Total Posts:61|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page

# GPS and relativity

 Posts: 1,834 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PMPosted: 1 year agoAS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Harry.
 Posts: 542 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/4/2016 3:32:42 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Harry.Altitude of satellite is about 20,000 km. Altitude of HA aircraft <100 km. Assuming the aircraft is on the ground is less than a 0.5% error.For GPS to work it is only necessary for the satellite clocks to synchronise. It is the difference in time stamp from simultaneous messages at the receiver that is important.Let's hope "the truth is out there" cos there is bugger all round here.
 Posts: 936 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/4/2016 3:38:02 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Harry.We have been deceived. Relativity has nothing to do with how satellites and GPS systems work. It is really done by triangulation between 3 satellites and the observer. The time delay is just a scientific fraud.
 Posts: 9,991 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/4/2016 3:56:22 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 3:38:02 PM, Akhenaten wrote:At 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Harry.We have been deceived. Relativity has nothing to do with how satellites and GPS systems work. It is really done by triangulation between 3 satellites and the observer. The time delay is just a scientific fraud.I read your link about the lack of necessity of adjusting the clock. Point is, even if the premise IS true that does not make the practice of adjusting the clock wrong, and sure as he11 not a "scientific fraud".
 Posts: 13,644 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/4/2016 4:45:12 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Once again, Harry, your alleged credentials fail you, considering this is information you could have easily looked up yourself, that is, if you are accredited to having the credentials you claims to have. Will you now be presenting some more wacky woo woo websites?Harry.Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
 Posts: 1,834 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/6/2016 3:42:37 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 4:45:12 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:At 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Once again, Harry, your alleged credentials fail you, considering this is information you could have easily looked up yourself, that is, if you are accredited to having the credentials you claims to have. Will you now be presenting some more wacky woo woo websites?Harry.Actually the word you were seeking is "purported" not "alleged" - just saying...I have looked up numerous articles pertaining to this but have not had the time to rigorously dig into the details as I'd like to, opening up a discussion about this in the science forum isn't something I'd expect objections to but then again you are a rather odd individual.Harry.
 Posts: 13,644 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/6/2016 3:54:41 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/6/2016 3:42:37 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:At 3/4/2016 4:45:12 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:At 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Once again, Harry, your alleged credentials fail you, considering this is information you could have easily looked up yourself, that is, if you are accredited to having the credentials you claims to have. Will you now be presenting some more wacky woo woo websites?Harry.Actually the word you were seeking is "purported" not "alleged" - just saying...I have looked up numerous articles pertaining to this but have not had the time to rigorously dig into the details as I'd like to, opening up a discussion about this in the science forum isn't something I'd expect objections to but then again you are a rather odd individual.Yes Harry, my point exactly. Yet, for some reason, you have plenty of time to post opposing, unscientific, nonsensical views of crackpots and cranks, and you call me the rather odd individual.Harry.Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
 Posts: 5,987 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/7/2016 1:33:05 AMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/4/2016 2:58:19 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:AS you may know the satellite's used for GPS each contain very very stable atomic clocks (these are the most stable oscillators we can devise, far beyond what's possible with quartz crystal designs).What is less know is that the clocks in the satellites have been adjusted to run at a lower frequency to compensate for relativistic effects. The goal being that when observed from the ground they'll be seen to run at the same rate as a local atomic clock and they'll remain synchronized (to a greater degree).My question is that how can we make such an adjustment when the magnitude of the relativistic effect differs among different observers?The largest effect is that due to gravitation and this varies with the altitude of the observer, so how can one compensate for both ground based and high altitude aircraft with a single adjustment to the satellite's clock?Harry.Synchronization takes place from a ground station.Also the relativistic effect differs for GPS altitude.http://www.gps.gov...It's interesting to note that in the early days of GPS the military was able to encode the messages to be accurate for military units and yet off as much as 100 meters for non encoded units. Due to GPS prevalence in many civilian systems it is unlikely such a feature will be used.
 Posts: 2,436 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/7/2016 7:01:29 AMPosted: 1 year agoBump due to spam threads.#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica #WarOnDDO
 Posts: 751 Add as FriendChallenge to a DebateSend a Message 3/7/2016 3:58:30 PMPosted: 1 year agoAt 3/7/2016 2:42:08 PM, Dirty.Harry wrote:I've been discussing only one thing with you dumass, namely can position be established with satellites that have uncompensated clocks and so far I think it's very possible.A simple use of google would provide you with more than enough information to prove your "I think" wrong. You can establish position without compensating the clocks but you will drift at about Sure. It wouldn't be the correct position and it would drift to an unusable number in minutes with drift being approximately 11km per day.I will leave to location of this information to you as practice using google.