Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Electron size, shape and spin.Confusion and conflicts with Einstein's
 1905 SR.
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 23:33:47 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <43d5f4c5dc0bb6403360e6d899866f5b@www.novabbs.com>
References: <8d05bbe123c740f2934b31e367a92231@www.novabbs.com> <65006a73bc196736fbec3d54e21fa717@www.novabbs.com> <vr9tmf$q4vi$1@dont-email.me> <0c0b2bb49434e61879858abed2b9d6c2@www.novabbs.com> <vrbtgj$2k1q7$1@dont-email.me> <a1b3bbfca4b1e9797d98903a77f0cf59@www.novabbs.com> <f58a6ba75e73908078c5576f74ffe329@www.novabbs.com> <9ed9e92086e0d99fde7d81edfced643a@www.novabbs.com> <0082c223a6c8e6952b11ec32b83c473b@www.novabbs.com> <d38ac7fb8de3a1e3c8f08908a6e1953a@www.novabbs.com> <40f0e2c10ed1e2c2d24989b4c7917802@www.novabbs.com> <vrf73v$1iffb$1@dont-email.me> <c6032fd09dd139befbdfc8b5d8b477b6@www.novabbs.com> <vri0qb$30cv$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1056294"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="OjDMvaaXMeeN/7kNOPQl+dWI+zbnIp3mGAHMVhZ2e/A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$ME6CJ0oFp7Ul8sOypQjw.esy8xqhPYwK1L/VqhnwqB3Aajua0l.nC
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 26080b4f8b9f153eb24ebbc1b47c4c36ee247939
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 11295
Lines: 259

On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 21:24:30 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

> Den 19.03.2025 22:38, skrev rhertz:
>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 19:53:36 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>>
>> <snip all the repeated crap. I left this part as a sample of your
>> idiocy>
>>
>>> You claim to be an engineer.
>>> When an engineer by practical measurement finds that the SV clock
>>> runs too fast by Δf/f = 4.425e-10, wouldn't he correct the problem
>>> by adjusting the clock down by  Δf/f = - 4.425e-10 ?
>>>
>>> What would the engineer Richard Hertz do?
>>> Claim that the measurements must be wrong because he did't
>>> get the expected result, and give up the GPS project?
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> You are an engineer too.
>>
>> The other imbecile wrote that BOTH Cs clocks are locally running at
>> 10,230,000.000000 Hz. But THIS IS NOT WHAT RELATIVISTS CLAIM.
>
> No, that was what YOU said.
> I was responding to your scenario:
>
> Richard Hertz wrote:
> |- Suppose that the time of the onboard Cs clock is measured
> |   by accumulating  counts of cycles of the 10.23 Mhz master
> |   TCXO clock. This, to accumulate  pulses with a period of
> |   97.7517 nsec during 86,400 sec, requires an  onboard
> |   digital counter displaying 883,872,000,000 counts (12 digits).
> |   Such  data,  at the end of the 24 hours period MUST be sent
> |   down to Earth station,  where  a twin Cs clock is also counting
> |   pulses in sync with the onboard Cs clock.
> |   Will a comparison differ in 389 LOST PULSES (38 usec)?
>
> You say that the reference frequency is 10.23 Mhz, but in
> a GPS SV clock the reference frequency is: 10.2299999954326 MHz
>
> So the clock you describe is an ordinary clock running
> at the rate defined by SI.
> After 86,400 seconds the clock will show 86,400 seconds,
> and your counter would have counted 86400*10.23e6 = 883872000000 cycles,
> just as you correctly states.
>
> An ordinary SI-clock will obviously always show 86400 seconds
> when it has been running for 86400 seconds.
> It doesn't matter if the clock is in a satellite, on the ground
> or on the moon.
>
> --------------------------
>
> But let us see if we can find your missing pulses.
> A "solar day" is defined as the time between each time the sun
> passes the same meridian. Let us suppose that we are at one
> of the two times of the year when a solar day by a clock
> at Earth's geoid is measured to be 86400 seconds.
>
> A normal clock with rate as defined by SI which is in GPS orbit
> will according to GR measure a solar day to be
>    86400*(1+4.4647e-10) s = 86400s + 38.575μs
>
> Note that this means that the SV clock will be 38.575μs
> more ahead of the ground clock every day.
>
> The number of pulses from the oscillator counted by your counter
> will then be  86400*(1+4.4647e-10)*10.23e6 = 883872000394 pulses.
>
> The counter on the ground will count 86400*10.23e6 = 883872000000
> pulses from the local oscillator.
> So the counter in the SV will count 394 pulses more.
>
> There are your missing counts.
>
> -------------------------
>
> Your blunder was that you didn't realise that a "day" measured
> by the clock in the SV is 38.575μs longer that a day measured by
> a clock on the ground. This is THE central point.
>
> So when you specified that the counter should count the pulses
> during 86400 seconds, you missed the pulses sent during the 38.575μs.
>
> That's why I wrote:
>
> "If the satellite counter is counting the cycles from the 10.23 MHz
>   oscillator for 86,400 sec measured in the satellite, then:
>   the satellite counter counts 883872000000 cycles"
>
>
>>
>> They claim that the onboard TCXO master clock was tuned to
>> 10,229,999.995430 Hz,
>> with a difference of 0.00457 Hz wrt the Earth'c clock.
>
> Right. But in your scenario you specified an uncorrected clock.
>
> In a real GPS satellite the reference oscillator is adjusted down
> by the factor (1-4.4647e-10) so it will measure the number of second
> during a solar day to be (86400s + 38.575μs)*(1-4.4647e-10) = 86400s
>
> So it will stay in sync with the ground clock.
>
>>
>> Clock on Earth station: accumulates 883,872,000,000 pulses in 86400 sec
>> (1 day).
>
> Right.
>
>>
>> Clock on GPS SV: accumulates 883,871,999,605 pulses in 86400 sec (1
>> day).
>
> It accumulates 883872000000 pulses in (86400s + 38.575μs) (1 day)
>
>>
>>
>> The STUPID CLAIM OF RELATIVISTS is that the frequency L1 (1575.42 Mhz),
>> which is GENERATED BY MULTIPLYING THE MASTER FREQUENCY OF 10.23 Mhz by
>> EXACTLY 154 is what ALLOWS THAT SUCH CARRIER REACHES EARTH AS IF IT WAS
>> GENERATED BY THE ONBOARD Cs CLOCK WORKING AT 10,229,999.995430 Hz,
>> creating an L1 carrier at the GPS SV of 1,575,419,999.29622 Hz.
>
> What are you talking about?
> All the frequencies in the SV are derived from the reference
> frequency 10.2299999954326 MHz.
> There is no "MASTER FREQUENCY OF 10.23 Mhz" in the SV.
>
>  From the Interface Specification Document.
> ------------------------------------------
> 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.
>
> The "common frequency source within the SV" is 10.2299999954326 MHz.
>
> The main reason for the GR correction is to make the SV clock
> run synchronously to UTC.
> (Or to the GPS coordinated time which is the same as UTC but for
> a known offset)
>
>>
>> When that GPS carrier reaches Earth, it has been shifted (by the
>> mathemagics of relativity) to EXACTLY 1,575,412 Hz = 10,230,000 Hz x
>> 154.
>
> When the carrier reaches the receiver it is Doppler shifted
> up to  Δf/f = ± 1e-7  , up to 200 times the GR correction.
>
> The frequency of the carrier is irrelevant, the receiver
> must have bandwidth enough to receive the carriers from
> up to 12 satellites. The carriers are all Doppler shifted
> differently.
>
> The satellites are not separated by their frequency, but
> by their PRN sequence.
>
> The frequency that is important is the shipping rate,
> since this frequency is used by the receiver to calculate
> the time when the signal was transmitted.
>
> But you don't know how that is done, do you?
>
>
>>
>>
>> Dou you understood what I wrote above, imbecile?
>
> I understand that there is nothing you can't misunderstand.
>
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========