Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: In 1911, EInstein thought that photons had mass. Still in use 123
 years after,
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 20:17:54 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 187
Message-ID: <vc789d$2a51h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <b0788923a07a14a4d1cd494533f4ae12@www.novabbs.com>
 <vc4sa1$1lsnl$1@dont-email.me>
 <8add4994ad042201cb3d9096a43136c2@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 20:16:14 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fd3eb00c7a065c5523992bdf06bce5cf";
	logging-data="2430001"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19deoKGUcZUMUAcrDUZ4FJM"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:imke0lUodP+U+60LDiD58+wllhM=
In-Reply-To: <8add4994ad042201cb3d9096a43136c2@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 7900

Den 15.09.2024 00:15, skrev rhertz:
> 
> Paul.b.Andersen wrote:
> 
>> Den 14.09.2024 05:31, skrev rhertz:
>>> 
>>> Δf/f₂ = hγ/c²
>>> 
>>> Which is the same equation used in the 1961 Pound-Rebka experiment, 
>>> the 1971 Hafele-Keating experiment and MANY MORE, like in the 2017
>>> Mudrak theoretical paper for calculations of the GR effect on 
>>> Galileo GNSS. 

>> 
>> You mean this paper:
>> https://paulba.no/pdf/RelativisticCorrectionsInGalileo.pdf
>> 
>> The equation given in this paper is:
>> 
>> Δf/f = (GM/c²)(1/a - 1/r) + ((aΩ)² − v²)/2c²
>> 
>> The gravitational term is: Δf/f = (GM/c²)(1/a - 1/r)
>> 
>> Which is _very_ different from Δf/f₂ = hγ/c²
>> 

So I caught you in the lie that Einstein's 1911 equation
was used in Mudrak's paper.

> Paul, how fragile your memory is!

Both your an my memories are just fine.

You haven't forgotten that I caught you in a lie,
but you are trying to divert the attention from it!

> 
> You forgot that I was the one who noticed you about the existence of the
> Mudrak's paper, 3 years ago!

Of course I haven't forgotten.

> Mudrak (an EE like you) was full of shit and anger when he wrote that
> paper. He was MAD because the Galileo Consortium decided TO NOT
> INCORPORATE RELATIVISTIC CORRECTIONS INTO THE GROUND RECEIVERS. They
> left the "responsability" to the receiver's manufacturers, WHICH DIDN'T
> WANT TO FOLLOW GR.

You seem very confused. :-D
"RELATIVISTIC CORRECTIONS INTO THE GROUND RECEIVERS".

The "corrections in the ground receivers" are done in exactly
the same way in GPS and Galileo.
The monitor stations upload parameters in a correction polynomial
to the SV. The SV downloads these parameters to the receiver.
The receiver calculate the correction to add to the SV-clock time
received from the SV.

You can read all about it in the Interface Specification Documents
https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200N.pdf
https://www.gsc-europa.eu/sites/default/files/sites/all/files/Galileo_OS_SIS_ICD_v2.1.pdf

I hardly think Mudrak was "full of anger" because the corrections
were done as specified in the Interface Control Document. :-D

And I can't imagine what your mean by the statement:
"They left the "responsability" to the receiver's manufacturers,
  WHICH DIDN'T WANT TO FOLLOW GR."

And I bet you don't know either.

------------------

But do I remember that you was the one who noticed you about
  the existence of the Mudrak's paper, 3 years ago!

Yes I remember it very well:


05.09.2021 Paul B. Andersen wrote:
|
|> Den 05.09.2021 08:50, skrev Richard Hertz:
|>
|> https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF03404697.pdf
|
| Thanks for a very interesting paper!
|
|
| And this paper answers the question we have been wondering about:
| "Is the satellite clock corrected for relativistic effects?"
|
| Let's quote from the paper:
| "At the time of writing, the frequency of the Galileo
|  satellite clocks is not corrected to compensate
|  the relativistic shift, unlike GPS. Nevertheless,
|  the capability to adjust the satellite clock frequency,
|  e.g. in order to align it to GST, is available. Galileo
|  onboard clocks will be periodically aligned to GST both
|  and phase and frequency to maintain these parameters
|  within the limits acceptable from the system operations
|  point of view. Furthermore, as an experiment, the relativistic
|  frequency shift of GSAT0102 (PRN E12) was corrected in orbit,
|  after launch."
|
| I quote from a previous conversation:
|
| | On July 15, 2021 Paul B. Andersen wrote:
| |> Den 14.07.2021 05:56, skrev Prokaryotic Capase Homolog:
|
| |>> A number of years ago, Paul Andersen had given a link
| |>> to a description of the tunable frequency synthesizers
| |>> used in current GPS satellites.
| |>> Although the earliest GPS satellites could not be
| |>> fine-tuned, current satellites -are- tunable.
| |>> The nominal frequency offset mentioned in the GPS
| |>> ICD is merely that: a -nominal- frequency offset.
| |>>
| |>
| |> The paper at the mentioned link doesn't seem to be
| |> available any more, but here is another paper about
| |> the same issue:
| |>
| |> https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a485237.pdf
| |>
| |>   "The purpose of the GPS Block II-R TKS shown in Figure 1
| |>    is to tune the 10.23 MHz digitally controlled VCXO to produce
| |>    the GPS navigation signal with the timing accuracy of RAFS.
| |>    By linking the VCXO to the RAFS using a control loop controlled
| |>    by software, it is possible to precisely adjust the frequency
| |>    and phase of the TKS output, to cancel drift of the RAFS once
| |>    it has been characterized, and to detect any anomalous RAFS
| |>    frequency or phase excursions."
| |>
| |> TKS  = Time Keeping System
| |> RAFS = Rubidium Atomic Frequency Standard
| |>
| |> I think such a TKS has been in all Block II satellites,
| |> and I strongly suspect that there is a similar system
| |> in Galileo satellites.
|
| So I was right. It is a "similar system" in the Galileo
| satellites that make it possible to tune the frequency
| after launch. And the satellite clock frequency is adjusted
| by the factor -4.7219E-10 to align it to the GST (Galileo
| System Time).

And the rate of the Galileo SV clocks not only can be,
but are adjusted by the factor -4.7219E-10

| 06.09.2021 Paul B. Andersen wrote:

|> Open this link:
|> https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/5/1695/pdf
|> see fig.8 page 11.
|>
|> The clock offset (a_f1) will be the dominating factor
|> in the clock correction.
|>
|> The GSAT0222/E13 clock correction has been almost constant
|> ≈ -500 μS since April 2019 to January 2021,
|> The clock has been ≈500 μS ahead of System time all the time.
|>
|> The GSAT0220/E33 clock correction has been almost constant
|> ≈ +380 μS since February 2019 to January 2021,
|> The clock has been ≈380 μS behind  System time all the time.
|>
|> The GSAT0221/E15 clock correction has decreased from
|> ≈ +900 μS in February 2019 to ≈ 820 μS in January 2021.
|> That's an average rate error of the clock ≈ 0.1 μS/day
|>
|> The GSAT0219/E36 clock correction has decreased from
|> ≈ +750 μS in February 2019 to ≈ 420 μS in January 2021.
|> That's an average rate error of the clock ≈ 0.5 μS/day
|>
|> So the clock frequencies must have been corrected by
|> the factor -4.7219E-10.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========