On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>
>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
>>>>> or real anything.
>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
>>>> or clocks.
>>>
>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
>>> like all serious clocks always did.

>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
>> not 9192631770.

> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>
>
10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)

10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426

1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059

That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
the ground.

On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> >>
> > Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> > which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> > (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> > by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> > to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> > 10229999.99543Hz
> > But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> > from the ground.
> >
> You have been told before:
>
> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>
> > The correction is specified in the
> > "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> >
> > https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> >
> > From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> > "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> > coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> > The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> > on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> > rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> > are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> > are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> > P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz..
> > This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> >
> > SV = space vehicle, satellite.
Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
Maybe when it says in section 3.3.1.1 it “appears”....they
mean the daily corrections from the ground make it look like it’s at 10.22999.
To keep relativists quiet. Not that I’m averse to these clock gains being real.
It’s just that the various references on it seem inconsistent as
to what the actual clock settings are on the satellite.

Seperate to that I notice that the usual relativistic formula for
calculating clock gains as seen in equation 33 and 34 in Neil Ashby’s paper
is essentially just GM/r divided into a frequency of 8.9875532e+16.
Which gives the same results the same as that predicted by GR.
As shown below.

Where r=6371, r’=4.12 r and c^2 is 8.9875532e+16:
(GM/r-r’)÷ f
(47379129.4927) ÷ 299792458^2 = 5.2716391e-10
And additionally for other frequencies:
47379430.8842 ÷ 10229999.99543= +4.63142042086
47379430.8842 ÷ 9.19263177 x 10^16 = +0.00515
In fact any radius divided by the frequency of 8.9875532e+16 will give
the same result as your GR formula.
Yet when you use your formula below to calculate gains ..
one gets complete different amounts.
1.000000000527x 10229999.543 = 10230000.0008 (+ 0.00539121031)
1.000000000527x 9192661770= 9192661774.84(+4.84)

Notice the discrepancy in the two calculations from the two methods
for calculating clock gains for 10.22999Mhz at 4.12r: (+0.00539 vs +4.63.)?
They both can’t be correct.
And if your answer to this is that the (GM/r) ÷ f method I used to get
+4.63 for 10.2299Mhz is wrong. Then why does that same method
yield a correct result of 5.2716391e-10 when used for 8.9875532e+16 Hz?
I think maybe your mistake is to assume clock gains for one frequency can
be calculated using clock gains from another frequency. As you do with
your above quoted method of 1.000000000527x f.

On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>> or real anything.
> >>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>> or clocks.
> >>>
> >>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>> like all serious clocks always did.
>
> >> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
> >> not 9192631770.
>
> > 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> > 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >
> >
> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
>
> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
>
> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
>
> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
> the ground.

Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
Different result. Fact is, as I’ve pointed out to Paul, it’s not correct to calculate
clock gains for one frequency using the clock gains from another. As you
and Paul do.

On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 16:51:14 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>> or real anything.
> >>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>> or clocks.
> >>>
> >>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>> like all serious clocks always did.
>
> >> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
> >> not 9192631770.
>
> > 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> > 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >
> >
> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)

Sorry, stupid Mike, the direct comparing of the frequency
to the local clock present on the satellite (i..e. measurement)
gives 10.23.

On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
>> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
>>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
>>>>>>> or real anything.
>>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
>>>>>> or clocks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
>>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
>>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
>>
>>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
>>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
>>>> not 9192631770.
>>
>>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
>>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>>>
>>>
>> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
>> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
>>
>> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
>>
>> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
>> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
>>
>> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
>> the ground.
>
> Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
> both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
> 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2

Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.

On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 23:13:15 UTC, Volney wrote:
> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>>>> or real anything.
> >>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>>>> or clocks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
> >>
> >>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
> >>>> not 9192631770.
> >>
> >>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> >>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >>>
> >>>
> >> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> >> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
> >>
> >> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
> >>
> >> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
> >> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
> >>
> >> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
> >> the ground.
> >
> > Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
> > both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
> > 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
> 9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.

Yes, sorry my typos. It is 9192631770.
But my point is that you say you can calculate total gains of 457 for 10.22999Mhz
from the clock gains of another frequency ( that frequency being 8.9875518e+16hz
which has a gain of +446 which you then use to calculate the gain
of +457 for 10.22999Mhz)

Then to calculate total clock gains for a third frequency of 9192631770 which clock gains
do you use?
446 or 457?
(ie. do you use the 446 gain from 8.9875518e+16hz or the 457 gain from 10.22999Mhz)
Both can’t be correct. Yet they both use your same method.

On 12/30/2023 8:07 PM, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 23:13:15 UTC, Volney wrote:
>> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
>>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
>>>>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
>>>>>>>>> or real anything.
>>>>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
>>>>>>>> or clocks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
>>>>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
>>>>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
>>>>
>>>>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
>>>>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
>>>>>> not 9192631770.
>>>>
>>>>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
>>>>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
>>>> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
>>>>
>>>> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
>>>>
>>>> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
>>>> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
>>>>
>>>> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
>>>> the ground.
>>>
>>> Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
>>> both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
>>> 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
>> 9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.
>
> Yes, sorry my typos. It is 9192631770.

And the calculations based on your incorrect value?

> But my point is that you say you can calculate total gains of 457 for 10.22999Mhz
> from the clock gains of another frequency ( that frequency being 8.9875518e+16hz

That number 8.9875518e+16 is not a frequency. It is c^2.

> which has a gain of +446 which you then use to calculate the gain
> of +457 for 10.22999Mhz)

And you have that value wrong as well.

[snip rest of GIGO]

You are very, very confused.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 00:13:15 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>>>> or real anything.
> >>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>>>> or clocks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
> >>
> >>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
> >>>> not 9192631770.
> >>
> >>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> >>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >>>
> >>>
> >> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> >> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
> >>
> >> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
> >>
> >> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
> >> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
> >>
> >> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
> >> the ground.
> >
> > Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
> > both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
> > 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
> 9192631770 Cs cycles

No, stupid Mike, sorry, all the serious timekeeping system and clocks are
ignoring your ideological madness. Te second is still 1/(24*60*60) of
a day, just like it was when your idiot guru lived and mumbled.

Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
>>>>
>>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
>>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
>>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
>>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
>>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
>>> 10229999.99543Hz
>>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
>>> from the ground.
>>>

>> You have been told before:
>>
>> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>>> The correction is specified in the
>>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
>>>
>>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
>>>
>>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
>>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
>>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
>>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
>>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
>>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
>>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
>>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
>>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
>>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
>>>
>>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.

> Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.

The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.

Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?

The PRN-P code chipping rate is 10.23 Mbps measured
relative to GPS-coordinated time.
(or "- as it appears to an observer on the ground -")

That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.
(or "-as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -")

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 03:17:25 UTC, Volney wrote:
> On 12/30/2023 8:07 PM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 23:13:15 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>>>>>> or real anything.
> >>>>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>>>>>> or clocks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>>>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>>>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >>>>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
> >>>>>> not 9192631770.
> >>>>
> >>>>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> >>>>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> >>>> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
> >>>>
> >>>> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
> >>>>
> >>>> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
> >>>> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
> >>>>
> >>>> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
> >>>> the ground.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
> >>> both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
> >>> 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
> >> 9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.
> >
> > Yes, sorry my typos. It is 9192631770.
> And the calculations based on your incorrect value?
> > But my point is that you say you can calculate total gains of 457 for 10.22999Mhz
> > from the clock gains of another frequency ( that frequency being 8.9875518e+16hz
> That number 8.9875518e+16 is not a frequency. It is c^2.
> > which has a gain of +446 which you then use to calculate the gain
> > of +457 for 10.22999Mhz)
> And you have that value wrong as well.

47379129.4927 ÷ 10229999.9954= 4.63139095932
If this above calculation and its resulting value is wrong...
Then presumably you think using the same formula as above but
dividing into a different frequency (c^2), also gives the wrong value?
47379430.8842 ÷ 8.9875518e+16 (GPS) = 5.2716726e-10
>
> [snip rest of GIGO]
>
> You are very, very confused.

Not so confused as to realise that all GR does is divide potential (GM/r)
into frequency to get a clock gain of + 5.2716726e-10

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 10:13:43 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> >>>>
> >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> >>> from the ground.
> >>>
>
> >> You have been told before:
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >>
> >>> The correction is specified in the
> >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> >>>
> >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> >>>
> >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
>
> > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
> the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
>
> Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?
>
I know a specification isn’t usually stated in such vague terms as”appears to be”

> The PRN-P code chipping rate is 10.23 Mbps measured
> relative to GPS-coordinated time.
> (or "- as it appears to an observer on the ground -")
>
> That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.
> (or "-as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -")
>
> --
“Appear”. Does not mean preset to 10.2299Mhz . Appear could also mean
corrected daily and “assumed” to be at 10229999.99543. After all
is there a live video feed from GPS satelitte of live image of the
clock setting frequency showing its at10229999.99543? No.
Especially considering the rest of your document and other sources
state very clearly the clocks are not preset before launch. And broadcast at
10.23Mhz . And corrected daily. And as you say elsewhere the Newtonian
Doppler effects of the satelittes far exceed any predicted clock gains from
GR.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 11:13:43 UTC+1, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> >>>>
> >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> >>> from the ground.
> >>>
>
> >> You have been told before:
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >>
> >>> The correction is specified in the
> >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> >>>
> >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> >>>
> >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
>
> > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
> the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
>
> Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?

And the MEASUREMENT _SPECIFIES_ that it's 10.23.
Do you know what MEASUREMENT is?

> That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.

A lie, of course, as expected from a fanatic idiot.
There are no SI clocks on the satellite, nobody serious
is obeying or going to obey your ideological madness.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 10:13:43 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> >>>>
> >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> >>> from the ground.
> >>>
>
> >> You have been told before:
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >>
> >>> The correction is specified in the
> >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> >>>
> >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> >>>
> >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
>
> > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
> the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
>
> Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?
>
> The PRN-P code chipping rate is 10.23 Mbps measured
> relative to GPS-coordinated time.
> (or "- as it appears to an observer on the ground -")
>
> That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.
> (or "-as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -")

Even this link says the GPS *satelitte* itself broadcasts the signal at 10.23 Mhz .
Not at 10.22999Mhz
https://flightcrewguide.com/wiki/navigation/gps/gps-signals/#:~:text=The%20“P”%20code%20or%20“,C%2FA%2C%2010.23%20MHz.

On Sunday, December 31, 2023 at 5:11:04 AM UTC-8, Lou wrote:
> On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 10:13:43 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> > > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> > >>>>
> > >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> > >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> > >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> > >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> > >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> > >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> > >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> > >>> from the ground.
> > >>>
> >
> > >> You have been told before:
> > >>
> > >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The correction is specified in the
> > >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> > >>>
> > >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> > >>>
> > >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> > >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> > >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> > >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> > >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> > >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> > >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> > >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> > >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> > >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> > >>>
> > >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
> >
> > > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > > 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> > The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
> > the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
> >
> > Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?
> >
> > The PRN-P code chipping rate is 10.23 Mbps measured
> > relative to GPS-coordinated time.
> > (or "- as it appears to an observer on the ground -")
> >
> > That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.
> > (or "-as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -")
> Even this link says the GPS *satelitte* itself broadcasts the signal at 10.23 Mhz .
> Not at 10.22999Mhz
> https://flightcrewguide.com/wiki/navigation/gps/gps-signals/#:~:text=The%20“P”%20code%20or%20“,C%2FA%2C%2010.23%20MHz.
It would have to change from lower to higher frequency. Because the speed of light moving from the vacuum of space into the atmosphere changes from 3 x 10e8 m/sec to 2.997e8m/sec it forms compression waves increasing the frequency from 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite to 10.23 Mbps. No relativity is required or involved whatsoever.

On Sunday, December 31, 2023 at 5:11:04 AM UTC-8, Lou wrote:
> On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 10:13:43 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > Den 30.12.2023 20:40, skrev Lou:
> > > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> > >>>>
> > >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> > >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> > >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> > >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> > >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> > >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> > >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> > >>> from the ground.
> > >>>
> >
> > >> You have been told before:
> > >>
> > >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> The correction is specified in the
> > >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> > >>>
> > >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> > >>>
> > >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> > >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> > >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> > >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> > >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> > >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> > >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> > >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> > >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> > >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> > >>>
> > >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
> >
> > > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > > 10.23Mhz. And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> > The "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" _SPECIFIES_ that
> > the frequency standard is set to 10.2299999954326 MHz.
> >
> > Do you know what a SPECIFICATION is?
> >
> > The PRN-P code chipping rate is 10.23 Mbps measured
> > relative to GPS-coordinated time.
> > (or "- as it appears to an observer on the ground -")
> >
> > That is 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite.
> > (or "-as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -")
> Even this link says the GPS *satelitte* itself broadcasts the signal at 10.23 Mhz .
> Not at 10.22999Mhz
> https://flightcrewguide.com/wiki/navigation/gps/gps-signals/#:~:text=The%20“P”%20code%20or%20“,C%2FA%2C%2010.23%20MHz.
It would have to change from a lower to a higher frequency. Because the speed of light moving from the vacuum of space into the atmosphere changes from 3 x 10e8 m/sec to 2.997x 10e8m/sec it forms compression waves increasing the frequency from 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite to 10.23 Mbps. No relatovity required or involved whatsoever.

On 12/31/2023 2:33 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 00:13:15 UTC+1, Volney wrote:

>> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
>> 9192631770 Cs cycles
>
> No, stupid Mike, sorry, all the serious timekeeping system and clocks are
> ignoring your ideological madness. Te second is still 1/(24*60*60) of
> a day, just like it was when your idiot guru lived and mumbled.
>
Sorry, janitor, but that hasn't been true for nearly 57 years now.

SI Second: "The second, symbol s, is the SI unit of time. It is defined
by taking the fixed numerical value of the caesium frequency, ∆νCs, the
unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the caesium
133 atom, to be 9 192 631 770 when expressed in the unit Hz, which is
equal to s−1."

Since you've been told that repeatedly, what's your excuse for *still*
being wrong?

On 12/31/2023 5:27 AM, Lou wrote:
> On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 03:17:25 UTC, Volney wrote:
>> On 12/30/2023 8:07 PM, Lou wrote:
>>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 23:13:15 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
>>>>>>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
>>>>>>>>>>> or real anything.
>>>>>>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
>>>>>>>>>> or clocks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
>>>>>>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
>>>>>>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
>>>>>>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774.1 and
>>>>>>>> not 9192631770.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
>>>>>>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
>>>>>> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
>>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
>>>>>> the ground.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
>>>>> both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
>>>>> 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
>>>> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
>>>> 9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.
>>>
>>> Yes, sorry my typos. It is 9192631770.
>> And the calculations based on your incorrect value?
>>> But my point is that you say you can calculate total gains of 457 for 10.22999Mhz
>>> from the clock gains of another frequency ( that frequency being 8.9875518e+16hz
>> That number 8.9875518e+16 is not a frequency. It is c^2.
>>> which has a gain of +446 which you then use to calculate the gain
>>> of +457 for 10.22999Mhz)
>> And you have that value wrong as well.
>
> 47379129.4927 ÷ 10229999.9954= 4.63139095932
> If this above calculation and its resulting value is wrong...

What is this 47379129.4927 number? And 10229999.9954 is *still* wrong.
You need to use the exact values with all the sig figs to get things EXACT.

> Then presumably you think using the same formula as above but
> dividing into a different frequency (c^2),

c^2 is NOT a frequency!

> also gives the wrong value?
> 47379430.8842 ÷ 8.9875518e+16 (GPS) = 5.2716726e-10

GIGO. 8.9875518e+16 is NOT a frequency!
>>
>> [snip rest of GIGO]
>>
>> You are very, very confused.
>
> Not so confused as to realise that all GR does is divide potential (GM/r)
> into frequency to get a clock gain of + 5.2716726e-10

GIGO.

On 12/30/2023 2:40 PM, Lou wrote:
> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
>>>>
>>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
>>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
>>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
>>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
>>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
>>> 10229999.99543Hz
>>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
>>> from the ground.
>>>
>> You have been told before:
>>
>> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>
>>> The correction is specified in the
>>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
>>>
>>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
>>>
>>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
>>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
>>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
>>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
>>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
>>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
>>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
>>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
>>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
>>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
>>>
>>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.

> Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> 10.23Mhz.

That's because that's where the frequency to be used is DEFINED. It's
the Interface Specification Document. All other references (to 10.23
MHz) are either on the the ground/geoid frequencies or described as a
nominal frequency.

> And that it’s NOT preset before launch.

As this is where the frequency is specified, it is set by design, and
most certainly is set before launch. By Design.

On 12/31/2023 10:08 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

> It would have to change from a lower to a higher frequency. Because the speed of light moving from the vacuum of space into the atmosphere changes from 3 x 10e8 m/sec to 2.997x 10e8m/sec it forms compression waves increasing the frequency from 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite to 10.23 Mbps.

Word salad gibberish.

The speed of light 299,792,458 m/s is the VACUUM speed of light. In a
non-vacuum like air, the frequency is unchanged. Only the speed and
wavelength change.

> No relatovity required or involved whatsoever.

Sorry, but the 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is explicitly derived from
10.23 MHz using GR calculations for the satellite orbit. You're in denial.

On Sunday, December 31, 2023 at 9:35:52 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> On 12/31/2023 10:08 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>
> > It would have to change from a lower to a higher frequency. Because the speed of light moving from the vacuum of space into the atmosphere changes from 3 x 10e8 m/sec to 2.997x 10e8m/sec it forms compression waves increasing the frequency from 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite to 10.23 Mbps.
> Word salad gibberish.
>
> The speed of light 299,792,458 m/s is the VACUUM speed of light. In a
> non-vacuum like air, the frequency is unchanged. Only the speed and
> wavelength change.
> > No relatovity required or involved whatsoever.
> Sorry, but the 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is explicitly derived from
> 10.23 MHz using GR calculations for the satellite orbit. You're in denial..
The frequency and the wavelength are two sides of the same coin. The only reason the frequency changes in this case is due to the forming of the compression waves.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 18:08:52 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 12/31/2023 2:33 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 00:13:15 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
>
> >> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
> >> 9192631770 Cs cycles
> >
> > No, stupid Mike, sorry, all the serious timekeeping system and clocks are
> > ignoring your ideological madness. Te second is still 1/(24*60*60) of
> > a day, just like it was when your idiot guru lived and mumbled.
> >
> Sorry, janitor, but that hasn't been true for nearly 57 years now.
>
> SI Second: "The second, symbol s, is the SI unit of time. It is defined
> by taking the fixed numerical value of the caesium frequency, ∆νCs, the
> unperturbed ground-state hyperfine transition frequency of the caesium
> 133 atom, to be 9 192 631 770 when expressed in the unit Hz, which is
> equal to s−1."
>
> Since you've been told that repeatedly, what's your excuse for *still*
> being wrong?

Sorry, stupid Mike, take your SI second and put it
straight into your dumb, fanatic ass, where it belongs.
Outside your insane church nobody is treating it seriously
and nobody ever will. Well, even some of your brothers
in faith, like Lodder, are not THAT stupid.

Since you've been told that repeatedly, what's your excuse
for *still* being wrong?
Oh', I've forgotten, you're an idiot, you don't need any excuse.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 18:27:44 UTC+1, Volney wrote:

> As this is where the frequency is specified, it is set by design, and
> most certainly is set before launch. By Design.

It may be set to 10.2299999954326 MHz before launch,
on the orbit it's 10.23. That's what the measurement result
is, sorry, stupid Mike, good bye, The Shit.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 17:27:44 UTC, Volney wrote:
> On 12/30/2023 2:40 PM, Lou wrote:
> > On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 14:19:33 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >> Den 30.12.2023 14:22, skrev Lou:
> >>>>
> >>> Regarding GPS and Relativity... I noticed a paper, cited below from NIST,
> >>> which says that the on board satelitte oscillator broadcasts at 10.23 MHz.
> >>> (Not to 10229999.99543Mhz as normally assumed.) This is also confirmed
> >>> by a former NASA GPS engineer Larry Ortega who concurs that ,contrary
> >>> to common assumption, the on board sat clocks are NOT preset to
> >>> 10229999.99543Hz
> >>> But rather set to 10.23 Mhz and instead corrected every 24 hours
> >>> from the ground.
> >>>
> >> You have been told before:
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, 15 November 2023 at 18:20:28 UTC, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> >>
> >>> The correction is specified in the
> >>> "INTERFACE SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT" for GPS:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
> >>>
> >>> From 3.3.1.1 Frequency Plan:
> >>> "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be
> >>> coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV.
> >>> The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer
> >>> on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock
> >>> rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV --
> >>> are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates
> >>> are offset by Δf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the
> >>> P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a Δf = -4.5674E-3 Hz.
> >>> This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz."
> >>>
> >>> SV = space vehicle, satellite.
>
> > Yes. But it’s the only time in the whole paper that 1022999 is mentioned.
> > Every other reference in the paper says the sat clock broadcast frequency is
> > 10.23Mhz.
> That's because that's where the frequency to be used is DEFINED. It's
> the Interface Specification Document. All other references (to 10.23
> MHz) are either on the the ground/geoid frequencies or described as a
> nominal frequency.
> > And that it’s NOT preset before launch.
> As this is where the frequency is specified, it is set by design, and
> most certainly is set before launch. By Design.

Word salad to cover up the fact that the satelitte broadcasts its
signal...to the earth receiver...at 10.23Mhz.
As is confirmed by pretty well every tech spec from NIST etc.

On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 17:19:13 UTC, Volney wrote:
> On 12/31/2023 5:27 AM, Lou wrote:
> > On Sunday 31 December 2023 at 03:17:25 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >> On 12/30/2023 8:07 PM, Lou wrote:
> >>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 23:13:15 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>> On 12/30/2023 3:01 PM, Lou wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday 30 December 2023 at 15:51:14 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/29/2023 6:11 AM, Lou wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 20:28:04 UTC, Volney wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 12/26/2023 11:59 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday 26 December 2023 at 16:48:43 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/26/23 1:37 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> And with the advent of GPS we now know that GR shit
> >>>>>>>>>>> has nothing in common with real clocks, real observers
> >>>>>>>>>>> or real anything.
> >>>>>>>>>> Not true. We just know that Maciej Wozniak knows nothing about GPS, GR,
> >>>>>>>>>> or clocks.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Spitting and ravings won't help, poor fanatic trash. the
> >>>>>>>>> "improper" clocks of GPS will keep measuring t'=t, just
> >>>>>>>>> like all serious clocks always did.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And once again, you got it back asswards. t'≠t is the whole reason why
> >>>>>>>> the master clock divisor on a GPS satellite is set to 9192631774..1 and
> >>>>>>>> not 9192631770.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 4.1? I get 4.2 using Pauls method from his website.
> >>>>>>> 1.000000000457 × 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> 10.23 MHz (frequency received on ground)
> >>>>>> 10.2299999954326 MHz (transmitted frequency, from gps.gov website)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 10.23/10.2299999954326 = 1.0000000004464711634446932934426
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1.0000000004464711634446932934426 * 9192631770 =
> >>>>>> 9,192,631,774.1042450014705502072059
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's the divisor of a Cs clock to generate an exact 1 pps signal on
> >>>>>> the ground.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, but let’s try the same calculation using the clock gain of 457 for
> >>>>> both SR and GR from 10.22999Mhz.
> >>>>> 1.000000000457x 9192661770= 9192661774.2
> >>>> Where did you get those numbers from? The second is defined to be
> >>>> 9192631770 Cs cycles, not 9192661770.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, sorry my typos. It is 9192631770.
> >> And the calculations based on your incorrect value?
> >>> But my point is that you say you can calculate total gains of 457 for 10.22999Mhz
> >>> from the clock gains of another frequency ( that frequency being 8.9875518e+16hz
> >> That number 8.9875518e+16 is not a frequency. It is c^2.
> >>> which has a gain of +446 which you then use to calculate the gain
> >>> of +457 for 10.22999Mhz)
> >> And you have that value wrong as well.
> >
> > 47379129.4927 ÷ 10229999.9954= 4.63139095932
> > If this above calculation and its resulting value is wrong...
> What is this 47379129.4927 number?
Please note I did start off trying to be polite. But seeing as I’m talking to
someone from the gutter ( who doesn’t even know what GM/r is...)
Ever heard of GM/r ? Obviously not. Because that’s what 47379129.4927 is.
I think you are just upset that you don’t need a byzantine formulae from GR
to come up with the “clock gains” of 5.27e-10 for 4.12r. A simple GM/r ÷f
does the job just as well. Considering 5.27e-10 for 4.12r is also what GR
calculates
Oh! And by the way. You probably don’t know what 4.12 r is either.
I’ll give you a hint. It has something to do with the average orbital radius of
GPS satelittes.

> And 10229999.9954 is *still* wrong.

No more wrong then if you added a further 50 digits to the number.
Anyways my calculation used 10229999.99543.The 3 got lost in cut and paste.
But this is crybaby stuff from you. Notice pretty well every relativist reference on
it uses at most 10.229999.99543. If you are lucky. So I will too.
And if you think adding a few more digits will prove that 5.27e-10 is incorrect.
Prove it. But first you’ll have to convince all your relativists friends that their GR
calculations giving 5.27e-10 for 4.12r are also wrong.
And seeing as you are a stickler for accuracy...looks like you just proved
GR completely wrong too. Notice Neil Ashby’s paper at Pauls website admits
that the relativist calculations are way off from that observed.( last line page 16)anyways
442 ps observed. 446 predicted.

> You need to use the exact values with all the sig figs to get things EXACT.

What. As exact as GRs completely inexact prediction of 446 ps gains?
You need to stop being so anally retentive.

> > Then presumably you think using the same formula as above but
> > dividing into a different frequency (c^2),
> c^2 is NOT a frequency!
> > also gives the wrong value?
> > 47379430.8842 ÷ 8.9875518e+16 (GPS) = 5.2716726e-10
> GIGO. 8.9875518e+16 is NOT a frequency!
Since when can any number not be a frequency!!
Wow, you don’t realise frequencies can be any number
Including 8.9875518e+16 hz !!!
> >>
> >> [snip rest of GIGO]
> >>
> >> You are very, very confused.
> >
> > Not so confused as to realise that all GR does is divide potential (GM/r)
> > into frequency to get a clock gain of + 5.2716726e-10

Prove 47379430.8842 ÷ 8.9875518e+16 does not equal 5.2716726e-1
Cant? Thought not.
What’s sad is that you are unable intellectually to understand basic physics.
Note that in both my formula and GR’s the “clock gains” actually are
how much of GM/r are in each each beat in any frequency. A mathematical
construct that actually has nothing to do with time or clock gains in actuality.
So for instance in the frequency 8.9875518e+16 hz...5.27e-10 is
how much of GM/r gets divvied up if divided into 8.9875518e+16 pieces.
Don’t believe me? Try multiplying 8.9875518e+16 x 5.27e-10

On Sunday, December 31, 2023 at 9:35:52 AM UTC-8, Volney wrote:
> On 12/31/2023 10:08 AM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>
> > It would have to change from a lower to a higher frequency. Because the speed of light moving from the vacuum of space into the atmosphere changes from 3 x 10e8 m/sec to 2.997x 10e8m/sec it forms compression waves increasing the frequency from 10.2299999954326 Mbps measured by a SI-clock in the satellite to 10.23 Mbps.
> Word salad gibberish.
>
> The speed of light 299,792,458 m/s is the VACUUM speed of light. In a
> non-vacuum like air, the frequency is unchanged. Only the speed and
> wavelength change.
> > No relatovity required or involved whatsoever.
> Sorry, but the 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is explicitly derived from
> 10.23 MHz using GR calculations for the satellite orbit. You're in denial..
Anderson said it would be 10.2299999954326 at the satellite and 10.23 at the receiver; did he not?