Re: The old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy

On 6/30/2025 7:51 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
 > Den 28.06.2025 23:29, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
 >> On 6/28/2025 9:22 PM, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
 >>  > Den 27.06.2025 10:34, skrev Maciej Woźniak:
 >>  >> On 4/10/2025 10:41 PM, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
 >>  >>
 >>  >>  > GPS clocks are adjusted down by (1 - 4.4647e-10)
 >>  >>  > so the adjusted clock will measure a mean solar day
 >>  >>  > to last 86400 s, and the clock will stay in sync with UTC.
 >>  >>
 >>  >> That's right - the clocks made for serious measurements
 >>  >> are adjusted (calibrated) to count seconds of 1/86400
 >>  >> of a mean solar day.
 >
 >>  >> Quite right.
 >>  > The GPS-SV clocks are indeed made for serious measurements.
 >>  > And the designers of the GPS understood that they
 >>  > had to adjust the clocks down by ((1 - 4.4647e-10) to
 >>  > make the SV-clock stay in sync with UTC and would have
 >>  > measured 86400 seconds in a mean solar day.
 >
 > And then it should be obvious that if the clock had not
 > been adjusted down by (1 - 4.4647e-10), then it would have
 > measured a mean solar day to last 84600.000037771 seconds.
 >
 >>  >  > The Galileo-SV clocks are also made for serious measurements.
 >>  > And the designers of the Galileo GNSS understood that they
 >>  > had to adjust the clocks down by ((1 - 4.7218e-10) to
 >>  > make the SV-clock stay in sync with UTC and would have
 >>  > measured 86400 seconds in a mean solar day.
 >
 > And then it should be obvious that if the clock had not
 > been adjusted down by  (1 - 4.4647e-10), then it would have
 > measured a mean solar day to last 84600.000039946 seconds.
 >
 >>  >  > The GLONASS-SV clocks are also made for serious measurements.
 >>  > And the designers of GLONASS understood that they
 >>  > had to adjust the clocks down by ((1 - 4.3582e-10) to
 >>  > make the SV-clock stay in sync with UTC and would have
 >>  > measured 86400 seconds in a mean solar day.
 >
 > And then it should be obvious that if the clock had not
And then it should be obvious that
1)no serious clock is relying on your ISo
idiocy  (QED, common sense has been warning
your bunch of idiots)
2)the relativistic idiot is desperately
trying to change the subject
3)and he is completely unable to distinguish
between what is - and what would be if; lost
completely in his delusional gedankenland,
as expected from a relativistic idiot.