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

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

  1. Sam Wormley

    The Sorcerer Guest

    |
    | in message | >
    | > | >> On 2006-06-07 16:09:05 +0100, "Tom Potter" <> said:
    | >> >>
    | >> >
    | >> > I will be looking forward to seeing "Phineas T Puddleduck"
    | >> > comment of some of the "clues" that he asserts that I am resistant
    to.
    | >> >
    | >> > So far, all I have seen from Puddleduck is parroting,
    | >> > and attacks on the messenger.
    | >> >
    | >> > Ever notice than when some immature, clueless clown comes into
    | >> > sci.physics
    | >> > and gets exposed, he climbs into bed with Sam Wormley and Dork
    Moortel?
    | >> >
    | >> > Parrots of the feather, horse's asses, and all that.
    | >>
    | >> You love parrots don't you.
    | >
    | > Yes, but I think he prefers horses:
    | > http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/HorseAss2.html
    | > http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/HorseAss.html
    |
    | It is interesting to see that Dork Moortel
    | suggests that it is better to get one's information
    | from a horse's ass,
    | rather than from the horse's mouth.
    |
    | That explains a lot about the quality of his posts.
    |
    | Hopefully everyone will read the two "fumbles"
    | listed by Dork, and decide for themselves
    | what kind of information is best for them.

    Dork Van de merde, quality of posts:
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/badevents.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/Boolehelp.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/classic.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/closingspeed.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/closingspeed2.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/paradorks.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/PartialDerivative.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/real.htm
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/shit.htm
    and the coup de grace, this extract from "On the Electrodynamics of Moving
    Bodies",
    by Dork's hero:
    http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Dork/shit.htm

    Androcles
     
    The Sorcerer, Jun 8, 2006
  2. Sam Wormley

    J. J. Lodder Guest

    Given the anti-scientific mood now prevalent in the USA
    that would not at all be surprising.

    It's Jewish science you know,
    and no doubt also a piece of liberal scheming
    to hide the truth.

    Teach the controversy in every American school!

    Jan
     
    J. J. Lodder, Jun 8, 2006
  3. He doesn't know.
     
    Richard Herring, Jun 8, 2006
  4. Sam Wormley

    tdp1001 Guest

    Jan raises a good point.
    Jews are central to a lot of conflict and babble.

    Consider the Bible, Communism, Freudism, General Relativity,
    the Class Wars of the 1900's, the Religious Wars of the 2000's, etc.

    I wonder if this is a function of Nature (Genetics)
    or Nurture (Religion)?

    Jan also raises a good point when she suggests that where there
    is more heat than light, that the matter
    should be examined so liberals and conservatives,
    Christians, Jews or Muslims, etc.
    cannot "hide the truth".

    This would make a good subject for scientists to study.
    To see where babble and conflict come from,
    and what its' affects on society are.

    It would be interesting to start by making
    a top 100 "More heat than light" subject list.

    I suggest:
    1. The Bible.
    2. General Relativity
    3. Communism vs. free markets.
    4. Liberal vs conservative
    5. Action vs energy (As the unit of change)
    6. ..

    Please add your favorite "More heat than light" subject.

    --
    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
     
    tdp1001, Jun 8, 2006
  5. Contributing to something else you dont understand?
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 8, 2006
  6. Sam Wormley

    Bhanwara Guest

    I am curious, are you (others invited to respond) familiar
    with the history of physics?

    Here are a couple of simple gedankens.

    1) In late 1800's, physicists had a lot of data to indicate light
    was a wave. There was one problem, nobody was sure how
    it could wave in empty space in the absence of a medium. The
    largest part of the physics development of the time happened
    mostly around the "medium" issue.

    Can you predict how physics would have developed if somebody
    had been able to propose, at that time, my simple explanation of
    how an electromagnetic wave can traverse across empty space
    (no medium) without any problems, and still be a wave?

    2) In early 1900's, physicists were strongly focussed on a single
    experiment, known then as the electron double-slit experiment.

    Can you predict how physics would have developed if somebody
    had been able to propose, at that time, my explanation of
    the field from the electron gun leaking from two holes and
    then the two sub-fields interfering with each other?
     
    Bhanwara, Jun 8, 2006
  7. As long as I am never lumped in with you.

    BTW Name the 13 hacks...
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 8, 2006

  8. No

    The world knows, NASA knows and the designers know the corrections are
    required for GPS. YOU don't. But yet you haven't got the courage of
    your convictions to go to eftaylor.com and do the maths that prove it
    to you.
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 8, 2006
  9. Don't hold your breath, you are not worth the effort.
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 8, 2006
  10. Ah. So you are scared that a bit of simple calculus will blow your
    medieval mind set out of the water then....

    Neither astrology or feng shui have a mathematical framework in use by
    a satellite based location system, k00k!
     
    Phineas T Puddleduck, Jun 8, 2006
  11. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    Tom Potter, Jun 8, 2006
  12. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    Here is what eftaylor.com says:
    ====================+
    "The satellite clock will "run fast" by something like 50 000 nanoseconds
    per day compared with the clock on Earth's surface due to position effects
    alone. Clearly general relativity is needed for correct operation of the
    Global
    Positioning Satellite System! "

    Here is how Galileo's 200 year old equation does the job.
    ======================================
    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
    by eftaylor.com and others.

    As can be seen, it is a barefaced lie to state as eftaylor.com does:
    "Clearly general relativity is needed for correct operation of the Global
    Positioning Satellite System!"

    Bullshit alarm pegs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    It is a shame that people on the taxpayer dole
    try to bullshit the public into thinking that they
    possess powerful, esoteric knowledge that is
    essential to everything.

    This is the same tactic used by charlatans through history.

    --
    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 8, 2006
  13. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    Considering your reactions so far,
    I'll be surprised if you don't set up a web page
    to get back at the folks
    who expose your ignorance in the newsgroups.

    Certain kinds of nerds can't deal with
    having their ignorance exposed.

    --
    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 8, 2006
  14. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    It is interesting to see that "Phineas T Puddleduck"
    is ignorant of the fact that it takes a deep understanding
    of calculus and nature (And people)
    to design complex data gathering and control systems.

    I was designing analog computer systems using 100 plus operational
    amplifiers,
    and using Time Data time series computers to solve all
    kinds of problems when "Phineas T Puddleduck"
    was sucking his thumb. Not to mention that I wrote
    one of the first fast Fourier transform program for micros,
    and was one of the first advertisers in Byte Magazine.

    I designed a system using calculus in the 1960's
    that measured the energy required to press fit parts.

    I assert that "Phineas T Puddleduck" doesn't know
    enough about calculus and physics to figure out how to do this,
    and I challenge him to try.

    It is interesting to see that "Phineas T Puddleduck"
    continues to redirect my posts to an off topic newsgroup.

    I wonder why he does this?

    --
    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 8, 2006
  15. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Potter hasn't a clue!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 8, 2006
  16. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    Not because of relativity as you claim, Potter. The steering
    and modeling of atomic clocks in orbit is similar to the steering
    and modeling of atomic clocks on the ground. The offsets predicted
    by SR/GTR were designed into the satellites before they were ever
    launched.
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 8, 2006
  17. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    You are just babbling, Potter. A $30B+ industry, applying relativity
    to create a global infrastructure benefiting people all over the
    world has you sputtering, Potter (Willy Lowman).
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 8, 2006
  18. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    The point, Potter, is that you have no idea what your talking
    about and can't articulate these "13 hacks" that you claim!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 8, 2006
  19. Sam Wormley

    Sam Wormley Guest

    The point, Potter, is that you have no idea what your talking
    about and can't articulate these "13 hacks" that you claim!
     
    Sam Wormley, Jun 8, 2006
  20. Sam Wormley

    Tom Potter Guest

    Tom Potter, Jun 8, 2006
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...