Re: In 1911, EInstein thought that photons had mass. Still in use 123 years after,

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.
You probably don't understand what I am talking about,
but I won't bother to explain.
You invariably stay clueless whatever I say.
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/