[Rushy]

Loss of coverage at the higher latitudes, for one.

This is incorrect.

I am correct. You are incorrect to presume my knowledge comes from Wikipedia. Don't be defensive. Your statement "A GPS satellite has to be geosynchronous to function properly" is flat out wrong. You cannot get global coverage if all of your satellites are in geosynchronous orbit. Can't work.

Your knowledge did come from Wikipedia and it can in fact work. I'm not sure why you call any of this "defensive", it is merely statements of fact.

[markjo]

A GPS satellite has to be geosynchronous to function properly (its location in the sky does not change).

Incorrect.  If you have detailed orbital data, then you can calculate the position of the GPS satellite.

Calculation of Satellite Position from Ephemeris Data

[Bobby Shafto]

Loss of coverage at the higher latitudes, for one.

I *AM* incorrect. But what about what I said is incorrect?

My mistake was instigated by your incorrect assertion: "A GPS satellite has to be geosynchronous to function properly (its location in the sky does not change."

A geosynchronous constellation for global positioning WOULD be technically possible, including coverage at polar regions. However, unlike you're mistaken claim, it isn't required. In fact, it wouldn't be practical. GPS satellites are at MEO for several reasons. Polar coverage is one of them.  That doesn't contradict the statement I made that was technically incorrect.

Why?

[HorstFue]

A GPS satellite has to be geosynchronous to function properly (its location in the sky does not change).

That's not true. I don't know if a geostationary system would work.
But the problem with it would be, that all satellites would be in the same orbital plane. Partly signals would come from a similar direction, which gives glancing intersection of the measured spheres. This could degrade accuracy significantly.
Best results are obtained, if satellites, used for getting an actual position, are very well distributed across all the sky.

[Bobby Shafto]

Geostationary orbits are geosynchronous, but geosynchronous need not be geostationary.

Though he used the term geosynchronous, rushy must mean geostationary if he is talking about satellite that does not change location in the sky. Only geostationary (equatorial) satellites satisfy that characteristic. And a global system cannot be based on geostationary vehicles. Not possible.

It becomes possible if you include geostationary satellites in inclined orbit, but those will move, tracking an analemma pattern in the sky.

A constellation of geosynchronous satellites some with inclined or polar orbits could provide global navigational coverage, but would be inferior and more cost prohibitive to one with medium earth orbit vehicles.

Geostationary only? Can only provide partial globe coverage and is not the only functional orbit. MEO not only works but has significant advantages.

[Treep Ravisarras]

So if I use an app like star walk to point me to a GPS satellite and I see it moving across the sky in the same path the app shows.... what am I seeing?

Likely some form of aircraft.

This question was attempted answered in otherthread recently that I've lost track of. I guess you should define what you mean by "see it", otherwise we keep going around in circles (which isn't bad necessarily)

[RonJ]

I am a licensed commercial pilot and now also a retired Merchant Marine officer.  GPS is used in both venues for navigation.  You probably could use airplanes to transmit GPS information, but it probably wouldn't be practical.  While operating in the middle of the Pacific ocean it is not unusual to not see another vessel for a couple of days on the transit between China and California.  Usually we can receive signals from 3 to 5 GPS transmitters.  The expense and logistics for using airplanes for such a project would be excessive.  All this expense just to provide location information for a handful of ships doesn't make much sense.  Satellites would be much cheaper, and more reliable.  Of course, if there's a dome over the ocean, then satellites wouldn't be possible.  In any event the position data we get is very good.  Even the position info I get using my iPhone matches what I see on the regular ship's GPS receivers.  We usually follow a great circle route, weather permitting, while on the 7000 mile trip.  This kind of a route makes no sense on anything but a global earth.   

[inquisitive]

I am a licensed commercial pilot and now also a retired Merchant Marine officer.  GPS is used in both venues for navigation.  You probably could use airplanes to transmit GPS information, but it probably wouldn't be practical.  While operating in the middle of the Pacific ocean it is not unusual to not see another vessel for a couple of days on the transit between China and California.  Usually we can receive signals from 3 to 5 GPS transmitters.  The expense and logistics for using airplanes for such a project would be excessive.  All this expense just to provide location information for a handful of ships doesn't make much sense.  Satellites would be much cheaper, and more reliable.  Of course, if there's a dome over the ocean, then satellites wouldn't be possible.  In any event the position data we get is very good.  Even the position info I get using my iPhone matches what I see on the regular ship's GPS receivers.  We usually follow a great circle route, weather permitting, while on the 7000 mile trip.  This kind of a route makes no sense on anything but a global earth.   

Only 3 to 5? My phone picks up 15.

[RonJ]

Your phone could be capable of receiving 15 different sats, but you probably wouldn't be receiving usable signals from all of them simultaneously.  The GPS 'birds' are in continuous low earth orbit and cover the whole earth.  Only a certain combination would be visible to your phone and in use at any given time.  On a large ship we usually have the antennas mounted on a railing just above the bridge.  This makes them easy to get at in case of a failure.  Because of this, some of the antennas could be blocked in certain directions by the stack or the radar towers.   We have to be careful because the microwave radiation from the radars can interfere with the GPS signals in certain circumstances.  In any event, we usually receive usable signals anywhere in the world and even use differential GPS while near land for additional accuracy.   

[sandokhan]

The GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) can pinpoint the location of your car (with it's coordinates) within a couple of metres. Wherever you are in the world.

That is only possible because of the missing orbital Sagnac effect and of the missing solar gravitational potential effect.

GPS functions because the satellites DO NOT register the orbital Sagnac effect, and only record the Coriolis effect upon the e/m signals.

The precision of the signal would be degraded significantly had the satellites recorded the missing ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT, which is 60 times greater than the Coriolis effect.

That is why mainstream relativists are abandoning Einstein's version of relativity, and are embracing Lorentz' local-aether model to save the situation.


http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1b.pdf

This is an IOP article.

[AATW]

Interesting you provide a link to a paper which references the rotating earth.
Cherry-picking, much?

[sandokhan]

You cannot have a rotating earth if the orbital Sagnac effect is missing.

GPS technology changed everything for the relativists: now they have to deal with the missing solar gravitational potential effect and with the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

To save the situation, they have begun to accept the local-aether model (Lorentz relativity), that is why the author of the IOP article still uses the term "rotating earth".

What is the local-aether model?




The aether/ether is translational but not rotational. That is, the Earth rotates around the Sun with its ether field attached to it, which is fixed (not rotating around the Earth's axis); the ether field is being translated along with the orbit of the Earth.

This artifice permits the relativists, at first sight, to have their cake and eat it too.

Now, they can claim that the local-aether model absorbs the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

Believe it or not, this is the last stand of the relativists: a rotating Earth with a fixed local-aether field surrounding the Earth, the Modified Lorentz Ether Theory (MLET).

In order to make things even easier, the local-aether field becomes the gravitational field of the Earth which also is fixed and does not rotate around the Earth's axis.

"A Gravity-based Theory

There is, however, another theory that does not rely on the concept of an aether, but is very closely aligned with the aether theories discussed thus far. The late Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering Petr Beckmann proposed that the outdated term "aether" could be replaced with the more modern term "gravity." Clearly, a gravitational field would have characteristics very similar to a partially entrained aether. Both would cause the bending of light rays. Gravity would be strongest near the surface of the planet where the partially entrained aether was most dense. Light would still behave in the same manner, if the speed of light is constant with respect to the source of the dominant gravitational field. This would square with all of the known experimental data because in nearly every case, the observer has always been tied to the Earth-bound frame of reference—so we substitute the word "gravity" for the word "aether." Obviously gravity exists and we know that, although gravity is "emitted" by the Earth, it does not rotate with it. So this is a very plausible replacement for a partially entrained aether. It also stands to reason if we speculate that light is actually a disturbance in the gravitational field.

Dr. William Cantrell"

The local aether model (potential) thus becomes also the gravitational potential for the rotating spherical Earth.

However, this aether (potential) envelope is stationary: that is, the Earth rotates within this spherical shell of aether/ether.

But now comes the huge invalidation of this fixed local-aether model.

The magnetic field of the Earth has been proven to have BOTH NORTH-SOUTH AND SOUTH-NORTH streams of particles.



Until recently, it was thought that the streams travelled ONLY in the south to north direction.



The lines of force issue forth from the south pole, arc through space, and re-enter at the other end, the north pole.

The magnetic field of the Earth HAS TO rotate together with the Earth:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/127766/does-the-geomagnetic-field-rotate

The gravitational field of the Earth does not rotate with the Earth:

The phenomenal work done by SPINTRONICS proved that there are TWO STREAMS OF PARTICLES, south-north AND north-south:

SPINTRONICS, secret world of magnets, the most thorough work on the double helix theory of the magnetic field (double helix of the telluric currents):

https://freeenergycommunity.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/the-secret-world-of-magnets-spintronics-2006-howard-johnson.pdf





This mysterious SECOND STREAM/FLUX OF PARTICLES was already described in 1903 and 1904 by E.T. Whittaker: it is the gravitational string of the electrogravitational field of the Earth.

The electrogravitational field has magnetic waves AND ALSO gravitational waves.

This is the missing part of the unified field theory.

E.T. Whittaker proved mathematically the existence of the electrogravitational potential, the bidirectional longitudinal waves.

They travel/propagate in double torsion fashion.

No physicist to date has observed this crucial fact: the magnetic wave and the gravitational wave form a single structure, the electrogravitational field. The gravitational potential consists of bosons which flow through dextrorotatory subquarks (electrons), and the electromagnetic potential is made up of bosons which propagate through laevorotatory subquarks (positrons).

This fact then allows us to immediately state that the Earth does not and could not rotate around its own axis: it is stationary.

Since the electrogravitational field is comprised of the two waves in a double torsion form (the gravitational + the electromagnetic waves) THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER AT THE SAME RATE, in order for its effects to be observed/recorded.

One (the gravitational field) cannot be stationary, while the other (the magnetic field) rotates at a certain rate: the bidirectional waves which comprise this lattice would be decoupled in an instant.

THEY HAVE TO ROTATE TOGETHER. In the case of heliocentrism, one of them HAS TO BE STATIONARY, WHILE THE OTHER ONE ROTATES.



But these constitute only HALF of the field lines of a magnet.






There two flows of subquarks/magnetic monopoles: South-Center-North AND North-Center-South.

The modern study of the magnetic field/electromagnetism ONLY includes the South to North flow.

Yet, there are TWO continuous streams of different particles.

What, then, is the nature of the SECOND flux of particles?

https://web.archive.org/web/20160203121514/http://www.electricitybook.com/magnetricity/hojo-leed.jpg

"Magnetic current is the same as electric current is a wrong expression. Really it is not one current they are two currents, one current is composed of North Pole individual magnets in concentrated streams, and the other is composed of South Pole magnets in concentrated streams, and they are running one stream against the other stream in whirling, screw like fashion, and with high speed."


Modern science only studies one of these streams.


Whittaker proved that the potential consists of pairs of bidirectional longitudinal scalar waves, and that the same equation governs both gravity and magnetism.


The second flow/stream of particles IS THE GRAVITATIONAL WAVE, which has a dextrorotatory spin. Both flows/streams form the ELECTROGRAVITATIONAL FIELD.


The spherical orbiting Earth has a STATIC gravitational field and a ROTATING magnetic field.

But in reality BOTH have to be rotating.

That is why the local-aether model cannot be true.

[markjo]

The GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) can pinpoint the location of your car (with it's coordinates) within a couple of metres. Wherever you are in the world.

That is only possible because of the missing orbital Sagnac effect and of the missing solar gravitational potential effect.

GPS functions because the satellites DO NOT register the orbital Sagnac effect, and only record the Coriolis effect upon the e/m signals.

The precision of the signal would be degraded significantly had the satellites recorded the missing ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT, which is 60 times greater than the Coriolis effect.

Actually, the Sagnac effect, as well as other relativistic effects, are considered in GPS calculations.

The Sagnac Effect in the Global Positioning System

Abstract

In the Global Positioning System (GPS) the reference frame used for navigation is an earth-centered, earth-fixed rotating frame, the WGS-84 frame. The time reference is defined in an underlying earth-centered locally inertial frame, freely falling with the earth but non-rotating, with a time unit determined by atomic clocks at rest on earth’s rotating geoid. Therefore GPS receivers must apply significant Sagnac or Sagnac-like corrections, depending on how information is processed by the receiver. These corrections can be described either from the point of view of the local inertial frame, in which light travels with uniform speed c in all directions, or from the point of view of an earth-centered rotating frame, in which the Sagnac effect is described by terms in the fundamental scalar invariant that couple space and time. Such corrections are very important for comparing time standards world-wide.

[RonJ]

I would agree that a GPS system could be constructed using a whole bunch of aircraft, but it wouldn't be practical.   The logistics of operating the fleet of aircraft necessary for good coverage of the earth would be substantial.  Additionally, they would have to have a place to takeoff and land.  Multiple countries now have GPS systems and I have personally used the American and Russian ones in the middle of all the earth's major oceans.  Multiple airports, world wide, would be necessary and they would also have to be kept a completely secret as to their location.  Pilots would know of their presents because sooner or later they would have to be given vectors for avoidance purposes when the GPS 'aircraft' had to return to land for service.  Additionally GPS orbits are published and the speeds necessary to complete those published orbits are way beyond any known aircraft types.  There's just too many 'facts' about the system that I've seen with my own eyes to believe that the system is not composed of satellites.  For someone that only uses the GPS in a car or to do a little geocaching, or Pokemon hunting I could see where it really wouldn't matter much.  As for me we depended on accurate GPS position data for our very lives while at sea.  We took the operation and maintenance of our GPS receivers seriously.

[sandokhan]

Actually, the Sagnac effect, as well as other relativistic effects, are considered in GPS calculations.

Let us see the formula which N. Ashby puts forth in front of his readers:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.615.3798&rep=rep1&type=pdf (page 10)



But this is the Coriolis effect formula: area x angular velocity.

You haven't done your homework on this one either.

In fact, Ashby himself accepts the fact that the correction is caused by the Coriolis effect:

"In the rotating frame of reference the effect appears to arise from a Coriolis-like term in the fundamental scalar invariant." (page 19 from the paper).




It is not the ROTATIONAL SAGNAC EFFECT they are measuring, in fact it is the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

No rotational Sagnac effect is being observed/recorded.

No orbital Sagnac effect is being registered at all.

That is why the relativists are accepting the local-aether model.

[markjo]

It is not the ROTATIONAL SAGNAC EFFECT they are measuring, in fact it is the CORIOLIS EFFECT formula.

No rotational Sagnac effect is being observed/recorded.

No orbital Sagnac effect is being registered at all.

Your own source says that Sagnac-like corrections are unavoidable so the corrections are applied by the GPS receiving unit.  GNSS even takes this, and other relativistic effects, into account in the engineering requierments.

Another relevant phenomena is the so-called Sagnac effect which concerns the propagation of electromagnetic signals in rotating reference frames. For the case of the GNSS, the Sagnac effect can amount to about 100 nanoseconds, corresponding approximately to 30 meters. Thus, satellite positioning systems provides the means to test the current theory of relativity. GPS has already been used to test the isotropy of the speed of light with a great precision and with the expected clocks improvement in the GNSS System it is expected to improve the test of the violation of the Local Positioning Invariance (LPI).

[sandokhan]

You haven't studied the subject.

The "Sagnac" effect is not needed at all if light anisotropy is assumed:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170426170819/http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/apr/article/viewFile/30130/17851

But the correction mentioned by Ashby is NOT the rotational Sagnac effect: it is, in fact, the Coriolis effect of the ether drift upon the e/m signal.

[Humble B]

But the correction mentioned by Ashby is NOT the rotational Sagnac effect: it is, in fact, the Coriolis effect of the ether drift upon the e/m signal.

Coriolis effects only occur above surfaces that are:

A- Visible
B- Rotating.

If the surface of your earth is visible, but not rotating, there will be NO Coriolis effect above that surface.
If your drifting ether is rotating, but not visible, it will NOT create a Coriolis effect.

When a drifting ether exert a force on moving objects and e/m waves, then this force should not be confused with the Coriolis force.

In case of a real Coriolis effect the moving object or electromagnetic waves travels in a straight line, and therefore both (mass & wave) can be subject of the same Coriolis effect.

Physical objects have mass and that mass gives them "inertia". To overcome inertia and change the trajectory of a physical object we can use a real force
Electromagnetic waves have no mass, so no inertia, and are not sensitive to forces that can change the kinetic energy of physical objects with mass.

Example:
To change the velocity and trajectory of a football, we can kick it with our foot.
But we cannot change the velocity and trajectory of an Electromagnetic wave by kicking, pushing or pulling it. That won't work, that wave will go on moving with the same speed and in the same direction, no matter how hard we kick it.

The experiments you are referring only talk about a change in "velocity of the propagation path" as a result of propagation through an ether field, not about a change from a linear to a curved propagation path, that is theoretically impossible, because waves always move in a straight line trough a medium.

And here falls your theory apart: When the Coriolis effect on earth is observed to have the same effect on electromagnetic waves as it has on objects with mass, then this can only be explained with a rotating earth (bcs here both keep moving in a straight line), not with ether drift. Because a medium like ether can change the velocity of an electromagnetic wave, but that will not change its trajectory from "straight" into "curved". And forces that can curve the path of a physical object do not influence propagation of electromagnetic waves.

Bottom line: A medium like ether can change the velocity of an electromagnetic wave, but can not make that wave follow a curved trajectory. That's why the researchers you are using to legitimise your ether-drift theory will never abandon their spinning earth as the sole explanation for the observed Coriolis effect.

[sandokhan]

Because a medium like ether can change the velocity of an electromagnetic wave, but that will not change its trajectory from "straight" into "curved".

You must be dreaming.

Dr. Ludwik Silberstein calculated the PRECISE deflection due to the Coriolis effect on a light beam:

dt = 4ωA/c^2

It is a physical effect.

Only the Sagnac effect will cause the modification of the velocity of the light beams.

You are most forgetful.

Michelson and Gale recorded ONLY the Coriolis effect, and not the rotational Sagnac effect.

That is, the Earth does not rotate: only the Coriolis effect of the ether drift was registered by the fringe shifts of the interferometer.

If your drifting ether is rotating, but not visible, it will NOT create a Coriolis effect.

But it will: you need to understand the hydrodynamic ether equation.

“This implies an important conclusion: bodies of different volumes that are in the same gradient medium acquire the same acceleration.

Note that if we keep watch on the fall of bodies of different masses and volumes in the Earth’s gravitation field under conditions when the effect of the air resistance is minimized (or excluded), the bodies acquire the same acceleration. Galileo was the first to establish this fact. The most vivid experiment corroborating the fact of equal acceleration for bodies of different masses is a fall of a lead pellet and bird feather in the deaerated glass tube. Imagine we start dividing one of the falling bodies into some parts and watching on the fall of these parts in the vacuum. Quite apparently, both large and small parts will fall down with the same acceleration in the Earth’s gravitation field. If we continue this division down to atoms we can obtain the same result. Hence it follows that the gravitation field is applied to every element that has a mass and constitutes a physical body. This field will equally accelerate large and small bodies only if it is gradient and acts on every elementary particle of the bodies. But a gradient gravitation field can act on bodies if there is a medium in which the bodies are immersed. Such a medium is the ether medium. The ether medium has a gradient effect not on the outer sheath of a body (a bird feather or lead pellet), but directly on the nuclei and electrons constituting the bodies. That is why bodies of different densities acquire equal acceleration.

Equal acceleration of the bodies of different volumes and masses in the gravitation field also indicates such an interesting fact that it does not matter what external volume the body has and what its density is. Only the ether medium volume that is forced out by the total amount of elementary particles (atomic nuclei, electrons etc.) matters. If gravitation forces acted on the outer sheath of the bodies then the bodies of a lower density would accelerate in the gravitation field faster than those of a higher density.

The examples discussed above allow clarifying the action mechanism of the gravitation force of physical bodies on each other. Newton was the first to presume that there is a certain relation between the gravitation mechanism and Archimedean principle. The medium exerting pressure on a gravitating body is the ether.”


Now, an unbelievable fact.

HERE IS THE GPS USER NAVIGATION INTERFACE MANUAL:

http://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200H.pdf

NO SAGNAC EFFECT IS MENTIONED AT ALL.

The only term which looks like a correction is found on page 97:

-2RV/c², where R is the position vector of the SV (space vehicle), and V is the velocity of the SV.

NO ANGULAR VELOCITY OF THE EARTH IS INVOLVED.

That is, the user manual treats the entire system AS IF the Earth is stationary.

The e/m signal from the satellite will encounter the ether drift: both a physical effect (Coriolis) and an electromagnetic Sagnac effect (density of ether at different altitudes) on the linear/translational/uniform light path.

A medium like ether can change the velocity of an electromagnetic wave, but can not make that wave follow a curved trajectory.

Your lack of knowledge is what is preventing you from reaching the correct conclusions.

Dr. Silberstein revealed the error committed by M. von Laue in the paper published in 1911:

"Laue seems, by the way, to be under the misapprehension that the light rays relative to the rotating table are straight lines, which they are not."

In 1921, Dr. Silberstein proposed that the Sagnac effect, as it relates to the rotation of the Earth or to the effect of the ether drift, must be explained in terms of the Coriolis effect: the direct action of Coriolis forces on counterpropagating waves.

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Michelson-Gale/Silberstein.pdf

The propagation of light in rotating systems, Journal of the Optical Society of America, vol. V, number 4, 1921

Dr. Silberstein developed the formula published by A. Michelson using very precise details, not to be found anywhere else.

He uses the expression kω for the angular velocity, where k is the aether drag factor.

He proves that the formula for the Coriolis effect on the light beams is:

dt = 2ωσ/c^2

Then, Dr. Silberstein analyzes the area σ and proves that it is actually a SUM of two other areas (page 300 of the paper, page 10 of the pdf document).

The effect of the Coriolis force upon the interferometer will be to create a convex and a concave shape of the areas: σ1 and σ2.

The sum of these two areas is replaced by 2A and this is how the final formula achieves its final form:

dt = 4ωA/c^2

A = σ1 + σ2

That is, the CORIOLIS EFFECT upon the light beams is totally related to the closed contour area.

In 1922, Dr. Silberstein published a second paper on the subject, where he generalizes the nature of the rays arriving from the collimator:

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Historical%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Electrodynamics/Download/2645

In 1924, one year before the Michelson-Gale experiment, Dr. Silberstein published a third paper, where he again explicitly links the Coriolis effect to the counterpropagating light beams in the interferometer:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14786442408634503

[inquisitive]

Your phone could be capable of receiving 15 different sats, but you probably wouldn't be receiving usable signals from all of them simultaneously.  The GPS 'birds' are in continuous low earth orbit and cover the whole earth.  Only a certain combination would be visible to your phone and in use at any given time.  On a large ship we usually have the antennas mounted on a railing just above the bridge.  This makes them easy to get at in case of a failure.  Because of this, some of the antennas could be blocked in certain directions by the stack or the radar towers.   We have to be careful because the microwave radiation from the radars can interfere with the GPS signals in certain circumstances.  In any event, we usually receive usable signals anywhere in the world and even use differential GPS while near land for additional accuracy.   

In view 17 in use 14.