| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Douglas Eagleson" |
| Date: |
15 Oct 2006 09:45:18 PM |
| Object: |
Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
And failing to worry means you are not theoretical enough. A mystery
variation is real.
.
|
|
| User: "Douglas Eagleson" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
15 Oct 2006 09:48:56 PM |
|
|
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
And failing to worry means you are not theoretical enough. A mystery
variation is real.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ch Umley" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
15 Oct 2006 10:51:19 PM |
|
|
"Douglas Eagleson" <eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160966936.835657.151250@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
And failing to worry means you are not theoretical enough. A mystery
variation is real.
satellites move around quit a bit, much more than you have. Google for it
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Eagleson" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
16 Oct 2006 05:04:31 PM |
|
|
Ch Umley wrote:
"Douglas Eagleson" <eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1160966936.835657.151250@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
And failing to worry means you are not theoretical enough. A mystery
variation is real.
satellites move around quit a bit, much more than you have. Google for it
The exact mystery is hard to put name to. And the exact cause even
harder. A 1-2 meter cyclical height dependent variation.
An apparent relativistic effect is the author's question, not mine.
Ask me and I might claim to know why. I just get the idea it does not
mean anything importent, when in fact it is anomaly so importent to
answer that the reason for thirty years to find anomaly in Gravity
probe B is funny.
Implication of a true answer is likely astounding change in physics.
So the warning bell is ringing. Everybody knew of the force anoamly of
Probe - B thirty years ago when it was first reported, in another
experiment, and theorectically resolved field theory.
These bells should worry the real person.
Here is the answer in a nutshell. It is not a dark matter effect. A
certain time is associated with the earth and the force relation of all
matter to another is a real known quantity. So the exact relation in
small theory is stateable to try to communicate ideas.
Here is the differential equation-
A location/dx or x/dx
A t. or variable=t
And here solve the field to require the x per unit time change.
So please infer the indpendent variable of space and time together but
independently related.
So gamma solves!
Einstein's gamma as the solution to the height variation implies a time
change! And this is the reason for the observation. Inference of
field causes the experimental variation.
I do not invent the talks discovery. ANd to call the proof of all
field relative to another is the size of the quandery of mine. A
certain field is the cause and the only question is which stellar body
causes the variation or force to appear.
THe author calls for redshift effect. As suggestion.
I do not make this stuuf up, it is real theoretcial implication. It is
litterally as importent to understand as dark matter, but is not!
Here is the best solution experimentally. Solve for the height in
relation to all bodies and place the field inference in experiment. So
I guess it the earth as a field. And make the undertanding that the
clock of 12 hours proves it earth related. I did not make this up. It
is proven by the cyclical relation.
So why does the gravity vary by gamma???????
That is the only inference allowed in science. And it disagrees with
physics understanding making it a true anomaly, like probe-B.
So go home and figure out how to make gamma, gravity, effect. It is a
small dilemma for the theorectically inclined. Solvable I feel.
A height of field begs the question. Why does the earth's gravity vary
with height? As anomaly.
Here we are, go get the theorectical announcer. My answers are set in
stone elsewise.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Surfer" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
19 Oct 2006 11:56:28 AM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 19:48:56 -0700, "Douglas Eagleson"
<eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
This discussion seems to figure it out:
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=110528
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Eagleson" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
19 Oct 2006 10:16:08 PM |
|
|
Surfer wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 19:48:56 -0700, "Douglas Eagleson"
<eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
http:://ryanharne.com/past/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
This discussion seems to figure it out:
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=110528
You people need to read the guys article.
A third abstract lie is the contention he proposed.
He clearly suggested red shift.
You needa worry because in smart people land the guy is good to
proposed the resolution.
An informal proposal is the guys contention.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Surfer" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
19 Oct 2006 08:34:29 AM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 19:48:56 -0700, "Douglas Eagleson"
<eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
Earlier in the year, I asked someone I know about the following
related document.
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/Lecture1Signed.pdf
His comment was:
"This looks like a naive misunderstanding of the GPS!! The GPS doesn't
include a model of the local variations in ground height built in. it
only gives altitude relative to an assumed geoid (an elliptical
surface). One can choose different geoids within the device. Most
countries have their preferred geoid, which is (I think) based on a
best fit of the actual terrain to an elliptical surface"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Anomaly in the Satillite Height |
19 Oct 2006 09:34:21 AM |
|
|
Surfer wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 19:48:56 -0700, "Douglas Eagleson"
<eaglesondouglas@yahoo.com> wrote:
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/GTRintroSigned.pdf
A basic anomaly is introduced concerning satillites and prediction.
A 1-2 meter height variation with rotation is observed!
So the mystery is real. What gives?
Earlier in the year, I asked someone I know about the following
related document.
http://www.afmayer.net/docs/Lecture1Signed.pdf
His comment was:
"This looks like a naive misunderstanding of the GPS!! The GPS doesn't
include a model of the local variations in ground height built in. it
only gives altitude relative to an assumed geoid (an elliptical
surface). One can choose different geoids within the device. Most
countries have their preferred geoid, which is (I think) based on a
best fit of the actual terrain to an elliptical surface"
Perhaps you meant ellipsoid and not geoid... there are many ellipsoids
in use, but really only one geoid.
The content of the above url is suspect.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/wrong.html#gps
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
