Einstein Proven Wrong, Yet Again

originally posted by: Nochzwei
...as i had anticipated ignoramuses like augustus and terry don to raise those issues.

Oh, man, that's f**king rich. I actually had to do the proverbial "lol" at my desk here

originally posted by: Zimnydran
To the OP...... See that GPS on your phone..... if Einstein was wrong.... you would get lost every time you use it... or worse

mate, stick to the op, ive addressed the gps issue

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: Reverbs

Ive dealt with the gps issues. stick to he op, where there is no mention of gps, as i had anticipated ignoramuses like augustus and terry don to raise those issues. i dont blame them tho, as the misconceptions abound. unfortunately tptbs plan of dunmbing down is working, looks like

So you're saying me, AM and other members are "ignoramuses" because YOU can't prove yourself right and we can (quite easily) prove you wrong?

It's quite funny actually, watching you NOT prove GR wrong lol.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

You really need me to explain this to you?

GPS,
Satellites,
ISS,
Other space craft,
Computers,
And a whole host of other things wouldn't work correctly if GR was wrong.

If you really want to, we can go over those one at a time

There no point. You'll just dismiss it without actually countering it. Same rubbish you always do.

"GR is bunk!" but never offer any explanation.

"GR doesn't work!" but never show why.

Where's your equations to counter GR?

Oh, that's right. A silly YouTube video of a heater is your "proof". LOL!

So are you making a tactical retreat?

a reply to: Nochzwei

Will you answer LetsGoViking's post? It's a good opportunity for you to educate and help everyone here understand your point.

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

You really need me to explain this to you?

GPS,
Satellites,
ISS,
Other space craft,
Computers,
And a whole host of other things wouldn't work correctly if GR was wrong.

If you really want to, we can go over those one at a time

There no point. You'll just dismiss it without actually countering it. Same rubbish you always do.

"GR is bunk!" but never offer any explanation.

"GR doesn't work!" but never show why.

Where's your equations to counter GR?

Oh, that's right. A silly YouTube video of a heater is your "proof". LOL!

So are you making a tactical retreat?

No. I'm pointing out the fact that you don't EVER answer questions. You just dismiss them. Just look at your replies about GPS lol.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

So all the unmanned GPS satellites are functioning because of "trial and error"?

I guess you can prove that?

While your at it, prove "GR is bunk".

empirically applied correction to gps receivers. how dumb can you be, eh

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

So all the unmanned GPS satellites are functioning because of "trial and error"?

I guess you can prove that?

While your at it, prove "GR is bunk".

empirically applied correction to gps receivers. how dumb can you be, eh

Instead of just wasting time, prove it.

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: Nochzwei
...as i had anticipated ignoramuses like augustus and terry don to raise those issues.

Oh, man, that's f**king rich. I actually had to do the proverbial "lol" at my desk here

Lol, hope your boss didnt witness it

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Nochzwei

Will you answer LetsGoViking's post? It's a good opportunity for you to educate and help everyone here understand your point.

Once again, i dont waste my time on bunk equations. people discuss the op only, no need to troll

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Nochzwei

Will you answer LetsGoViking's post? It's a good opportunity for you to educate and help everyone here understand your point.

Once again, i dont waste my time on bunk equations. people discuss the op only, no need to troll

And there's your classic reply.

Why don't you answer the question or show where it's wrong? Is it because you can't?

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

So all the unmanned GPS satellites are functioning because of "trial and error"?

I guess you can prove that?

While your at it, prove "GR is bunk".

empirically applied correction to gps receivers. how dumb can you be, eh

Instead of just wasting time, prove it.

do your home work yourself. talk to the us navy branch that flies those satelleites.
enough of gps, stick to the op.

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

So all the unmanned GPS satellites are functioning because of "trial and error"?

I guess you can prove that?

While your at it, prove "GR is bunk".

empirically applied correction to gps receivers. how dumb can you be, eh

Instead of just wasting time, prove it.

do your home work yourself. talk to the us navy branch that flies those satelleites.
enough of gps, stick to the op.

The OP is about GR and how you haven't proven it wrong. GR is used in GPS, therefore, I'm on topic. It's not my fault you can't prove it wrong, even though you keep trying.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Nochzwei

Will you answer LetsGoViking's post? It's a good opportunity for you to educate and help everyone here understand your point.

Once again, i dont waste my time on bunk equations. people discuss the op only, no need to troll

And there's your classic reply.

Why don't you answer the question or show where it's wrong? Is it because you can't?

be my guest and believe as you please. you are trolling mate

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Nochzwei

Will you answer LetsGoViking's post? It's a good opportunity for you to educate and help everyone here understand your point.

Once again, i dont waste my time on bunk equations. people discuss the op only, no need to troll

And there's your classic reply.

Why don't you answer the question or show where it's wrong? Is it because you can't?

be my guest and believe as you please. you are trolling mate

I'm not trolling. You just refuse to answer any question or provide any evidence as to why GR is wrong. It's not my fault you can't do it.

a reply to: Nochzwei

There is no such thing as a "bunk" question.

You've an opportunity here to educate, because apparently you're seeing something no one else is...

That is one hell of an opportunity. Much like Einstein did with his theories...

So.

Ball. Your court. Have at it.

Question for the OP: Can you at least identify which of Einsteins field equations you would use to prove that GR doesn't match this particular observed reality?

From my understanding GPS satellite clock time dilation relative to ground doesn't really matter, is dealt with implicitly by using at least 4 sat signals in the position calculation. This assumes that sat clocks are in sync relative to each other (perfect circular orbits, same orbital velocity).

In reality GPS sat orbits are eccentric and you have to apply relativistic corrections. For this purpose the sats are sending their orbital parameters: semi-major axis, eccentricity of the osculating orbit, eccentric anomaly. Ignoring this relativistic correction results in a 13m range and 20m height error.

See: www.navipedia.net...
GPS Interface Control Document (Page 88): www.navcen.uscg.gov...

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Nochzwei

So all the unmanned GPS satellites are functioning because of "trial and error"?

I guess you can prove that?

While your at it, prove "GR is bunk".

empirically applied correction to gps receivers. how dumb can you be, eh

Instead of just wasting time, prove it.

do your home work yourself. talk to the us navy branch that flies those satelleites.
enough of gps, stick to the op.

He can't because he doesn't understand thr math involved. Seen this argument from him before. Gps actually uses Einstine equations well two of them actually. Gps satellites orbit at roughly 20000 km and has an orbital speed of about 14,000 km/hour. Roughly one orbit every 12 hours. As a side note they aren't in geosynchronous orbits like most people assume. There is just alot of them believe it's currently around 30. Meaning anywhere on the globe you can access at least 4.

Now there is two effects that must be accounted for yo get the acuracy needed. To acurately use them for location the clocks have to be acurate to within say 20 nanoseconds but our satellites are constantly in motion. Special Relativity predicts that the on-board atomic clocks on the satellites should fall behind clocks on the ground by about 7 microseconds per day. Amazingly they do because of the slower ticking rate due to the time dilation effect of their relative motion. So as predicted our clocks on the ground tick more slowly being closer to a massive object ie the earth. So just being further from earth calculations tell us that the ground-based clocks will get behind by 45 microseconds per day.

So now we have motion causing time dilation and of course gravity. So our satellites lose 7 microseconds a day compared to ground based clocks. And ground clocks lose 45 microseconds a day do to being closer to ears center of gravity. Meaning we take 45 microseconds and subtract 7 microseconds giving us the adjustment we need to make of 38 microseconds. So daily our ground clocks will get 38 microseconds behind we solve this through software. This would be impossible if it wasn't for Einstines equations.

But Ill tell you what if the op believes he has a better equation than Einstine by all means let's hear it. We can do the math and see if our GPS will be acurate. Oh and his argument this has nothing to do with the op is stupid it's thr exact same experiment.

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: Nochzwei
a reply to: Reverbs

Ive dealt with the gps issues. stick to he op, where there is no mention of gps, as i had anticipated ignoramuses like augustus and terry don to raise those issues. i dont blame them tho, as the misconceptions abound. unfortunately tptbs plan of dunmbing down is working, looks like

So you're saying me, AM and other members are "ignoramuses" because YOU can't prove yourself right and we can (quite easily) prove you wrong?

It's quite funny actually, watching you NOT prove GR wrong lol.

Hey people stick to the contents of the op alone.
And no more of phd friend in NIST knowing some chow mein experimenter, or any other of GR sheites, black holes, gps, SATELLEITES, SPACE PROBES, lensing and what have you. this thread is about the contents in the op.