I was unable to find any public docs dating from the very earliest times (they were probably classified). I did find one history that mentioned that the major correction is built into the satellite's clocks in the first place.
This sheds some light into the controversy
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a516975.pdf
George
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a516975.pdf
George
I saw this but missed the reference [1] dated 1951. This was an optional MIT text that made my head explode.
This is relevant, shorter and more recent
https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=904814
George
There was a big fuss when they tested that* back in about 1996 and it knocked out a load of US cellular networks. As GSM in europe was rolled out before GPS was considered as a stable time source they all had atomic references. As US came a few years later to the digital party some of them used GPS with little or no backup from traditional timing sources.
So the belief in telco circles is that selective availability has been agreed not to be deployed over continental USA. Personally I prefer the more official line that the FAA lobbied hard for it as they wanted GPS assisted landing for planes.
* This 'test' was supposedly a war scenario of completely banjaxing things rather than the std error that was put in so that missiles would miss the whitehouse.
What comes out from what I have read, compensation of most of the relativistic effects is done by software at the GPS receiver.
Without Relativity, GPS Would Be Lost | Engineering360
Where are how are GPS relativistic corrections applied? - Quora
(every paper makes reference to Neil Ashby)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...VPUB-C13-83ec647d39931e27e1a786845bb825c2.pdf
Bill, go through the two links at post #121, you will see how things progress and what is planned for the near future.
Currently for aviation, go to WAAS as Wayne wrote.
George
Without Relativity, GPS Would Be Lost | Engineering360
Where are how are GPS relativistic corrections applied? - Quora
(every paper makes reference to Neil Ashby)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg...VPUB-C13-83ec647d39931e27e1a786845bb825c2.pdf
Bill, go through the two links at post #121, you will see how things progress and what is planned for the near future.
Currently for aviation, go to WAAS as Wayne wrote.
George
Love it. Those blokes my kinda people.
I'm going for the Dr. Morgus talent replicator so I can play like SRV.
YouTube
-
They still do of course. The FAA sends out emails when system testing or interference testing is happening. Most of it here is around Edwards and outside Las Vegas (Area 51) probably aliens.
-
I recently heard a plausable explanation for faster than light.
It came from the relativists camp so should be acceptable to all.
(Its not that silly TWT bunching thing either.)
The idea is the two remote linked particles are obsvered as one and modeled as one, time of flight and speed are factored out.
Thats a keeper for now.
-
I recently heard a plausable explanation for faster than light.
It came from the relativists camp so should be acceptable to all.
(Its not that silly TWT bunching thing either.)
The idea is the two remote linked particles are obsvered as one and modeled as one, time of flight and speed are factored out.
Thats a keeper for now.
-
I note that the latest spec birds dont even have SA GPS.gov: Selective Availability
I can't find a reference for the test in the 90s that took out IIRC most of californias mobiles but there is this from more recently What Happens If GPS Fails? - The Atlantic
Mobile phones really shouldn't work, and that's from someone who spent half his career working on the network technology!
It is not. That's yet another red herring propagated by those that are living with the belief that reading Scientific American makes them QM experts.
It was long mathematically demonstrated that quantum entanglement does not collide with a) special relativity/light speed limit and b) causality principle. Quantum entanglement produces correlation between measurements, and the mutual information between the entangled particles can be exploited, but any transmission of information at faster than light speeds is still impossible and not required to explain what's happening.
Part of the confusion is coming from the common understanding of the "measurement" concept. While in the macroscopic world "measurements" are essentially functions that map a state variable to real (or complex) numbers, meaning that a "measurement" always implies a transfer of information, and the system under test is not perturbed in any way, in QM "measurements" (aka "observables") are auto adjoint operators that change the quantum system state from one eigenstate to another. These "measurement" operators have real eigenvalues, which can be determined by a "meter".
P.A.M. Dirac said:
Now how on earth somebody without a basic understanding of linear operators algebra, Hilbert spaces, etc... believes it can intelligently discuss QM. Flash news: it's not possible other than at pub discussion level.
Last edited:
I lost track of a really wonderful article by a British scientist explaining this soon after one of the benchmark experiments years ago. No transporters, sorry. For some reason I have no problem at all with the double slit experiment or with the slits for that matter.
Waly I think the energy is not conserved in this discussion.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.