Washington Uni.

Yet another one who does not understand the GPS. shrug

On Apr 26, 8:37 pm, "Peter Webb" wrote:
"hanson" wrote:

Why did you post a Wikipedia article which quite clearly states that
Relativity is used in GPS as evidence that GPS doesn't use Relativity? Is it
an English language problem, or don't you read what you post, or are you
just stupid?

Well, the only mention of relativity is in the section on “history”.
The rest of the article dealing with the exact workings of the GPS
never even references relativity as its application. Your analytical
skills must be totally lacking. shrug

You have been told through rigorous engineering analyses that the
clocks of the satellites and the ground do not have to be
synchronized. The rest of the article never even has attempted to
utter this issue as a requirement. So, where exactly is this
relativistic correction utilized in the GPS? shrug

Oh, the requirement only exists in the minds of retards like
yourself. shrug

Nowhere in these links below, academic or industrial,
or govt, is there any word about relativity:
http://www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/
http://www.maps-gps-info.com/gps-accuracy.html
http://www.igage.com/mp/GPSAccuracy.htm
http://www.nasm.si.edu/gps/spheres.html
http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/01/04/new-gps-system-boosts-accuracy-t....
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/02/enhancing-gps.html

None of them mention Newton's laws of motion, either.

Just how dumb can Peter get? Newton’s law is not in question here.
shrug

Why would you think that a Garmin GPS brochure would talk about General
Relativity?

If they applied relativity, they will mention it in their algorithm.
shrug

Their algorithm is very certainly covered in the “navigation equation”
section of the following link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS

If you possess knowledge in algebra, you should have no problem figure
out what it is saying. Notice there is no relativity coming into play
in the algorithm. shrug

Only some few papers written by kikes, make a big
deal about the vanishing to non-existent role that
SR/GR is supposed to play in GPS...

Why didn't you Google "GPS relativity", if you wanted to find out who has
written papers on this.

When I do this, these are the first few links I get:

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/...Unit5/gps.html

Not Jewish.

Professor of astronomy at Ohio State.

It is sad a professor would blindly repeat garbage like that without
investigating further and understanding the subject better. shrug

Is the Darb still in Ohio State?

http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/gps-relativity.asp

Not Jewish.

Physics Professor at Maryland U.

Oh, another self-styled physicist. shrug

http://www.physicscentral.com/explore/writers/will.cfm

Not Jewish.

Physics professor at Washington Uni.

Yet another one who does not understand the GPS. shrug

.... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHA...

"Peter Webb" wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
"Peter Webb" wrote:
"hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:
Nowhere in these links below, academic or industrial,
or govt, is there any word about relativity:
http://www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/
http://www.maps-gps-info.com/gps-accuracy.html
http://www.igage.com/mp/GPSAccuracy.htm
http://www.nasm.si.edu/gps/spheres.html
http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/01/04/new-gps-system-boosts-accuracy-t...
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/02/enhancing-gps.html

ED & flaccid Peter Webb wrote:
None of them mention Newton's laws of motion, either.
So?

hanson wrote:
"So",... so, you are an Einstein Dingleberry, Peter.

"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
Just how dumb can Peter get? Newton’s law is not in
question here. shrug

hanson wrote:
Webb is not dumb. He is worse. He is an Einstein
Dingleberry. When EDs like Webb hear or see the
word "relativity" they fall into a religious trance.
The only difference between Webb and some rag
head is their icon. Webb worships Einstein's Asshole
while the Islamist extremist yearns for 72 whores
promised to him in the Koran if he defends it.

Dingleberry Webb wrote:
Why would you think that a Garmin GPS brochure
would talk about General Relativity?

"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
If they applied relativity, they will mention it in their
algorithm. shrug
Their algorithm is very certainly covered in the
“navigation equation” section of the following link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS [1]

ED Webb wrote:
Yes. And it mentions how Relativity is used. Just search for
"Relativity" on the page. Can't you read very well in English?

hanson cited & wrote:
The 2 places in link [1] which mention relativity say:
"In 1956 Friedwardt Winterberg[2] proposed a test of
general relativity using accurate atomic clocks placed in
orbit in artificial satellites. To achieve accuracy requirements,
GPS uses principles of general relativity to correct the
satellites' atomic clocks."

Webb, you Exquisite Dingbat ED, I already covered that
in my post to Dunno-Dono, which you read, but you came
back like a drug addict for another fix... ahahaha..

Listen ED-Webb, Einstein Dingleberries, like yourself,
will never be able to realize in their fanaticism that the
above cited paragraph only shows that the author was
a biased Einstein Dingleberry too... who by hook and
crook tried to fudge in something about relativity... which
gave Webb an immediate relativity erection... AHAHAHA...

Even worse, ED-Webb does not realize that the author
twists ED-Webb like a pendejo and confuses ED-Webb
with his circular reasoning by using SR/GR to test SR/GR.
AHAHAHAHA.. ahahaha...

But that is good enough for the ED-pendejo choir who
cherishes its own http://tinyurl.com/Proof-of-Relativity
with Webb, loud on centerstage, up front and deliriously
happy.... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs Webb
ahahahaha... ahahahahanson

shaved the rest of Webb's pendejos

So, just to get this straight, you accept and acknowledge that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS says "GPS uses principles of general
relativity to correct the satellites' atomic clocks."?

So, you are now (instead) claiming that the web page - offered as proof that
GPS doesn't use Relativity - does state that GPS uses Relativity after all,
but that is wrong?

Is that your position?

pendejo-"Peter Webb" wrote:
Is that your position?

hanson wrote:
ED-pendejo Webb, listen. Here is a "repeat" of my position:

.... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHAHA... AHAHAHA...

"Peter Webb" wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
"Peter Webb" wrote:
"hanson" wrote:

hanson wrote:
Nowhere in these links below, academic or industrial,
or govt, is there any word about relativity:
http://www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/
http://www.maps-gps-info.com/gps-accuracy.html
http://www.igage.com/mp/GPSAccuracy.htm
http://www.nasm.si.edu/gps/spheres.html
http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/01/04/new-gps-system-boosts-accuracy-t...
http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/02/enhancing-gps.html

ED & flaccid Peter Webb wrote:
None of them mention Newton's laws of motion, either.
So?

hanson wrote:
"So",... so, you are an Einstein Dingleberry, Peter.

"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
Just how dumb can Peter get? Newton’s law is not in
question here. shrug

hanson wrote:
Webb is not dumb. He is worse. He is an Einstein
Dingleberry. When EDs like Webb hear or see the
word "relativity" they fall into a religious trance.
The only difference between Webb and some rag
head is their icon. Webb worships Einstein's Asshole
while the Islamist extremist yearns for 72 whores
promised to him in the Koran if he defends it.

Dingleberry Webb wrote:
Why would you think that a Garmin GPS brochure
would talk about General Relativity?

"Koobee Wublee" wrote:
If they applied relativity, they will mention it in their
algorithm. shrug
Their algorithm is very certainly covered in the
“navigation equation” section of the following link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS [1]

ED Webb wrote:
Yes. And it mentions how Relativity is used. Just search for
"Relativity" on the page. Can't you read very well in English?

hanson cited & wrote:
The 2 places in link [1] which mention relativity say:
"In 1956 Friedwardt Winterberg[2] proposed a test of
general relativity using accurate atomic clocks placed in
orbit in artificial satellites. To achieve accuracy requirements,
GPS uses principles of general relativity to correct the
satellites' atomic clocks."

Webb, you Exquisite Dingbat ED, I already covered that
in my post to Dunno-Dono, which you read, but you came
back like a drug addict for another fix... ahahaha..

Listen ED-Webb, Einstein Dingleberries, like yourself,
will never be able to realize in their fanaticism that the
above cited paragraph only shows that the author was
a biased Einstein Dingleberry too... who by hook and
crook tried to fudge in something about relativity... which
gave Webb an immediate relativity erection... AHAHAHA...

Even worse, ED-Webb does not realize that the author
twists ED-Webb like a pendejo and confuses ED-Webb
with his circular reasoning by using SR/GR to test SR/GR.
AHAHAHAHA.. ahahaha...

But that is good enough for the ED-pendejo choir who
cherishes its own http://tinyurl.com/Proof-of-Relativity
with Webb, loud on centerstage, up front and deliriously
happy.... ahahahahaha... Thanks for the laughs Webb
ahahahaha... ahahahahanson

shaved the rest of Webb's pendejos

On Apr 27, 12:44 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:

So, just to get this straight, you accept and acknowledge that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS
says "GPS uses principles of general
relativity to correct the satellites' atomic clocks."?

No. shrug

So, you are now (instead) claiming that the web page - offered as proof that
GPS doesn't use Relativity - does state that GPS uses Relativity after all,
but that is wrong?

The article claims so in a non-technical section but fails to deliver
so in the technical section. In science, it is the technical section
that is backed up by analyses that count. You just have to get used
to it. shrug

Claim is cheap. Any bozo can claim so is true. shrug

Is that your position?

Absolutely. Only retards cannot decide for themselves. shrug

"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
...
On Apr 27, 12:44 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:

So, just to get this straight, you accept and acknowledge that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS
says "GPS uses principles of general
relativity to correct the satellites' atomic clocks."?

No. shrug



OK, go to the web page, scan down to the fourth paragraph, second sentence.

Do you see it now?


So, you are now (instead) claiming that the web page - offered as proof
that
GPS doesn't use Relativity - does state that GPS uses Relativity after
all,
but that is wrong?

The article claims so in a non-technical section but fails to deliver
so in the technical section. In science, it is the technical section
that is backed up by analyses that count. You just have to get used
to it. shrug

Then why did you post it?

And why did you post it, claiming that it doesn't even mention Relativity,
when it clearly states "To achieve accuracy requirements, GPS uses
principles of general relativity to correct the satellites' atomic clocks."

(Fourth paragraph, second sentence. The one you couldn't find).



Claim is cheap. Any bozo can claim so is true. shrug

Is that your position?

Absolutely. Only retards cannot decide for themselves. shrug

Do you now acknowledge and accept that this web page (offered as proof that
GPS doesn't use Relativity) clearly states the exact opposite of what you
claim, specifically stating (and I quote): "To achieve accuracy
requirements, GPS uses principles of general relativity to correct the
satellites' atomic clocks." ?

Well?

On Apr 27, 7:55*am, "Peter Webb"
wrote:

Do you now acknowledge and accept that this web page (offered as proof that
GPS doesn't use Relativity) clearly states the exact opposite of what you
claim, specifically stating (and I quote): "To achieve accuracy
requirements, GPS uses principles of general relativity to correct the
satellites' atomic clocks." ?

Well?

Why are we debating on the basis of secondary sources? Here are
quotes from the officially released Interface Control Documents
for the GPS, Galileo, and GLONASS systems:

GPS Interface Control Document (ICD 200c)
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/...D200Cw1234.pdf
3.3.3.1 "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 delta f/f = -4.4647E-10..."

European GNSS (Galileo) Open Service
Signal In Space Interface Control Document
http://tinyurl.com/yblsztb
5.1.4 "This satellite time correction is modelled through the
following second order polynomial...where...delta t_r is a
relativistic correction term...-4.442807309 x 10^-10..."

Global Navigation Satellite System
GLONASS
http://rniikp.ru/en/pages/about/publ...LONASS_eng.pdf
3.3.1.1 "To compensate relativistic effects, the nominal value of
frequency, as observed at satellite, is biased from 5.0 MHz by
relative value f/f = -4.36 10^-10..."

Jerry

..... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahaha....

"Peter Webb"
did show his own http://tinyurl.com/Proof-of-Relativity & wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote:

pendejo-"Peter Webb" wrote:
Well?

hanson wrote:
ahahahaha... No, not all is "well" with you, pendejo-Peter.
You act quite rational and analytical, and you see thru the
con that Al Gore's AWG fanatics try to **** you over with...

But when it comes to SR/GR, how come you behave like
a brainwashed object that fell victim to the grand Zionist
con of the 20th century, and you proselytize for it as if your
sanity and well being was at stake?....

..... when & while it is abundantly clear that only some few
papers, written by kikes, make a big deal about the vanishing
to non-existent role that SR/GR is supposed to play in GPS...
.... like in Ashby's crap, which takes 39 questionable steps to
get to the 38 usec,
..... when & while 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, & show that

||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c^2 *86400 = 38 microsec/day ----
||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c *86400 = 11.2... drift /day ----
|||||
where m_e = mass of earth and h = the satellite's height
above the earth surface. Corrections are done by standard
industrial ways by classical methods devoid of any SR/GR.
http://tinyurl.com/622an2 or http://tinyurl.com/57asbg or
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 |||||

and apparently the incessant indoctrination of the goyim by
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity and / or
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR
has taken its toll on you, Peter Webb, as seen in here
in you the http://tinyurl.com/Zionist-educated-Relativists

Ding! Ding!... Snap out of it, Peter.. Thanks for the laughs..
ahaha... ahahahaha.. ahahahanson

Dingleberry-"Jerry"
another fanatical pendejo, who wrote crap since he can't
see that it is abundantly clear that only some few papers,
written by kikes, make a big deal about the vanishing to
non-existent role that SR/GR is supposed to play in GPS...
.... like in Ashby's crap, which takes 39 questionable steps
to get to the 38 usec,
..... when & while 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, & show that

||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c^2 *86400 = 38 microsec/day ----
||||| ---- m_e/h * 2G/c *86400 = 11.2... drift /day ----
|||||
where m_e = mass of earth and h = the satellite's height
above the earth surface. Corrections are done by standard
industrial ways by classical methods devoid of any SR/GR.
http://tinyurl.com/622an2 or http://tinyurl.com/57asbg or
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 |||||

and apparently the incessant indoctrination of the goyim by
http://tinyurl.com/Zio-Politics-with-Relativity and / or
http://tinyurl.com/Alberts-Zio-Politics-w-SR-GR
has taken its toll on you, Jerry Dingleberry, as seen in here
in you the http://tinyurl.com/Zionist-educated-Relativists

Ding! Ding!... Snap out of it, Jerry.. Thanks for the laughs..
ahaha... ahahahaha.. ahahahanson