Science > Physics > Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Tom Potter" |
| Date: |
08 Apr 2007 09:48:18 PM |
| Object: |
Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
Seekers of wisdom and truth
can browse this summary in order to determine
if the pro-relativity people of the anti-relativity people
are prejudiced in their positions.
Tom Potter
=========
The problem is that General Relativity includes everything,
EXCEPT the main player, man!
Einstein basically took the maths and methods
of stress analysis, and applied them to the universe,
rather than to an uninhabited, inanimate object.
This took one, or a few easily understood
and easy to compute problems,
and lumped them into one huge,
difficult, if not impossible, to solve sausage,
in which the ingredients had to be re-sorted out,
and weighed (Measured/quantized),
and as it eliminated sentient man,
it put the world back into the old auguring mode it was in
before the Lunar Society took Newton's Equations
and used them to forge the Industrial revolution,
General Relativity is a Tower of Babel
that wastes time, money and minds on such
pursuits as time travel, worm holes, gravity waves,
rubber rulers and clocks, etc.
After Newton's model,
there were immediate and rapid advances
in mechanics, astronomy, etc.
After Maxwell's model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in chemistry, electricity, etc.
After Watson's and Crick's DNA model
there were immediate and rapid advances
in medicine, genetics, animal husbandry,
the history of the Earth and Mankind, etc.
Here we are, 100 years after General Relativity
and it continues to generate more hype and heat
than light and advances.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste."
OsherD
======
I agree with Tom Potter.
[Osher to Sam]
If you [Sam] understand General Relativity so well, why do you
keep posting full articles by other people with no or minimal
comment?
Mark L. Fergerson
===============
You're stealing material from Pentcho Valev now?
Eric Gisse
========
With 8 websites, one would think you wouldn't post so much in a
newsgroup that even you admit does not like you.
--------------
Yes Tom, we know. As a salesman, you don't like or even understand
basic science unless it generates a product. As a result, you think
all research is a waste of time. You don't have to keep reminding us
of your ignorance every fucking time you post.
-----------------
Yes--you go on and on with your boiler plate responses every time.
Why, Potter, do you give a *****? You don't understand GTR... Why do
you care? How can you condemn something you don't understand?
---------------
Every time it is more of that boilerplate response tacked on with *****
about how you don't understand relativity.
---------------
Perhaps Tom Potter would get a clue and open a textbook on relativity.
I would post links that give experimental support, but apparently you
can't be bothered to read those.
The whole reason people care about relativity is because it predicts
correctly. Sure certain approximations make the application of the
whole theory an exercise in irritation, but that is no reason to dump
GR into the sea like you seem to desire.
I really wish you would stop posting, Tom. You have no appreciation
for the sciences whatsoever. You do not enjoy science nor do you have
any respect for basic research. You see no utility in understanding
the universe for the sake of understanding - almost every
technological device you own is the product of a theory that was
"useless" at the time. The irony of this is lost on you.
--------------------
GR is the only model that predicts all aspects of gravitation
properly. That is all that is required, and GR suffices. Your
inability to understand an admittedly complicated theory is not the
fault of the theory. Theories such as quantum mechanics are no less
complicated - but you don't ***** about them, even though you have no
chance of understanding them either.
The full implementation of QM requires lots of computer and man hours
- but do you *****?
-----------------
Yea. You hate science. I get it.
Sam Wormley
===========
Hey, Potter, why do you knock General Relativity, when you don't even
understand it? What's it done to you personally to warrant your scorn?
----------------
In what way is GTR a lousy model? How is it pinching your balls?
-----------------
Yes--you go on and on with your boiler plate responses every time.
Why, Potter, do you give a *****? You don't understand GTR... Why do
you care? How can you condemn something you don't understand?
-----------------
Says, the former salesperson, Potter, who doesn't understand GTR
and can't articulate its use to predict effects on satellite
clocks.
----------------
I'm asking you a question, Potter: Why, Potter, do you give a
*****? Especially since you have no understanding of GTR! Why do
you care? How can you condemn something you don't understand?
-------------
Potter misses the critical point--"GR is the only model that
predicts
all aspects of gravitation properly. That is all that is required,
and
GR suffices".
Not surprising as Potter *fails* to understand GR.
Y.Porat
======
The notion that space is curved
is one of Einstein s biggest flops
hanson
======
GR is a religion, a belief system, that strayed away from the
empirical and
real world physics, as shown in
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/wabnigga_saga.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/96c1fde68777bc9f
wherein it says
GR is even worse of a con then is SR, because it is nothing but
circular
dance and playing around with Newton's revered G. As long as Einstein
uses Newton's G in his equations he carries with him , unavoidably,
all the
baggage, the short comings and defects attributed to Newton's G that
REL is trying to get (unsuccessfully) rid of.
BioFreak
=======
GR is only hyped by non-physicist sorry-asses who never
forgave themselves and the world that they chose a
non-physics major once they had the chance. This pit as
well as every vile spot in USA is full of them.
Physicists take one course of it (or two) and then get
busy doing physics. They only hear of GR again from the
sorry-***** "engineer" losers who thought they had the
world and were left looking at themselves as nothing
but card-carrying slaves with a smile.
"me_so_horneee" (The_Man)
========================
How would you know? Angry becuase GR has developed a better method of
cold selling?
A mind is a terrible thing to waste."
It is a shame what happened to YOURS.
Phineas T Puddleduck
==================
GR works loon. GPS, Hulse Taylor, Pound and Rebka.
Stick to frothing.
--------------------
Whay do you insist on proving your stupidity on a daily basis? Or has
being a salesman all your life rotted your little brain?
-----------------
Poor potter. Such a small little mind.
Y.Porat
======
GR has nothing to do with chemistry
you are parroting and mumbling !!
Don Stockbauer
=============
Hmmmmmmm.......Doesn't it seem like to be deserving of the name
General Relativity should include ALL relationships between all
entities in the Universe (at least out to the causal horizon)?????
--------------
So this is why second order cybernetics needs to be emphasized, where
the observer (The "I") (introspection, self-awareness) is paramount.
--------------
The neat thing about cybernetics is that it helps one combine systems
into a metasystem (although this is usually a self-organization thing,
not under our control). Even works for such systems as relativity and
quantum mechanics, combining them into a unified worldview. And other
such systems, like the nations of the Earth. But it's all too good to
be true.
---------------
It's "interesting" to read Endless Discussions (ED syndrome).
doug
====
Tom Potter wrote:
As can be seen from the following excerpt from a paper given at the
31st Annual Precise Time and Time Interval (PTTI) Meeting,
the "gravitational red shift" numbers for
"both general relativity and the quasi-Newtonian approach"
yield the same results, as far as frequency shift is concerned.
No. It says the classical shift is half the GTR shift.
This is the abstract of a 1999 meeting. The author does not seem
to believe in relativity and is proposing an experiment to
disprove it. Nothing has shown up since this abstract on the
internet by this author. There is no proof here, only speculation.
Why bother to present this when it just weakens any arguement you
might want to present?
Jeff.Relf
========
How we model time, God and aging, effects our health. Lambda-CDM
employs
G.R., telling us that the energy of the known Universe is being "
spent ".
In General Relativity it's obvious that time is truly a spatial
dimension
( static, parochial, immutable ). It's only _ Pseudo _ randomness that
makes
it seem otherwise.
Regarding Doug's comment:
"No. It says the classical shift is half the GTR shift.",
I must point out that constants involve scaling,
and when models vary by pi, this indicates that
one model was scaled with cycles and the other with radians,
and when models vary by "2", this indicates that
one model was scaled with radius and the other with diameter.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
| User: "Bill Hobba" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 02:35:25 AM |
|
|
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176086898.024340.132460@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
Seekers of wisdom and truth
can browse this summary in order to determine
if the pro-relativity people of the anti-relativity people
are prejudiced in their positions.
Tom Potter
=========
The problem is that General Relativity includes everything,
EXCEPT the main player, man!
So does just about every other theory in physics (the maybe here is quantum
physics - I don't believe it does but there are those who interpret some
perhaps injudicious comments by Von Neumann as requiring it) - and for good
reason. Revisit the foundations of science taught here in Australia to 10
year olds. In particular the tacit assumptions of 'naive realism'.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kochen-specker/
The specifics detailed in the above more advanced topic are obviously not
taught to 10 year olds - but the tacit assumptions of non contextuality and
value definiteness is, ie a world outside ourselves exits independent of us,
is.
Rest of usual rubbish snipped.
Bill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 07:19:09 AM |
|
|
On Apr 9, 10:35 am, "Bill Hobba" <rubb...@junk.com> wrote:
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176086898.024340.132460@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
Seekers of wisdom and truth
can browse this summary in order to determine
if the pro-relativity people of the anti-relativity people
are prejudiced in their positions.
Tom Potter
=========
The problem is that General Relativity includes everything,
EXCEPT the main player, man!
So does just about every other theory in physics (the maybe here is quantum
physics - I don't believe it does but there are those who interpret some
perhaps injudicious comments by Von Neumann as requiring it) - and for good
reason. Revisit the foundations of science taught here in Australia to 10
year olds. In particular the tacit assumptions of 'naive realism'.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kochen-specker/
The specifics detailed in the above more advanced topic are obviously not
taught to 10 year olds - but the tacit assumptions of non contextuality and
value definiteness is, ie a world outside ourselves exits independent of us,
is.
Rest of usual rubbish snipped.
Bill
As can be seen by the web pages of,
and public statements by,
the General Relativity welfare gang,
they fear that their GTR scam is crumbling,
and they will not be able to continue to
be supported by the taxpayers,
and as can be seen by the responses to my posts,
it is obvious that the General Relativity Zombies
(Ignorant people who pretend to be privy to
powerful, esoteric knowledge,
in order to impress other ignorant people.)
are also fear being exposed as ignorant phonies.
I suggest that rational, intelligent folks
should compare the works of the Newton, Maxwell,
and DNA models to the General Relativity model
and consider what models are hyped,
and are supported and promoted with taxpayer dollars,
and what models daily make enormous contributions to mankind.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 08:19:59 AM |
|
|
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1176121149.858399.282000@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
As can be seen by the web pages of,
and public statements by,
the General Relativity welfare gang,
they fear that their GTR scam is crumbling,
How would an ignoramus like you know about that, Protter?
and they will not be able to continue to
be supported by the taxpayers,
and as can be seen by the responses to my posts,
it is obvious that the General Relativity Zombies
(Ignorant people who pretend to be privy to
powerful, esoteric knowledge,
It only looks esoteric to less gifted (aka stupid) people
like you, Protter.
in order to impress other ignorant people.)
There you go, an ignorant Protter. You got that one right.
are also fear being exposed as ignorant phonies.
I suggest that rational, intelligent folks
should compare the works of the Newton, Maxwell,
and DNA models to the General Relativity model
and consider what models are hyped,
and are supported and promoted with taxpayer dollars,
and what models daily make enormous contributions to mankind.
Do you know how many taxpayer dollars it takes to feed
unemployed imbeciles and their ugly female offspring, Protter?
--
Tom Potter
You forgot a letter there.
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "=?UTF-8?Q?Jeff=E2=80=A6Relf?=" |
|
| Title: Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ? |
10 Apr 2007 07:25:59 AM |
|
|
Hi Tom_Potter,
You don't like the way the meter and second are defined
( to wit, as counts of periods of a special maser )
but you don't offer anything that's better... Why ?
Red/Blue shifts alter the meter and the second.
Add energy ( e.g. by falling into a gravity well )
and you get a blue shift ( i.e. a shorter S.I. second ).
Subtract energy ( e.g. centrifugal force ) and you get a red shift.
Only G.R. gets the red/blue shifts right,
Newtonian physics is off by a factor of 2.
Sure, G.R. is a tad harder to work with... Why does that bother you ?
G.R. explains the origins of the known Universe,
Newton's stuff doesn't. Would you expunge Darwin as well ?
G.R. explains humanity, Newton's stuff doesn't.
Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ?
In conversations were the word " God " is mentioned,
I've found that it often means,
" The higher powers that effect our fate. ".
( e.g. The pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
Also, religious people tend to be more optimistic than sober-minded,
using euphemisms like " Heavenly Father " instead of " Our Fate ".
If Jesus were alive today he'd be nailed to the cross again
by the same gang of law-obsessed, inhumane government stooges.
So I stay " judgement proof ".
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ? |
10 Apr 2007 10:51:26 AM |
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2007_Apr_10_6_@Cotse.NET...
Hi Tom_Potter,
You don't like the way the meter and second are defined
( to wit, as counts of periods of a special maser )
but you don't offer anything that's better... Why ?
Red/Blue shifts alter the meter and the second.
Add energy ( e.g. by falling into a gravity well )
and you get a blue shift ( i.e. a shorter S.I. second ).
Subtract energy ( e.g. centrifugal force ) and you get a red shift.
Only G.R. gets the red/blue shifts right,
Newtonian physics is off by a factor of 2.
Sure, G.R. is a tad harder to work with... Why does that bother you ?
G.R. explains the origins of the known Universe,
Newton's stuff doesn't. Would you expunge Darwin as well ?
G.R. explains humanity, Newton's stuff doesn't.
Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ?
Jeff, that clue still stays just out of reach for you, doesn't it?
In conversations were the word " God " is mentioned,
I've found that it often means,
" The higher powers that effect our fate. ".
( e.g. The pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
Also, religious people tend to be more optimistic than sober-minded,
using euphemisms like " Heavenly Father " instead of " Our Fate ".
If Jesus were alive today he'd be nailed to the cross again
by the same gang of law-obsessed, inhumane government stooges.
So I stay " judgement proof ".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ? |
10 Apr 2007 11:14:56 AM |
|
|
On Apr 10, 3:25 pm, Jeff...Relf <Jeff_R...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
Hi Tom_Potter,
You don't like the way the meter and second are defined
( to wit, as counts of periods of a special maser )
but you don't offer anything that's better... Why ?
Red/Blue shifts alter the meter and the second.
Add energy ( e.g. by falling into a gravity well )
and you get a blue shift ( i.e. a shorter S.I. second ).
Subtract energy ( e.g. centrifugal force ) and you get a red shift.
Only G.R. gets the red/blue shifts right,
Newtonian physics is off by a factor of 2.
Sure, G.R. is a tad harder to work with... Why does that bother you ?
G.R. explains the origins of the known Universe,
Newton's stuff doesn't. Would you expunge Darwin as well ?
G.R. explains humanity, Newton's stuff doesn't.
Time is spatial; so what is God, entropy and randomness ?
In conversations were the word " God " is mentioned,
I've found that it often means,
" The higher powers that effect our fate. ".
( e.g. The pseudo arrow of time, a.k.a. pseudo entropy )
Also, religious people tend to be more optimistic than sober-minded,
using euphemisms like " Heavenly Father " instead of " Our Fate ".
If Jesus were alive today he'd be nailed to the cross again
by the same gang of law-obsessed, inhumane government stooges.
So I stay " judgement proof ".
It is interesting to see that Jeff posted that I
"don't like the way the meter and second are defined.",
when I pointed out to him,
that the units, that light speed is measured in,
is a function of the units used,
and that the natural units of light speed
is the dimensionless
time interval per time period.
One can just as correctly express light speed
in furlongs per fortnight,
as they can in meters per second.
And as I pointed out,
the constant "pi" occurs when
one uses radian units rather than cycle units,
and the constant "2" appears when one
uses radian units rather than diameter units.
I must also point out to Jeff,
that the model of the birth of the universe came about when
Hubble discovered that the universe seemed to be expanding,
and that when one extrapolated the rate of expansion backwards,
it appeared that all stars originated at a point about 13 billion
years ago.
In fact, Einstein had to modify his model
to accomodate Hubble's discovery.
Poor Newton was dead,
and didn't have the opportunity to modify his model.
Jeff did make a good point when he suggested that
General Relativity was more of a religion,
than a viable, useful model of reality.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 01:56:53 AM |
|
|
On Apr 8, 6:48 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
We know you hate relativity. Nothing you can say or do will change
relativity's status in the physics community.
So why continue bleating?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Shubee" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
08 Apr 2007 10:18:52 PM |
|
|
On Apr 8, 7:48 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Einstein basically took the maths and methods
of stress analysis, and applied them to the universe,
and lumped them into one huge,
difficult, if not impossible, to solve sausage,
in which the ingredients had to be re-sorted out,
and weighed (Measured/quantized),
That is correct. Einstein's inspiration in describing the universe is
directly attributable to his love of sausages.
Shubee
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
08 Apr 2007 10:31:31 PM |
|
|
On Apr 8, 8:18 pm, "Shubee" <e.shu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Apr 8, 7:48 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Einstein basically took the maths and methods
of stress analysis, and applied them to the universe,
and lumped them into one huge,
difficult, if not impossible, to solve sausage,
in which the ingredients had to be re-sorted out,
and weighed (Measured/quantized),
That is correct. Einstein's inspiration in describing the universe is
directly attributable to his love of sausages.
Shubeehttp://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
Scooby DooDoo to Potty : crank to crank.
.
|
|
|
| User: "maxwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 03:57:56 PM |
|
|
On Apr 8, 8:31 pm, wrote:
Scooby DooDoo to Potty : crank to crank.
Wow, glad you guys don't do movie reviews - giving 5 stars to this
comment as a contribution to science!
.
|
|
|
| User: "harry" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
10 Apr 2007 07:46:35 AM |
|
|
"maxwell" <spsi@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:1176152276.143402.175920@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 8, 8:31 pm, wrote:
Scooby DooDoo to Potty : crank to crank.
Wow, glad you guys don't do movie reviews - giving 5 stars to this
comment as a contribution to science!
Exactly - childish comments on crappy postings are worth nothing (and
neither is this comment worth anything!).
Come on, put one star here ;-)
O
I
I
I
I I
I I
Harald
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
08 Apr 2007 10:32:23 PM |
|
|
Shubee wrote:
On Apr 8, 7:48 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
Einstein basically took the maths and methods
of stress analysis, and applied them to the universe,
and lumped them into one huge,
difficult, if not impossible, to solve sausage,
in which the ingredients had to be re-sorted out,
and weighed (Measured/quantized),
That is correct. Einstein's inspiration in describing the universe is
directly attributable to his love of sausages.
Shubee
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
Crackpot Shubert is contradicted by SR! Check his posting record at
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3AInnocent
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3APerspicacious
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 10:04:54 AM |
|
|
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 11:27:10 AM |
|
|
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message =
news:461A5616.19DE3485@hate.spam.net...
Tom Potter wrote:
=20
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
=20
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
1) GPS works.
2) *****, fool, idiot, jackass, mooncalf, moron, nincompoop, ninny, =
nitwit, simple, simpleton, softhead, tomfool, dope, gander, goose. =
cretin, ding-dong, dip, goof, jerk, nerd, schmo, schmuck, turkey, =
imbecile, FUCKHEAD.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
09 Apr 2007 11:31:55 PM |
|
|
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
The fact of the matter is that General Relativity
is not needed to design, operate, and maintain the GPS system,
and plays a trivial, IF ANY, role in the GPS system.
It might be of value to people ignorant of the technologies that
went into the GPS system to examine
what the relative contributions
of some of the technologies were.
Semiconductor technology - 30%
(Fast correlators, small, light weight, low power
comsumption devices are essential to the GPS system.)
Rocket technology - 30%
(You need a way to get the oscillators into orbit)
Communications technology - 15%
(Efficient transmitters and antennas,
and broadband transmitters and receivers are essential.)
Software technology 11%
(Fast, accurate algorithms are needed to perform
the correlations, and compute the co-ordinates of
the receivers from data received.)
Information theory - 9%
(Information theory, compression methods,
pseudo random codes, etc. play a critical role
in the GPS system.
The Doppler effect - 2%
(The Doppler Effect, discovered by Christian Doppler
over 100 years ago, is essential to understanding the
compensation needed in the local oscillator to track
the incoming signal, and it is also used to compute
the velocity of the receiver. The people who hype
General Relativity try to claim credit for the Doppler Effect,
just as they try to claim credit for the Galileo Effect.
Antenna technology - 1%
(Small, light, efficient antennas are essential to the GPS system.)
The Galileo effect - 1%
(Although the people who hype General Relativity claim
that it was necessary to compute the frequency offset in the
GPS oscillators, the effect of acceleration on the period of
oscillators,
discovered over 300 years ago, can be (And was) used to compute
the affect of altitude on the GPS oscillators.)
General Relativity - 0%
(It may be that the "contribution" of General Relativity
was a negative, as the GTR Gurus used 13 complicated, time-consuming,
hacks of GTR to account for the desired frequency offset in the
orbiting
oscillators, when it could be done with one, simple equation
determined by Galileo over 3000 years ago. )
It is interesting to see that the GTR Guru's
don't seem to comprehend why the frequency offset
is DESIRABLE but not essential
to the operation of the GPS system,
and they don't seem to know that the output frequency
of an oscillator can be scaled up or down electronically,
digitally with divider circuits, and
continuously with homodyne devices.
What is important is the stability of the oscillators,
not the absolute frequency, which can be, AND IS,
adjusted to the desired values.
Considering that Uncle Al frequently uses the phrases:
" 1) GPS works.
2) Idiot."
hopefully he will put forth his best argument as to why
General Relativity is essential to the GPS system,
and why it is more essential than the factors I mentioned above.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
10 Apr 2007 04:20:14 AM |
|
|
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:1176179515.222720.295980@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
=20
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
1) Grass is green.
2) Uncle Stooopid is a moron.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Morons/UncleStooopid.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "H. Wabnig .... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 01:48:08 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:20:14 GMT, "Androcles"
<Engineer@hogwarts.physics.co.uk> wrote:
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1176179515.222720.295980@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
1) Grass is green.
2) Uncle Stooopid is a moron.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Morons/UncleStooopid.htm
Androcles:
...........
c = 2AB/(t'A-tA) = 0/0
I always wonder why Androcles considers that beeing 0/0,
especially why he sets ( t'-t) = 0
furthermore, in spite of you and hanson
GPS is relativity corrected, SRT and GR, both of them.
Read what hanson's governement says.
Buy yourself some knowledge:
http://www.navtechgps.com/supply/books.asp?Line=engineering
Get in touch with Einstein:
http://www.navtechgps.com/Newsletters/GPSetc_News_May_14_2004.asp
https://listserv.unb.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0208&L=canspace&T=0&P=5139
http://www.satellitecorp.com/GPSRelativitySeminar.htm
Read what hanson's governement says:
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/2001SPSPerformanceStandardFINAL.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdf
from above link for example:
Since these coefficients do not include corrections for relativistic effects,
the user's equipment must determine the requisite relativistic correction.
Accordingly, the offset given below includes a term to perform this function.
Wormleys GPS collection
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
hanson and Androcles are full time idiots and notorious liars.
Androcles and hanson, where have your parents been around
9 months before your birth?
w.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 09:27:28 AM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 9:48 am, H. Wabnig <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .-
--- -. DOT .- -> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:20:14 GMT, "Androcles"
<Engin...@hogwarts.physics.co.uk> wrote:
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1176179515.222720.295980@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
1) Grass is green.
2) Uncle Stooopid is a moron.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Morons/UncleStooopid.htm
Androcles:
...........
c = 2AB/(t'A-tA) = 0/0
I always wonder why Androcles considers that beeing 0/0,
especially why he sets ( t'-t) = 0
furthermore, in spite of you and hanson
GPS is relativity corrected, SRT and GR, both of them.
Read what hanson's governement says.
Buy yourself some knowledge:http://www.navtechgps.com/supply/books.asp?Line=engineering
Get in touch with Einstein:http://www.navtechgps.com/Newsletters/GPSetc_News_May_14_2004.asphttps://listserv.unb.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0208&L=canspace&T=0&P=5139http://www.satellitecorp.com/GPSRelativitySeminar.htm
Read what hanson's governement says:http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/2001SPSPerformanceStandardFINA...http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdf
from above link for example:
Since these coefficients do not include corrections for relativistic effects,
the user's equipment must determine the requisite relativistic correction.
Accordingly, the offset given below includes a term to perform this function.
Wormleys GPS collectionhttp://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
hanson and Androcles are full time idiots and notorious liars.
Androcles and hanson, where have your parents been around
9 months before your birth?
w.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wabby, it appears that you didn't read those books,
as that don't make your case.
Maybe you just chewed off the cover, eh?
It can be easily demonstrated
(As I have done in several posts.)
that General Relativity is not essential to the GPS system,
nor is it a FRUITFUL model to use
to compute the affect that acceleration
and velocity have on oscillators and received signals.
One equation, discovered by Galileo over three hundred years ago,
accurately models the frequency offset used,
(But not really needed.) in the GPS system
As can be seen, the General Relativity Charlatans
use 13 hacks of GTR to do compute the offset.
It is interesting to see that Ashby,
the number one GTR Charlatan,
tries to convince folks (Tax granters)
that the frequency outputs derived from the atomic clocks
cannot be adjusted with frequency dividers,
and phase lock and homodyne circuits.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
13 Apr 2007 12:49:54 AM |
|
|
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:1176301648.173084.258530@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 11, 9:48 am, H. Wabnig <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .-
--- -. DOT .- -> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:20:14 GMT, "Androcles"
<Engin...@hogwarts.physics.co.uk> wrote:
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote in =
messagenews:1176179515.222720.295980@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
1) Grass is green.
2) Uncle Stooopid is a moron.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Morons/UncleStooopid.htm
Androcles:
...........
c =3D 2AB/(t'A-tA) =3D 0/0
I always wonder why Androcles considers that beeing 0/0,
especially why he sets ( t'-t) =3D 0
It's been explained to Wabnigger and he's still wondering...
furthermore, in spite of you and hanson
GPS is relativity corrected, SRT and GR, both of them.
Read what hanson's governement says.
Buy yourself some =
knowledge:http://www.navtechgps.com/supply/books.asp?Line=3Dengineering
Get in touch with =
Einstein:http://www.navtechgps.com/Newsletters/GPSetc_News_May_14_2004.as=
phttps://listserv.unb.ca/cgi-bin/wa?A2=3Dind0208&L=3Dcanspace&T=3D0&P=3D5=
139http://www.satellitecorp.com/GPSRelativitySeminar.htm
Read what hanson's governement =
says:http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/2001SPSPerformanceStandardFIN=
A...http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdf
from above link for example:
Since these coefficients do not include corrections for relativistic =
effects,
the user's equipment must determine the requisite relativistic =
correction.
Accordingly, the offset given below includes a term to perform this =
function.
Wormleys GPS collectionhttp://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
hanson and Androcles are full time idiots and notorious liars.
Androcles and hanson, where have your parents been around
9 months before your birth?
w.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
=20
Wabby, it appears that you didn't read those books,
as that don't make your case.
=20
Maybe you just chewed off the cover, eh?
=20
It can be easily demonstrated
(As I have done in several posts.)
that General Relativity is not essential to the GPS system,
nor is it a FRUITFUL model to use
to compute the affect that acceleration
and velocity have on oscillators and received signals.
=20
One equation, discovered by Galileo over three hundred years ago,
accurately models the frequency offset used,
(But not really needed.) in the GPS system
=20
As can be seen, the General Relativity Charlatans
use 13 hacks of GTR to do compute the offset.
=20
It is interesting to see that Ashby,
the number one GTR Charlatan,
tries to convince folks (Tax granters)
that the frequency outputs derived from the atomic clocks
cannot be adjusted with frequency dividers,
and phase lock and homodyne circuits.
=20
--
Tom Potter
=20
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
=20
=20
=20
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 10:09:24 AM |
|
|
In article <1176301648.173084.258530@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote:
It can be easily demonstrated
(As I have done in several posts.)
that General Relativity is not essential to the GPS system,
nor is it a FRUITFUL model to use
to compute the affect that acceleration
and velocity have on oscillators and received signals.
One equation, discovered by Galileo over three hundred years ago,
accurately models the frequency offset used,
(But not really needed.) in the GPS system
Post proof.
--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 09:39:19 PM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 6:09 pm, Phineas T Puddleduck <phineaspuddled...@gmail.com>
wrote:
In article <1176301648.173084.258...@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
It can be easily demonstrated
(As I have done in several posts.)
that General Relativity is not essential to the GPS system,
nor is it a FRUITFUL model to use
to compute the affect that acceleration
and velocity have on oscillators and received signals.
One equation, discovered by Galileo over three hundred years ago,
accurately models the frequency offset used,
(But not really needed.) in the GPS system
Post proof.
As can be seen, "Puddleduck", like most people,
has been conditioned to give credit for the GPS frequency offset
to the wrong person.
A frequency offset for the **Galileo** effect is built into the
clocks.
(Although the frequency offset is not really required,
and the Charlatans that hype General Relativity
do not even seem to comprehend why the offset is used.)
Galileo Effect - Affect of acceleration on oscillating systems.
Hubble Effect - Affect of distance on oscillating systems.
Doppler Effect - Affect of velocity on oscillating systems.
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
The Doppler Effect is not used to offset the oscillators
as the relative velocity between the birds and receivers
is constantly changing, and the Hubble Effect is not compensated for
because it is too small to be a factor.
The "classical" "gravitational red shift" equation is:
f = f0 * ( 1 + 1/2 * g * distance / C^2)
where "g" is about 9.8 meters per seconds^2
"distance" is about 10,000 kilometers or 10,000,000 meters,
and "C" is about 300,000,000 meters per second,
in the case of the GPS system in Earth orbit.
Computing we get: 1.00000000054444444,
and subtracting one (1.0..) to get the difference,
we get the 5.4*10^-10 which is basically the number used
in the GPS system to offset the "chip rate" (Frequency)
of the "P code" offset.
Over 200 years ago, England sent ships all
over the world with standard pendulums
to measure the number of swings for sunrise to sunrise
Newton used this data and the **Galileo** effect
to compute all kinds of things about the Earth,
including its' shape, and tides all over the world.
It appears from their articles that the people who
promote the Urban Legend that General Relativity
was essential to the GPS system,
do not even know why the offset to the GPS clock
is useful, but not essential to the GPS system.
Apparently Einstein has far better press agents
than Galileo and Newton.
It is sad that so-called scientists
with selfish agenda's hype GTR so intently.
One would think that if they were privy to
powerful esoteric knowledge,
that some of them would have used this knowledge
in the free market and make billions of dollars,
instead of living off the taxpayers.
No doubt, General Relativity is the model of choice
if one wants to speculate about time travel, warping through space,
gravity waves, gravitons, dragging space around,
rubber clocks and rulers, and such,
but if one wants to affect the lives of mankind
in a "fruitful" way, General Relativity
is a waste of time, money and minds.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
12 Apr 2007 08:35:42 AM |
|
|
In article <1176345559.559510.148930@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote:
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
It was 300 years ago recently.
And BTW Galilieo died in 1642.
--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John \C" |
|
| Title: Mike Varney is Gay. |
12 Apr 2007 08:59:50 AM |
|
|
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@gmail.com> wrote in message
And BTW Galilieo died in 1642.
And BTW your pea-brain died in 1994, Varney.
HJ
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
12 Apr 2007 04:36:35 PM |
|
|
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:phineaspuddleduck-BDE8F7.14354212042007@news.octanews.com...
In article <1176345559.559510.148930@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote:
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
It was 300 years ago recently.
And BTW Galilieo died in 1642.
Potter hasn't quite mastered this calendar thing yet. Although in the
strictest sense, it was *over* 200 years ago. He could have easily said over
a week ago as well, and still been correct.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
12 Apr 2007 09:32:58 PM |
|
|
On Apr 13, 12:36 am, "T Wake" <usenet.es...@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddled...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:phineaspuddleduck-BDE8F7.14354212042007@news.octanews.com...
In article <1176345559.559510.148...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
It was 300 years ago recently.
And BTW Galilieo died in 1642.
Potter hasn't quite mastered this calendar thing yet. Although in the
strictest sense, it was *over* 200 years ago. He could have easily said over
a week ago as well, and still been correct.
Much ado about nothing.
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/
http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home
http://no-turtles.com
http://www.frappr.com/tompotter
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
13 Apr 2007 07:13:46 AM |
|
|
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1176431578.204530.54150@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 13, 12:36 am, "T Wake" <usenet.es...@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddled...@gmail.com> wrote in
messagenews:phineaspuddleduck-BDE8F7.14354212042007@news.octanews.com...
In article <1176345559.559510.148...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
It was 300 years ago recently.
And BTW Galilieo died in 1642.
Potter hasn't quite mastered this calendar thing yet. Although in the
strictest sense, it was *over* 200 years ago. He could have easily said
over
a week ago as well, and still been correct.
Much ado about nothing.
Yeah, accuracy in theories is pretty unimportant, isn't it?
I mean, it is reasonable to have thought Galileo was promoting his ideas
3000 years ago, isn't it?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
12 Apr 2007 08:35:52 AM |
|
|
In article <1176345559.559510.148930@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Tom Potter" <tdp1001@gmail.com> wrote:
One would think that if they were privy to
powerful esoteric knowledge,
that some of them would have used this knowledge
in the free market and make billions of dollars,
instead of living off the taxpayers.
No doubt, General Relativity is the model of choice
if one wants to speculate about time travel, warping through space,
gravity waves, gravitons, dragging space around,
rubber clocks and rulers, and such,
but if one wants to affect the lives of mankind
in a "fruitful" way, General Relativity
is a waste of time, money and minds.
Hulse and Taylor?
--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 10:06:43 PM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 6:39 pm, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip crackpottery]
It would be insanity to use 13 hacks of General Relativity to
compute the GPS oscillator offset,
Oh look, more lying about "hacks" that don't exist. Who do you think
you are fooling?
when ONE equation discovered by Galileo over 200 years ago
does it just fine.
Oh look, more lying about an equation. Christ - do you really believe
this *****?
[...]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 10:15:37 PM |
|
|
Tom Potter wrote:
A frequency offset for the **Galileo** effect is built into the
clocks.
(Although the frequency offset is not really required,
and the Charlatans that hype General Relativity
do not even seem to comprehend why the offset is used.)
One wonders how you might have gotten so fucked up, Potter.
Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Summary of pro-Relativity and anti-Relativity debate |
11 Apr 2007 11:17:33 AM |
|
|
On Apr 11, 6:27 am, "Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Apr 11, 9:48 am, H. Wabnig <.... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .-
--- -. DOT .- -> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 09:20:14 GMT, "Androcles"
<Engin...@hogwarts.physics.co.uk> wrote:
"Tom Potter" <tdp1...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1176179515.222720.295980@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 9, 6:04 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:
The following is a summary of the posts made to the
"The General Relativity gang are circling the wagons." thread.
[snip crap]
1) GPS works.
2) Idiot.
I was surprised to see that Uncle Al,
like many people,
has been brainwashed to think that General Relativity
is essential to the GPS system.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS/GPS.htm
1) Grass is green.
2) Uncle Stooopid is a moron.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Morons/UncleStooopid.htm
Androcles:
...........
c = 2AB/(t'A-tA) = 0/0
I always wonder why Androcles considers that beeing 0/0,
especially why he sets ( t'-t) = 0
furthermore, in spite of you and hanson
GPS is relativity corrected, SRT and GR, both of them.
Read what hanson's governement says.
Buy yourself some knowledge:http://www.navtechgps.com/supply/books.asp?Line=engineering
Get in touch with Einstein:http://www.navtechgps.com/Newsletters/GPSetc_News_May_14_2004.asphttp...
Read what hanson's governement says:http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/2001SPSPerformanceStandardFINA...
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/gpssps1.pdf
from above link for example:
Since these coefficients do not include corrections for relativistic effects,
the user's equipment must determine the requisite relativistic correction.
Accordingly, the offset given below includes a term to perform this function.
Wormleys GPS collectionhttp://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
hanson and Androcles are full time idiots and notorious liars.
Androcles and hanson, where have your parents been around
9 months before your birth?
w.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wabby, it appears that you didn't read those books,
as that don't make your case.
When was the last time you read a book, crackpotter?
Maybe you just chewed off the cover, eh?
It can be easily demonstrated
(As I have done in several posts.)
Never to the satisfaction of anyone but yourself...
that General Relativity is not essential to the GPS system,
nor is it a FRUITFUL model to use
to compute the affect that acceleration
and velocity have on oscillators and received signals.
Yea, isn't it nice to know why the correction is needed rather than
sticking it in ad-hoc?
One equation, discovered by Galileo over three hundred years ago,
accurately models the frequency offset used,
(But not really needed.) in the GPS system
Galileo never used c, idiot. That equation is not his.
As can be seen, the General Relativity Charlatans
use 13 hacks of GTR to do compute the offset.
Oh look, once again you bring out the "13 hacks". PUT UP OR SHUT UP,
CRACKPOTTER.
It is interesting to see that Ashby,
the number one GTR Charlatan,
tries to convince folks (Tax granters)
that the frequency outputs derived from the atomic clocks
cannot be adjusted with frequency dividers,
and phase lock and homodyne circuits.
Idiot. The whole point is that so nobody has to DO THAT.
My god, do you really think you are anything other than a salesman?
--
Tom Potter
*** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 ***http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp/http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/homehttp://no-turtles.comhttp://www.frappr.com/tompotterhttp://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/http://tom-potter.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
