Einstein's Relativity and Everyday Life -- Clifford M. Will

Discussion in 'General GPS Discussion' started by Sam Wormley, Jun 5, 2006.

  1. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    It is interesting to see that Sam Wormley
    is using his OWN, PHONY, pretend, EDU web site
    as a reference.

    I wonder if Sam's web site simply parrots GTR Urban Legends
    as he does in the newsgroups,
    or if he provides an objective look at ACTUAL FACTS?

    For example,
    what is the simplest way to determine and set the
    frequency offsets of satellites?

    As can be seen,
    the GTR promoters use 13 hacks of GTR
    to accomplish what on, simple, clear, 200 year old Galileo equation does.

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

    --
    Tom Potter
    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
     
    Tom Potter, Jun 6, 2006
    #21
  2. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    I've heard of the tail wagging the dog,
    but when Sam gives GTR credit for the GPS system,
    he has a hair on the dog wagging the dog.
    (And a very tiny hair at best.)

    As rational, intelligent, practical, people understand,
    although 13 hacks of GTR can predict the frequency offset of the GPS
    oscillators,
    as can one, simple, clear, 200 year old equation discovered by Galileo,
    it is not necessary to use either,
    and in fact NASA used neither.

    They put a bird in orbit with an oscillator,
    noted how much various factors like gravity affected the oscillators,
    and then they adjusted the frequency dividers to get the outputs in sync.

    And they also monitor all of the clocks on a constant basis,
    and send them data to maintain sync with the master clock.

    Cult thinking is a waste of a mind.

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

    --
    Tom Potter
    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
     
    Tom Potter, Jun 6, 2006
    #22
  3. By forgetting about classical physics and the old inverse square law?
    Oops.

    6378km radius for the earth
    26560km radius for the sv's orbit

    (/ 26560.0 6378.0) 4.164314832235811 ; ~4x the distance

    Since "Force = G * mass1 * mmass2 / (distance ** 2)" we should get
    1/16 the gravity at 4x the distance where the gps sv's orbit.

    -wolfgang "Still cheering team relativity though!"
     
    Wolfgang S. Rupprecht, Jun 6, 2006
    #23
  4. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    As rational, intelligent, practical, people understand,
    although 13 hacks of GTR can predict the frequency offset of the GPS
    oscillators, as can one, simple, clear, 200 year old equation discovered by
    Galileo,
    it is not necessary to use either,
    and in fact NASA used neither.

    They put a bird in orbit with an oscillator,
    noted how much various factors like gravity affected the oscillators,
    and then they adjusted the frequency dividers to get the outputs in sync.

    And they also monitor all of the clocks on a constant basis,
    and send them data to maintain sync with the master clock.

    It is interesting to see how cult thinking
    wastes the minds of cult members,
    and prevents them from perceiving simple truths.

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

    --
    Tom Potter
    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
     
    Tom Potter, Jun 6, 2006
    #24
  5. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    In other words, you are saying the pre-built [frequency] correction was
    in
    fact actually derived from the environment experimentally, and not
    mathematically pre-computed? [Just like the daily corrections
    are experimentally computed, and not mathematically?]

    Is there a source for this information?
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 6, 2006
    #25
  6. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Cite your sources!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #26
  7. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Credit for the high accuracy that GPS achieves is from
    paying attention to relativistic effect in the design of
    the Global Positioning System.
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #27
  8. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    A $30B+ industry, applying relativity to create a global
    infrastructure benefiting people all over the world got
    your goat, eh Potter (Willy Lowman).
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #28
  9. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Glad you are interested Potter! You might learn something!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #29
  10. Perhaps this will help him

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/08apr_atomicclock.htm

    "According to Einstein's theory of gravity and space-time -- called
    "general relativity" -- clocks in strong gravity tick slower than clocks
    in weak gravity. Because gravity is weaker on the ISS than at Earth's
    surface, PARCS should accumulate an extra second every 10,000 years
    compared to clocks ticking on the planet below. PARCS won't be there
    that long, but the clock is so stable that it will reveal this effect in
    less than one year. (Strayer notes that clocks on GPS satellites
    experience this relativistic phenomenon, too, and that onboard systems
    must correct for it.)"

    --
    The greatest enemy of science is psuedoscience.

    "Time is pseudo-directional because randomness is always pseudo-random..."
    Jeff revolutionises physics in sci.physics.

    "Now there's two stuck naysay lose cannons and a third sick puppy on the
    way."
    Brad tries to reason with the voices in his head...
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 6, 2006
    #30
  11. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    Are you sure you mean "pre-dicted" rather than "post-dicted"?
    If GR personnel were an integral part of the GPS design team
    (as you have been saying) it would not have been impossible
    to take the observed correction from earlier experiments
    and manipulate the math until it post-dicted it. The entire
    orientation of any GR personnel on the team would have
    been "how can I use it to try to publish a paper that
    proves GR", because almost all "research" in GR appears
    to be nothing but the umpteenth "proof" of GR.
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 6, 2006
    #31
  12. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    Tom, do you have a reference to this equation by Galileo?
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 6, 2006
    #32
  13. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    Unless you are really out of it, this is rather
    well-known. However there is no published
    research paper I can cite that says
    "it was found that research papers cannot be
    against relativity in order to be published."

    But if your world-sense _is_ really out of it,
    unfortunately this is not something I can
    help with.
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 6, 2006
    #33

  14. In your head perhaps. If you truly have the answer that disproves GR,
    the world will beat a path to your door. The problem is, in so many ways
    GR has proved its accuracy - in the solar system (GPS, Mercury) and
    beyond with lensing.

    There's no doubt that perhaps GR is part and parcel of a larger
    framework, but at the end of the day if you're going to make
    extraordinary claims - you need extraordinary proofs. I dealt daily with
    someone rather well versed in GR and very abrasive - but even he
    admitted that if someone could prove their case the world, and the Nobel
    prize, would beat a path to your door.

    The "censorship" argument cannot be used anymore with the web. If you
    self publish on the web and people think you are onto something, you'll
    know it. You yourself have admitted you haven't done GR formally, which
    is ALWAYS going to go against you. The phrase about "know your enemy"
    springs to mind ;-)

    --
    The greatest enemy of science is psuedoscience.

    "Time is pseudo-directional because randomness is always pseudo-random..."
    Jeff revolutionises physics in sci.physics.

    "Now there's two stuck naysay lose cannons and a third sick puppy on the
    way."
    Brad tries to reason with the voices in his head...
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 6, 2006
    #34
  15. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Total fabrication on your part Bhanwara... No evidence
    what-so-ever.
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #35
  16. Sam Wormley

    dda1 Guest

    Fun to watch: two kooks talking nonsense.
     
    dda1, Jun 6, 2006
    #36
  17. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    You should research that Bhanwara! Cite credible references.
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 6, 2006
    #37
  18. So that means the equation was 200 years old when Galileo discovered it???


    --
    The greatest enemy of science is psuedoscience.

    "Time is pseudo-directional because randomness is always pseudo-random..."
    Jeff revolutionises physics in sci.physics.

    "Now there's two stuck naysay lose cannons and a third sick puppy on the
    way."
    Brad tries to reason with the voices in his head...
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 6, 2006
    #38
  19. Sam Wormley

    Guest Guest

    [...]
    This is complete nonsense.

    Here's a simple way to check. In many areas of physics, papers
    often first appear as electronic preprints on the "arXiv,"
    http://arxiv.org/. In the past *one week*, the following papers
    that don't "support relativity" -- that discuss alternatives to
    standard general relativity or talk about observations that could
    conflict with general relativity -- have appeared.

    In gr-qc:

    gr-qc/0606012 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: An Algorithm for Generating Rotating Brans-Dicke Wormhole
    Solutions
    Authors: Kamal K. Nandi, Yuan-Zhong Zhang

    gr-qc/0606008 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Modifying the Einstein Equations off the Constraint Hypersuface
    Authors: J. David Brown, Lisa L. Lowe

    gr-qc/0605152 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Understanding Gravity: Some Extra Dimensional Perspectives
    Authors: V H Satheesh Kumar, P K Suresh

    gr-qc/0605147 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Quantum Modified Null Trajectories in Schwarzschild Spacetime
    Authors: Avtar Singh Sehra

    In hep-ph:

    hep-ph/0606051 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Noncommutative Inspired Black Holes in Extra Dimensions
    Authors: Thomas G. Rizzo

    hep-ph/0606048 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Methods of approaching decoherence in the flavour sector
    due to space-time foam
    Authors: N.E. Mavromatos (King's Coll. London), Sarben Sarkar
    (King's Coll. London)

    hep-ph/0606045 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Soft Gluon Resummation Effects in Single Graviton Production
    at the CERN Large Hadron Collider in the Randall-Sundrum Model
    Authors: Qiang Li, Chong Sheng Li, Li Lin Yang

    hep-ph/0605326 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Probing Brane-World Scenarios with Vacuum Refraction of Light
    Using Gamma-Ray Bursts
    Authors: Merab Gogberashvili (Tbilisi, Inst. Phys.), Alexander S.
    Sakharov (CERN & Zurich, ETH), Edward K.G. Sarkisyan (CERN &
    Manchester U.)

    hep-ph/0605325 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: TASI 2004 Lectures on the Phenomenology of Extra Dimensions
    Authors: Graham D. Kribs

    In hep-th:

    hep-th/0606032 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Exponential Potentials and Attractor Solution of Dilatonic
    Cosmology
    Authors: Wei Fang, H.Q.Lu, Z.G.Huang

    hep-th/0606026 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Noncommutative $D_3$-brane, Black Holes and Attractor Mechanism
    Authors: Supriya Kar, Sumit Majumdar

    hep-th/0606019 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Transverse Fierz-Pauli symmetry
    Authors: E. Alvarez, D. Blas, J. Garriga, E. Verdaguer

    hep-th/0606021 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Dynamical generation of fuzzy extra dimensions, dimensional
    reduction and symmetry breaking
    Authors: Paolo Aschieri, Theodoros Grammatikopoulos, Harold Steinacker,
    George Zoupanos

    hep-th/0606006 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Braneworld stars and black holes
    Authors: Simon Creek, Ruth Gregory, Panagiota Kanti, Bina Mistry

    hep-th/0606005 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Rotating Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton Black Holes in D Dimensions
    Authors: Jutta Kunz, Dieter Maison, Francisco Navarro-Lerida, Jan Viebahn

    hep-th/0605287 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Comment on the first order noncommutative correction to gravity
    Authors: Pradip Mukherjee, Anirban Saha

    In astro-ph:

    astro-ph/0606078 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Cosmology and Astrophysical Constraints of Gauss-Bonnet Dark Energy
    Authors: Tomi Koivisto, David F. Mota

    astro-ph/0606047 [abs, ps, pdf, other] :
    Title: Braneworld inflation from an effective field theory after WMAP
    three-year data
    Authors: M. C. Bento, R. Gonzalez Felipe, N. M. C. Santos

    If this isn't good enough to convince you, you can go to Spires
    (http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/hep/) and look for papers with the
    keyword "MOND" ("Modified Newtonian Dynamics") -- 10 papers so far in 2006.
    Or papers with keywords "modified gravity" -- 20 so far in 2006. Or
    "Pioneer anomaly" -- 6 so far in 2006. Or "tests of gravity" -- 4 so far.
    Or "DGP" (one of the currently popular alternatives to GR) -- 5 in 2006.
    Or "TeVeS" (another alternative) -- only one so far in 2006, but 4 in 2005.
    Or "higher curvature gravity" (another alternative) -- 2 papers so far in
    2006. Or "dilaton gravity" (another alternative) -- 5 papers in 2006.
    Or "massive gravity" (another alternative) -- only one so far this year,
    but 12 last year. Or "generalized gravity" -- 7 papers so far this year.
    Or "Lorentz violation" (papers about the possibility of violations of the
    basic structure of special relativity) -- 11 papers so far in 2006, and 78
    in 2005.

    The idea that papers that don't "support GR' are suppressed is paranoid
    nonsense.

    Steve Carlip
     
    Guest, Jun 6, 2006
    #39
  20. Sam Wormley

    Mike Guest

    AT least I get partial credit for my error. What about you unethical
    person:

    http://groups.google.com/group/alt....53098/abd6fadea0a31456?hl=en#abd6fadea0a31456

    You have been warned.


    Mike
     
    Mike, Jun 6, 2006
    #40
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
There are no similar threads yet.
Loading...