Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley <swormley1@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:32:38 GMT
Tom Potter wrote:
Tom Potter wrote:As can be seen Sam Wormley confuses clocks with oscillators, and seems to think that the GPS ground control continually controls the oscillators and clocks on the GPS satellites.Potter, try not to be so stoooopid.
I suggest that Sammy do a little research on why af0, af1 and "Time of Applicability" data are transmitted to GPS receivers.
Note that af0 has the dimension of seconds, and that af1 has the dimension of seconds per seconds.
The af0 (Seconds) data tells GPS receivers how much the clock on a particular satellite differs from the master system time,
and af1 data (Seconds per second) tells GPS receivers how much the oscillator on a particular satellite is drifting with respect to the master system oscillator.
See: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf, pg 88
The SV PRN code phase offset is given by
Î"tsv = af0 + af1(t - toc) + af2(t - toc)2 + Î"tr
where
af0, af1 and af2 are the polynomial coefficients given in subframe1,
toc is the clock data reference time in seconds (reference paragraph
20.3.4.5), and Î"tr is the relativistic correction term (seconds) which
is given by Î"tr = F e A^0.5 sin Ek.
Look it up: http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/IS-GPS-200D.pdf
Sammy, the so-called relativistic correction term has to do with corrections for the eccentricity of the satellites orbits, the shape of the Earth, etc.
and as can be seen from the publication you quoted::
Poor Potter FAILS to understand that the clock offset in GPS satellites
are the primary relativistic corrections. I don't know why you don't read:
Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
"Relativistic effects on satellite clocks can be combined in such a way
that only two corrections need be considered. First, the average frequency
shift of clocks in orbit is corrected downward in frequency by 446.47 parts
in 10^12. This is a combination of five different sources of relativistic
effects: gravitational frequency shifts of ground clocks due to earth's
monopole and quadrupole moments, gravitational frequency shifts of the
satellite clock, and second-order Doppler shifts from motion of satellite
and earth-fixed clocks".
"Second, if the orbit is eccentric, an additional correction arises from
a combination of varying gravitational and motional frequency shifts as
the satellite's distance from earth varies. This correction is periodic
and is proportional to the orbit eccentricity. For an eccentricity of 0.01,
the amplitude of this term is 23 ns. Due to a shortage of computer resources
on satellites in the early days of GPS, it was decided that this latter
correction was to be the responsibility of software in GPS receivers. It
is a correction which must be applied to the broadcast time of signal
transmission, to obtain the coordinate time epoch of the transmission event
in the ECI frame".
Poor Potter FAILS to understand that the clock offset in GPS satellites
are the primary relativistic corrections. I don't know why you don't read
the excellent documentation I provide for you in these newsgroups!
Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
Bluster on, Potter, bluster some more! Froth at the mouth! Whatever!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- References:
- Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: PD
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Sam Wormley
- Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- From: Tom Potter
- Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- Prev by Date: Re: Faster than light
- Next by Date: Re: Smith Chart Tutorial
- Previous by thread: Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- Next by thread: Re: Simple experiments that conclusively disprove General Relativity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|