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.
Your hint is incorrect, as they are being used and as for now you cannot give a valid alternative for them. Geostationary orbits have been explained to you before, yet you do not understand them, we get that. They are outside of the atmosphere, hence little or no friction to slow them, they are moving at a speed that matches the Earths spin, how does this work you say, well if it is moving fast enough in one direction with pretty much zero friction then it will continue to move at that speed. It is also being pulled towards the Earth by gravity, but with the speed it is traveling somewhat perpendicular to the Earth, it basically falls around the Earth. It is only achievable above the equator since it is orbiting in the same direction as the Earth is spinning (geostationary that is).'geostationary satellites are stationary relative to the rotation of the earth.' Enough such that any movement does not affect reception.and i have explained, at length, why it is absurd to suppose they can be stationary with respect to anything. Yet again I must ask you to actually pay attention and read.
Why do you not want to tell us information from a broadcaster regarding the location of their transmitter on an airship, plane etc. and the channels broadcast that we assume come from a satellite?
What information are you looking for? They're not going to make it public knowledge where the balloons etc they claim are satellites really are, are they? If you want me to calculate it, why? I don't have access to the angles of two dishes from sufficiently far away. If it's easy to find out that information, why don't you do so and do the calculations? If the answer is so useful to you, then find it and report back, otherwise you're openly just wasting time.
Your error bars that you mentioned can easily be corrected though. Please do not mistake difficulty with impossibility.
I said: "Now, would you care to explain how a satellite counts as stationary? By definition it needs to be moving around the earth at ungodly speeds. You'd need to get it to the altitude where it's going at exactly the speed of the earth (impossible: the errors bars on ascent, altitude, resistance would add up), and keep it there, and prevent it slowing at all, given how quickly any change would add up. It seems far more realistic to suppose a more manageable system. Even if satellites were a valid option (hint: they're not) they'd be far too unwieldy to use like you're supposing."
Error bars were only one reason: also, by definition, they cannot be corrected for: that's what error bars are, the distance from the expected result. The only way to correct for them constantly would be a near infinite amount of fuel on the satellite.
And the fact is, even if satellites were possible, they wouldn't be used for this: the difficulty in doing so is absurd, for very little gain.
What makes you think they are ludicrous? I guess you do not accept anything that doesn't involve air not being real, or fairies being a hoax, or clouds being a projection. Unless everything has to do with aether, you do not accept it. I know you say the aether talks to you, sort of, but voices in your head do not count as evidence.The explanations I've seen are ludicrous: hence why I am asking the question. If, as you insist, it's so easy to find a good answer to my questions, why are you incapable of providing one?Why do you always want someone to answer here rather than looking yourself for an explanation of eg. geostationary satellites?The operation of geostationary satellites is well documented.Not relatively stationary, absolutely stationary (which kills off your entire list other than towers). Triangulate the signals from different sources. Understand how those signals travel and bounce off the reflector. All shows that they come from high above the atmosphere, in what we like to call orbit(which kills off the towers). Next explanation, those do not work.Nothing is absolutely stationary. I would love to hear how you expect that to work. I have already asked this. Is an answer forthcoming?QuoteSince you ran away from the other forum because you refused to answer questions and then claimed people were illiterate, why do you come to spew on this board now? Because there are less people here to ask questions that you will not answer? I think so.I left that forum because, like you and Inquisitive are doing here, you refuse to respond to any of my questions when I answer all of yours, and you claim victory when you have no ground to stand on. When people are more interested in insulting than discussing, I leave.
If you cannot answer my questions just admit it.
You obviously didn't read my post correcting the poor choice of phrasing there.Not relatively stationary, absolutely stationary (which kills off your entire list other than towers). Triangulate the signals from different sources. Understand how those signals travel and bounce off the reflector. All shows that they come from high above the atmosphere, in what we like to call orbit(which kills off the towers). Next explanation, those do not work.Nothing is absolutely stationary. I would love to hear how you expect that to work. I have already asked this. Is an answer forthcoming?QuoteSince you ran away from the other forum because you refused to answer questions and then claimed people were illiterate, why do you come to spew on this board now? Because there are less people here to ask questions that you will not answer? I think so.I left that forum because, like you and Inquisitive are doing here, you refuse to respond to any of my questions when I answer all of yours, and you claim victory when you have no ground to stand on. When people are more interested in insulting than discussing, I leave.