Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Not clear if he saying he just loses internet access. GPS receiver will show satellites being received from, he needs to check that. Not just NASA claiming number of satellites, other systems used.There is no doubt how GPS worksTL is suggesting the opposite.
The maps themselves are downloaded from the internet, the current position shown will be from a GPS receiver. Correct?Google Maps uses data connectivity over your cellphone connection. Unconnected with GPS which receives from about 20 satellites from US, Europe and China systems.You are mistaken about this. While it's true that it can and does use supplementary sources of information to improve its accuracy, it "normally" uses GPS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Maps_Navigation
Google Maps uses data connectivity over your cellphone connection. Unconnected with GPS which receives from about 20 satellites from US, Europe and China systems.@totallackey Yes I do use GPS while driving.At times, I find my Google maps on my smartphone (and when I used it, my Garmin) would mysteriously lose signal.
It seems the signal loss would occur in the exact same areas I would lose cell phone connectivity.
Strange, don't you think OP?
Slight problem is when multiple observations are made of the angle of the sun from different places at the same time and then repeated though the day.Empty "plain", not empty "plane".You are mistaken about this.I have a simple question that should be easy to answer: Why at sunset do I see the shadow line slowly crawl up a mountainside facing the sun? In the flat earth models I've seen, this doesn't make sense.It's just a different example of the same phenomenon as the "cloud lit from underside" section of https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration
Well, it makes it meaningful, but it also makes it immediately false (and I had warned you this would be the case, so I guess you just wanted to be wrong).What is the value of the acceleration?
You already know that the satellites are not geostationary, and that therefore this velocity cannot be constant - the figure you provided is likely an average or estimate. You should have been able to put 2 and 2 together there, really.
Funnily enough, the document you quoted (but forgot to read) confirms this. The first FAQ in supplementary information reads as follows (emphasis mine):Q - At different positions in its orbit, a GPS satellite will have differing speeds relative to different GPS receivers. Given this, do we need to adjust the speed used in the equation for time dilation to account for this variation?
A - In principle, we do need to use a different value for v in Equation 1 depending on the precise speed of a given satellite relative to a particular receiver. However, the speed of the satellites (3874 m/s) is much larger than the speed of a GPS receiver as it moves with Earth’s rotation (465 m/s at the equator). Differences in the values of the relative speed between a satellite and a receiver result in variations in the amount of time dilation of just 1% at most and so are insignificant for the current accuracy of the GPS.
You also know that, in RET, they orbit the Earth, and are thus subject to acceleration. You'll really struggle to find one without the other...
Your claim that they do not accelerate is amazingly nonsensical, and you'd do well to fix it. The answer above might provide you with a less terrible claim to make. I would strongly suggest reading it before citing it again - it actually has some good ammunition for your position once you've understood it. Plus, it's generally good practice not to quote-mine papers for something you think agrees with you without reading them and checking that it actually does.
Finally, I missed this gem earlier:It does not depend on your assumptions or anyone else's.Of course. After all, it's not like these would look differently in different inertial and non-inertial FoR. We can just ignore that. Oh, wait...
BillO, remember my usual advice: if you didn't understand what someone has said, simply ask them to clarify. No need to go on a tirade about how right you think you are.
Worth adding that GPNSS receivers give details of each satellites location and there are 4 separate systems in use.The multiple relativistic effects experienced by GPS are (primarily) due to relative velocity and a difference in gravitational potential. Your argument might hold some water if the satellites were geostationary, but they're not.I'm genuinely fascinated by what you think GPS satellites are and how they work. As you say, they're not geostationary, they are said to be satellites orbiting the globe earth. Obviously you can't believe that, so what do you think they are and how do they work?
How many satellites is it receiving GPNSS from and from what countries - US, China, Russia, Europe?Hi I am wajeeh, and I believe earth is flat as I havent seen any of the evidence found regarding round shaped earth but I stuck at satellites and how GPS works thing. can any flat earther explain if there is no satellite how GPS works?Do you use a smartphone?
Yes I am using smartphone.
There is no reason to doubt the existence of the ISS, there is enough information from reputable sources. Similarly clearly satellites exist and either orbit the earth like GPNSS ones or stay in the same position relative to us to give us satellite TV.Can we just agree that I cannot prove that any of these people have been on an ISS which is orbiting the globe and you can't prove they haven't?We can't, not for as long as you present these as philosophically equivalent. You can't prove a bombastic claim you've made. I can't prove something that's unprovable, and which you're unfairly suggesting I should prove.
It has everything to do with burden of proof. You made a claim you can't prove, and your best defence is that I can't prove you wrong.
I can see the future, but the moment I speak about it or act on it in any way, the future changes. I can't prove it, but you can't prove it's not true!
I am friends with an ethereal kangaroo that only I can see. I can't prove it, but you can't prove it's not true!
I have personally flown to space and confirmed that the Earth is flat by flapping my arms very fast. I couldn't take photos because I was flapping my arms very fast. I survived the trip, although I'm not sure how. Can't prove it, you can't prove me wrong.
It's one of those "heads I win, tails you lose" types of reasoning, you see.Maybe I wasn't clear but I meant someone with credibility. [...] what are their credentials to do so? Do they have any credibility?If "credentials" are your way of assessing someone's credibility, be prepared to get scammed multiple times in your life.Are they ex-NASA whistleblowers?At least one of them is, and hasn't died in an unfortunate accident just yet. Then again, after a prolonged disappearance he came back with seemingly worsened mental health. Crazy how that happens.Do they have the relevant skills in analysing images or video?In my assessment, yes, many of them do. Mind you, that doesn't make them right. That's why "credentials" are a shit determinant.Or are they just confirmation-biased fuelled conspiracy nuts?It must be so blissful to be able to dismiss people you don't like with a bunch of insults, and to just carry on with your life without thinking about it.
Then which globe model does it say on the tin?WGS-84
1. LEGO experiment link states vaguely that several feet of curvature is accounted for . Which model , pearshape or squashed ball or imaginary R= 6370km is used in this curvature correction?3. Not according to the documentation and information provided by receivers. Do China and Russia have balloons over the USA?
Could just be allowance for topography .
2. Yes , as stated before WSG is a mathematical ellipsoid surface used to model a globe ,with all vertices converging at earth's supposed centre of gravity . Where is that in whichever ellipsoid model used?
3. High altitude craft , balloon satellites , signals reflected of the dome, triangulation masts.
4. It's easy to brainwash young people . That's what schooling is about . Critical thinking is not part of the curriculum hence people cannot question what they are told they know .
i
Wgs84 is a mathematical defined surface that approximates the geoid which itself is a model based on the assumption that earth is some sort of pear shape or oblate spheroid.It's use is to map the earth as some sort of globe . Tom is correct imo .There is no assumption of shape, we accurately know it. A sphere.
This globe is then flattened to produce workable maps and to allow gps to function.
The flat earth geocentric model is used in all endeavors that involve navigation or survey . Geodesy is system of measure of earth based on the assumption of it's shape.
The shape of earth is easily measured by survey that doesn't have to include any atmospheric refraction or assumption of shape . Surveyors take no account of ( cannot find ) any curvature over any area of 100sq. miles - because we live on a plane .
Refractive distortion provides a smoke screen for the non existence of the globe . That is why science uses a coefficient of atmospheric refraction based on figures that cannot be accurate.
And:The WGS-84 model is the proven shape.
Your WGS84 geographic syestem is a flat map management system:
http://www.boshamlife.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/PrimeMeridian.pdf
“ By 1911, the Greenwich meridian had been accepted as the prime meridian for the whole world. However, relating the maps of an individual country or region to a standard system of latitude and longitude is not only difficult, it is nearly impossible. The earth is approximately spherical, but maps are flat. They are fitted as closely as possible to the surface of the earth in one region, but when fitting them to a standard system of latitude and longitude, there are bound to be slight discrepancies. The differences between the coordinate systems used by different maps really didn’t matter until recently. When the GPS system was introduced in the 1980s, it was realised that having dozens of ‘local’ systems of latitude and longitude for different countries wasn’t going to work. A single coordinate system had to be devised, which would give the best results for every part of the world. It is known as WGS 84 (World Geodetic System 1984). ”
AllAroundTheWorld (also mentioning RonJ's post)The WGS-84 model is the proven shape.
thanks for posting that video. But, it really doesn't help the discussion about flatness or not because the experiment again does not address the impact of refraction in a satisfactory manner. One of the FE persons tries to talk about it ( naming it mirage effect or something like that) and the "science" guy just smiles condescendingly. At the end, everybody, on both side of the debate, felt confirmed in their opinion. Come to think of it, that was utterly foreseeable and one has to blame the "science" guy.
As I said before, line-of-sight experiments like the Bedford level and Lady Bount experiments are only really useful when the atmospheric conditions including temperature and humidity gradients have been measured accurately or when the atmospheric conditions do not come into play in the first place like with LIGO with its vacuum tubes. Also, the post by RonJ about establishing microwave links must be taken into account. We have those links all over the world and they are working and they take earth's curvature into account.
Does anybody know of more things being built which have to take earth's curvature into account ?
Interestingly enough, comments from the FE side have not been definite in this thread although they should be shaking to their core. Guess I am rattling the cage here hoping that something constructive falls out.
Bit surprising that GPS works exactly as documented.Asking the people that build and operate GPS would be a good start.What if the conspiracy that regards the entire space community being NASA shills is true, or that you truly believe it is true. What then would be the point of asking the conspirators?
Asking the people that build and operate GPS would be a good start.If the Earth is flat, how can a G.P.S. satellite stay afloat? Or the I.S.S., for that matter?
There are several different FE models so there are many ways to answer this question so i'll just give a few
-there is no such thing as a satellite
-They are attached to the dome
-they are high altitude balloons
-they are orbiting earth in outer space because of gravity
-they are just planes or other high altitude mechanical devices sending out their signals
Dear TomWhy do you have a problem understanding satellite communication?
I'm probably a lot older than you. Here's some science ! Back when the dinosaurs roamed we watched TV with these funky rabbit ears, now we point this stupid round disc thingy in a direction and get the same thing only a box monitors our outflow of evil MONEY.
Stop being foolish. You couldn't point one of these miniature disc's within 5 thousand miles of a sat, if in fact it could float in the same location 25,000 miles up. Which it can't, no such thing dog, pass the blunt again. Live TV broadcast, no fricken latency, no delay to cut the nude streaker or murder in progress. Once the signal is out, it's available. The things peeps are asked to believe....amazing !!!Time for you to explain how the satellite dishes, that millions have, work. Check the angles. Identify the transmitter(s).
Do you consider the WGS-84 model to be incorrect?That's not true. By definition, they are projections of the Earth. You (and possibly the authors of some maps, notably excluding the "azimuthal equidistant projection") assume that the original shape of the Earth is your favourite shape.
Saying that the Earth is round because it is round is not gonna help us here.
I agree and this is the same point that i'm making. Even in the RE model there are like multiple shapes the earth could be such as a sphere, spheroid, oblate spheroid, globe etc.
People constantly look at something, such as a 2d map which is widely accepted as a map of the earth, and proudly proclaim EARTH IS A SPHERE! What about a spheroid? What about an oblate spheroid? What about some other shape?Fixed it for you:
If you project a Sphere Earth onto a flat plane map then the flat plane represents the Sphere Earth on a flat plane.
If you project a globe Earth onto a flat plane map then the flat plane represents the globe Earth on a flat plane.
If you project a spheroid Earth onto a flat plane map then the flat plane represents the spheroid Earth on a flat plane.
If you project an oblate spheroid Earth onto a flat plane map then the flat plane represents the oblate spheroid Earth on a flat plane.
You didn't fix anything. I had basically said the exact same thing here:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=15083.msg196532#msg196532
The shape of the earth is still moot.
If you project the earth (of any shape) onto a flat plane map then the flat plane map represents the earth (of any shape).
Tom, you asked 'producing independent, repeatable, and conclusive evidence that the earth is a globe.'They ask "Can the genie ever be put back into the bottle?"Surely that exists with the WGS-84 model?
Yes. By producing independent, repeatable, and conclusive evidence that the earth is a globe.
Are you talking about the system with the small flat maps? https://wiki.tfes.org/World_Geodetic_System_1984
I don't see what that has to do with the video in the thread.
They ask "Can the genie ever be put back into the bottle?"Surely that exists with the WGS-84 model?
Yes. By producing independent, repeatable, and conclusive evidence that the earth is a globe.
