-
I have 3 GPS units, all made by different companies, marine on my boat, in my car, and a hand held used for hiking. If there are no satellites, how do all GPS units, tell the person EXACTLY where they are in the world within 10 feet? The marine unit tells me the depth of the water, and where all the channels are...within 5 feet. And as soon as I take the antenna off, it doesn't work. As soon as I go under a bridge....IT DOESN'T WORK. So, tell me how it works. Also, depending on the time of day, it will tell you which of the several satellites you are linked with....and will give you a signal of each one. I've had up to 5 or 6 linked at once, and the more that are linked, the better it will give your position.
And another question. If there is no gravity....how does the sun and moon stay in the air? Why haven't we ran into it if the earth is accelerating upwards. You'd think we would have hit the sun by now. What holds it up there?
Also, why doesn't the ice fall of the edge? If the ice holds the water in....what holds the ice on the edge? Why doesn't it fall off too?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
-
wait......FA's dont believe in satellites??
-
Pseudollites---I love all these made up words you guys have. Please show me a picture of the "supposed" pseudollites. Why doesn't it work when I'm under a bridge? Why is it when I'm in my Chevy Avalanche, and I'm under a tree, Onstar can't pick out my location....but as soon as I move out from under the tree....they can.
-
im still lost....FA's dont believe in satellites???
why not?
even if the earth was flat(which its not) you can still have satellites
-
wait......FA's dont believe in satellites??
Nope, if they could some how get a high powered telescope and look at it...they'd assume it was a hologram or something.
-
wait......FA's dont believe in satellites??
Orbit is not possible, as earth is not round. I would have thought that fairly obvious.
Pseudollites---I love all these made up words you guys have.
Made up words (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite). ::)
Why doesn't it work when I'm under a bridge?
Why doesn't your car radio work when you are under a bridge?
Why is it when I'm in my Chevy Avalanche, and I'm under a tree, Onstar can't pick out my location....but as soon as I move out from under the tree....they can.
Again, bad reception from the radio signals.
-
im still lost....FA's dont believe in satellites???
why not?
even if the earth was flat(which its not) you can still have satellites
No, because satellites orbit the earth. Depending on how far they are from the surface, their speed is increased. Geosynchronous orbit is where Dish Network, and DirectTV satellites are. The distance matches the orbit so it is stationary. Funny how if my Dish Network dish moves 1cm and it loses signal. Bet they don't have an answer for that one.
-
wait......FA's dont believe in satellites??
Orbit is not possible, as earth is not round. I would have thought that fairly obvious.
Pseudollites---I love all these made up words you guys have.
Made up words (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite). ::)
Why doesn't it work when I'm under a bridge?
Why doesn't your car radio work when you are under a bridge?
Why is it when I'm in my Chevy Avalanche, and I'm under a tree, Onstar can't pick out my location....but as soon as I move out from under the tree....they can.
Again, bad reception from the radio signals.
What kind of radio do you have? My radio ALWAYS works under a bridge. It has NEVER gone out under a bridge. I installed audio equipment in cars back in the 90's...and even those radios didn't fade under bridges. Satellite radio however....Does not. But regular FM/AM...works fine under any bridge in the world.
-
so let me get this straight......sputnik the Russian first ever satellite is non existent?
why would they want to make that up?
-
so let me get this straight......sputnik the Russian first ever satellite is non existent?
why would they want to make that up?
To win the space race.
What kind of radio do you have? My radio ALWAYS works under a bridge. It has NEVER gone out under a bridge. I installed audio equipment in cars back in the 90's...and even those radios didn't fade under bridges. Satellite radio however....Does not. But regular FM/AM...works fine under any bridge in the world.
Then your GPS receiver is not as good quality as your car radio.
-
so let me get this straight......sputnik the Russian first ever satellite is non existent?
why would they want to make that up?
To win the space race.
What kind of radio do you have? My radio ALWAYS works under a bridge. It has NEVER gone out under a bridge. I installed audio equipment in cars back in the 90's...and even those radios didn't fade under bridges. Satellite radio however....Does not. But regular FM/AM...works fine under any bridge in the world.
Then your GPS receiver is not as good quality as your car radio.
That did not win them the first space race, putting the first man in space did.
Sputnik was made to take pictures of the US
-
Sputnik made the Gagarin story more plausible. And yes. The space race was really a photoshop/film studio type technology race. To control the media, is to control the world. Its worth winning.
-
Sputnik made the Gagarin story more plausible. And yes. The space race was really a photoshop/film studio type technology race. Controlling the media is to control the world.
what now your saying the Russians never sent the first man to space?
-
You need to go back to reading up on this site. I shouldn't have to do this much spoon feeding.
-
You need to go back to reading up on this site. I shouldn't have to do this much spoon feeding.
The FA theory is stupid I swear, how do yo8u believe in this crap.
I still stand by MY THEORY. you guys actually dont, just addicted debaters who live for this crap
-
The fact you keep calling it FA in every thread is stupid. It is FE. As in Flat Earth!.
I still stand by MY THEORY. You are an internet troll who has never been near a MiG-25, but it hasn't stopped you insisting you have.
-
The fact you keep calling it FA in every thread is stupid. It is FE. As in Flat Earth!.
I still stand by my theory. You are an internet troll who has never been near a MiG-25, but it hasn't stopped you insisting you have.
I have been far more than just near a Mig-25, I been inside and took off and landed so suck it
-
The fact you keep calling it FA in every thread is stupid. It is FE. As in Flat Earth!.
I still stand by my theory. You are an internet troll who has never been near a MiG-25, but it hasn't stopped you insisting you have.
I have been far more than just near a Mig-25, I been inside and took off and landed so suck it
Of course you have.
-
The fact you keep calling it FA in every thread is stupid. It is FE. As in Flat Earth!.
I still stand by my theory. You are an internet troll who has never been near a MiG-25, but it hasn't stopped you insisting you have.
I have been far more than just near a Mig-25, I been inside and took off and landed so suck it
Of course you have.
thanks for agreeing comrade
-
my boat
Off topic, but what kind of boat do you have?
And for your question about the Sun and Moon staying up:
This is answered best by the Aetheric Wind model (referred to by Mrs. Peach as Tausami Tsunami). In this model, aether, a form of matter not unlike gas or water but, due to high kinetic energy, is not effected by van der Waals forces and is incredibly fluid, with a viscosity of near zero. The aether is moving at ~9.81 m/s2 into the vacuum of infinity, comparable to the RE'er's universal expansion. The Earth moves up in the direction of the infinite vacuum. As the aether moves past the Earth, however, it leaves a vacuum and falls back down in a whirlpool to get rid of it. The Sun and Moon travel on the edge of this whirlpool, but cannot fall down it because when the aether reaches the center of the whirlpool, it shoots back up. In addition, the Sun and Moon need less to hold them up, because they are smaller (imagine a ceramic cup. Now imagine a ceramic cup the size of a house. Which will need stronger winds to be moved?).
-
Orbit is not possible, as earth is not round. I would have thought that fairly obvious.
Orbit may not be possible, but sustained spaceflight is. I would have thought that fairly obvious. ;)
-
Orbit is not possible, as earth is not round. I would have thought that fairly obvious.
It is in the AW model, however. I'll have to put some thought into the conspiracy.
-
Orbit is not possible, as earth is not round. I would have thought that fairly obvious.
It is in the AW model, however. I'll have to put some thought into the conspiracy.
What's an AW model?
-
What's an AW model?
An attractive female that holds rootbeer for promotional advertisements.
-
the FAQQERS are good at inventing things with no evidence. (How Zetetic of them)
They claim space travel is impossible, something like you would hit this massive space wall (sound familiar)
The ONLY reason they claim this is if any kind of space travel is possible it debunks the vast majority of their claims.
Space travel is very possible, even in a disc earth.
-
What's an AW model?
An attractive female that holds rootbeer for promotional advertisements.
(http://www.nopatternrequired.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/AWVINTAGEADBROWSER_thumb.jpg)
Notice the image of the globe at the bottom of this ad-vertisement, complete with children from all over the world (including continents not even depicted). There is something disturbingly sinister in that image.
-
so let me get this straight......sputnik the Russian first ever satellite is non existent?
why would they want to make that up?
To win the space race.
What kind of radio do you have? My radio ALWAYS works under a bridge. It has NEVER gone out under a bridge. I installed audio equipment in cars back in the 90's...and even those radios didn't fade under bridges. Satellite radio however....Does not. But regular FM/AM...works fine under any bridge in the world.
Then your GPS receiver is not as good quality as your car radio.
NO, you're gonna have to do better than that. I used a bridge as an example. A tree, a building, a sheet of wood held over the antenna.....WILL BLOCK IT. Even on my $4500 Raymarine unit for my boat. A radio however, is NOT blocked.
Also, how is it that my Dish Network dish....pointed at the southern sky, loses signal if I knock it off 1mm. Anyone in the US cannot receive signal unless they have a view of the southern SKY. Funny how when you point the dish....everyone in the US points it in the same direction....TO A SATELLITE!!! If you don't believe me....go tap someones dish and see if they don't come out to see what hit it. Radio signals do not behave that way.
-
This is a map of earth.
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth-1.png)
Around the edge (south) you will notice an ice wall. This is a place where few people can go. The psuedollites are arranged around the ice in a circle around earth allowing triangulation. This is why your dish must point the shortest distance towards South for TV etc.
As for reception problems, these are all down to a cheap and poor quality receiver. GPS radio waves are no different to any other radio waves. They can be obstructed and blocked. You should not be so tight when making consumer choices.
-
This is a map of earth.
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth-1.png)
Around the edge (south) you will notice an ice wall. This is a place where few people can go. The psuedollites are arranged around the ice in a circle around earth allowing triangulation. This is why your dish must point the shortest distance towards South for TV etc.
As for reception problems, these are all down to a cheap and poor quality receiver. GPS radio waves are no different to any other radio waves. They can be obstructed and blocked. You should not be so tight when making consumer choices.
I shouldn't be so tight on my purchase? I have a 36ft Sea Ray Sundancer, appraised at over $160k. The Raymarine unit was over $4,000. So if the GPS unit is in fact radio waves, how does it know my location? My radio, that does NOT lose reception under a bridge doesn't know if I'm in the water or on land. But the GPS does lose reception if it blocked for the sky above. Radio waves CANNOT give a location. GPS units however....can, because it doesn't detect radio waves.
-
You probably need to do a little more research on GPS or demand a refund then...
-
You probably need to do a little more research on GPS or demand a refund then...
What good would that do? There isn't a GPS unit made in the world that doesn't lose reception if its obstructed. The reason is very simple, its because its getting a signal from something in the sky....a satellite.
-
Well, heaven knows, it's a miracle that your GPS works at all without radio waves.
-
I'm a flat earther that believes in satellites. They are simply caught in aetheric tides above the earth.
Ski is 100% correct in that GPS uses radio signals. All you need for GPS to function are some accurate clocks and some radio transmitters / receivers.
-
GPS satellites transmit two low power radio signals, designated L1 and L2. Civilian GPS uses the L1 frequency of 1575.42 MHz in the UHF band. The signals travel by line of sight, meaning they will pass through clouds, glass and plastic, but will not go through most solid objects such as buildings and mountains.
This has been my report on GPS I hope you liked it thank you.
-
I'm a flat earther that believes in satellites. They are simply caught in aetheric tides above the earth.
Ski is 100% correct in that GPS uses radio signals. All you need for GPS to function are some accurate clocks and some radio transmitters / receivers.
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
-
i was on a first aid course today and the instructor told us something u may find of interest, especially if u live in the uk and us. for an emergency you now dial 112 for a better response. ill leave out the other more imortant reasons as they have little relevance but:
112 boosts the phone signal for upto 1 min after your call aswell as letting you call in the first place. the person who takes the call can then triagulate your position within 3m. this is simply using phone masts and signals so the same can then be applied to gps
-
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
Incorrect. That would verify the sources appear to be moving.
-
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
Incorrect. That would verify the sources appear to be moving.
How does one make a stationary radio source appear to move? You do realize that by using 2 directional antennas, it would be possible to triangulate the position of the radio source and tell if it is indeed moving or stationary.
-
(http://www.zgeek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=49043&d=1315609003)
-
(http://www.zgeek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=49043&d=1315609003)
Please refrain from low content posting in the discussion forums.
-
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
Incorrect. That would verify the sources appear to be moving.
How does one make a stationary radio source appear to move? You do realize that by using 2 directional antennas, it would be possible to triangulate the position of the radio source and tell if it is indeed moving or stationary.
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
-
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
Incorrect. That would verify the sources appear to be moving.
How does one make a stationary radio source appear to move? You do realize that by using 2 directional antennas, it would be possible to triangulate the position of the radio source and tell if it is indeed moving or stationary.
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
Thus NASA, or whoever sends up the satellites would need to have a comprehensive theory of EA (bendy light), and then would have to calculate very fast trajectories for these satellites. And EA/Aether currents would have to perfect match certain criteria to duplicate the RE phenomena. In other words, conditions beyond NASA's control would have to be ideal for the conspiracy to work.
-
And all you need is some directional antennas and spectrum analyzers to verify the data contained within the signals and the fact that the signal sources are moving.
Incorrect. That would verify the sources appear to be moving.
How does one make a stationary radio source appear to move? You do realize that by using 2 directional antennas, it would be possible to triangulate the position of the radio source and tell if it is indeed moving or stationary.
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
Thus NASA, or whoever sends up the satellites would need to have a comprehensive theory of EA (bendy light), and then would have to calculate very fast trajectories for these satellites. And EA/Aether currents would have to perfect match certain criteria to duplicate the RE phenomena. In other words, conditions beyond NASA's control would have to be ideal for the conspiracy to work.
What conspiracy? NASA is just incompetent. Finally through years of spending American hero blood to grease the engines of their progress, they have fumbled through the dark and figured out a model that is close enough to the real thing to work. Next if they could only handle their books!
-
What conspiracy? NASA is just incompetent. Finally through years of spending American hero blood to grease the engines of their progress, they have fumbled through the dark and figured out a model that is close enough to the real thing to work. Next if they could only handle their books!
Wait, so (in my mind) you think that the RE model (the one NASA uses) is accurate enough to launch space craft into FE aether streams that just happen to exactly follow RE trajectory calculations? And the AE bends light just perfectly to make the earth appear spherical from space, and perfectly enough to allow for accurate RE triangulation? Because that's what I am reading, but I don't think thats what you're saying.
I would like some elaboration on what YOU think NASA might be basing on an non-RE model (and thus making a conspiracy), including (to keep as much on thread as possible):
~Orbit trajectory calculations
~GPS triangulation
If they use non-RE models, what might they use?
Do you have a (rough) quantitative model of AE?
Do you have a (rough) quantitative model of orbit trajectories or aether currents?
-
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle.
Not true. You only have to have two lines to "triangulate" a location. If someone is receiving a signal from a certain direction, lets say 50 degrees from their present location, and someone else is receiving a signal from another direction, lets say 90 degrees from their present location, then we can triangulate the location of the signal by placing a point on the map for each person, then drawing a line in the direction that the signal was received for each one. Where the lines cross is the source of the signal. A third line will only confirm the source of the signal, but it will not make a triangle, it will make three lines that intersect at the point of the signal.
-
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
Obviously using GPS signals (generated by whatever actual means) works as an accurate positioning system, therefore it must be possible to accurately locate the sources of those signals.
-
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
Obviously using GPS signals (generated by whatever actual means) works as an accurate positioning system, therefore it must be possible to accurately locate the sources of those signals.
Why do you think this?
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle.
Not true. You only have to have two lines to "triangulate" a location.
Yes I know, but if what I'm suggesting is true, your point has no bearing. Its completely secondary and has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. You can only triangulate if the radio signals are travelling in a straight line. Otherwise you are not triangulating anything. Please note what I said. I said you must be ABLE to draw the third line. Not you must draw the third line.
What conspiracy? NASA is just incompetent. Finally through years of spending American hero blood to grease the engines of their progress, they have fumbled through the dark and figured out a model that is close enough to the real thing to work. Next if they could only handle their books!
Wait, so (in my mind) you think that the RE model (the one NASA uses) is accurate enough to launch space craft into FE aether streams that just happen to exactly follow RE trajectory calculations? And the AE bends light just perfectly to make the earth appear spherical from space, and perfectly enough to allow for accurate RE triangulation? Because that's what I am reading, but I don't think thats what you're saying.
I would like some elaboration on what YOU think NASA might be basing on an non-RE model (and thus making a conspiracy), including (to keep as much on thread as possible):
~Orbit trajectory calculations
~GPS triangulation
If they use non-RE models, what might they use?
Do you have a (rough) quantitative model of AE?
Do you have a (rough) quantitative model of orbit trajectories or aether currents?
Science has built a model that mimics the results of the physical laws with different mechanisms. Such often the case in what is essentially blackbox reverse engineering.
-
You can only triangulate something if you can draw a triangle. Especially if something is effecting EM radiation. Perhaps Aether, Engineers force, or EA.
Obviously using GPS signals (generated by whatever actual means) works as an accurate positioning system, therefore it must be possible to accurately locate the sources of those signals.
Why do you think this?
Because the multilateration algorithm used by GPS receivers requires the locations of the signal sources (satellites). Also, the frequencies of and data contained within the GPS signals is documented and publicly available so that anyone with the proper equipment and know how can build their own GPS receiver without any conspiracy assistance.
-
Yes, but to simplify, if the satellites are stationary, and aether affects their light flow all that is required is that light is travelling such that they appear to be in the correct location. They need not actually be in that location.
-
Yes, but to simplify, if the satellites are stationary, and aether affects their light flow all that is required is that light is travelling such that they appear to be in the correct location. They need not actually be in that location.
But GPS satellites are not stationary. That's the whole point of using directional antennas to track the movement of the GPS signal sources.
-
All you FEers need to do one single thing : Go buy a damn telescope and watch the sky. You'll see for yourself that there ARE satellites. You will see them moving (orbiting) with your own eyes. You can even see them with your naked eye, they look like a star, except that its slow moving. And if you zoom in with a good enough telescope, you will see the actual satellite in detail.
But i guess you'll find a good reason not to do this simple task? Thork, what's your excuse??
-
Yes, but to simplify, if the satellites are stationary, and aether affects their light flow all that is required is that light is travelling such that they appear to be in the correct location. They need not actually be in that location.
But GPS satellites are not stationary. That's the whole point of using directional antennas to track the movement of the GPS signal sources.
We don't know if they are stationary or not, and it doesn't matter at all. All that matters is the apparent path the light takes, not its actual path.
Directional antennas don't work to triangulate if em is being bent.
-
All you FEers need to do one single thing : Go buy a damn telescope and watch the sky. You'll see for yourself that there ARE satellites. You will see them moving (orbiting) with your own eyes. You can even see them with your naked eye, they look like a star, except that its slow moving. And if you zoom in with a good enough telescope, you will see the actual satellite in detail.
But i guess you'll find a good reason not to do this simple task? Thork, what's your excuse??
Of course satellites exist.
-
Yes, but to simplify, if the satellites are stationary, and aether affects their light flow all that is required is that light is travelling such that they appear to be in the correct location. They need not actually be in that location.
But GPS satellites are not stationary. That's the whole point of using directional antennas to track the movement of the GPS signal sources.
We don't know if they are stationary or not, and it doesn't matter at all. All that matters is the apparent path the light takes, not its actual path.
The actual paths that the signals takes do matter because of the very precise and accurate timing of the multiple signals required for accurate multilateration.
Directional antennas don't work to triangulate if em is being bent.
They do if you know how to compensate for the bending.
-
Yes, but to simplify, if the satellites are stationary, and aether affects their light flow all that is required is that light is travelling such that they appear to be in the correct location. They need not actually be in that location.
But GPS satellites are not stationary. That's the whole point of using directional antennas to track the movement of the GPS signal sources.
We don't know if they are stationary or not, and it doesn't matter at all. All that matters is the apparent path the light takes, not its actual path.
The actual paths that the signals takes do matter because of the very precise and accurate timing of the multiple signals required for accurate multilateration.
Directional antennas don't work to triangulate if em is being bent.
They do if you know how to compensate for the bending.
And you can't compensate for the bending because we can't directly observe their location.
The actual paths do not matter. What matters is the time it takes to traverse these paths.
At no point does a radio receiver ask "Where did this signal come from". At best it can determine how long it took to get to it.
-
All you FEers need to do one single thing : Go buy a damn telescope and watch the sky. You'll see for yourself that there ARE satellites. You will see them moving (orbiting) with your own eyes. You can even see them with your naked eye, they look like a star, except that its slow moving. And if you zoom in with a good enough telescope, you will see the actual satellite in detail.
But i guess you'll find a good reason not to do this simple task? Thork, what's your excuse??
Of course satellites exist.
Well you guys need to get your act together, because some of you think they don't, some of you think they do. Funny how FEers never agree on anything, while REers understand all the facts the same, with logical explanations and actual observations.
Its like you guys each have your own opinion of how your FE works. There's not even a consensus among your society. And so your theory is not a theory, its a funny idea with random and subjective explanations based on your own guesses, at best.
-
All I get out of this is that NASA is just stupid and uses the RE model. It happens to work perfectly due to bendy light and aetheric currents that NASA does not know exist. And the RE triangulation model just happens to work too. But the earth is actually flat? Thats pretty hard to believe.
Basically, you are saying unknown forces do remarkable things to satellites and light that happen to exactly match what RE naturally predicts about satellites. This makes no sense.
-
All I get out of this is that NASA is just stupid and uses the RE model. It happens to work perfectly due to bendy light and aetheric currents that NASA does not know exist. And the RE triangulation model just happens to work too. But the earth is actually flat? Thats pretty hard to believe.
Basically, you are saying unknown forces do remarkable things to satellites and light that happen to exactly match what RE naturally predicts about satellites. This makes no sense.
Perfectly?
I suppose thats a pretty perfect record. If you measure perfection by the amount of blood on ones hands.
-
And you can't compensate for the bending because we can't directly observe their location.
The actual paths do not matter. What matters is the time it takes to traverse these paths.
At no point does a radio receiver ask "Where did this signal come from". At best it can determine how long it took to get to it.
Actually, the receiver works out the location of the satellite by using the almanac data that describes the orbital parameters of each satellite. This almanac data is embedded in the signals transmitted by each GPS satellite.
Also, if the receiver doesn't know where the signal source is located, then the timing is pretty much useless, don't you think?
-
And you can't compensate for the bending because we can't directly observe their location.
The actual paths do not matter. What matters is the time it takes to traverse these paths.
At no point does a radio receiver ask "Where did this signal come from". At best it can determine how long it took to get to it.
Actually, the receiver works out the location of the satellite by using the almanac data that describes the orbital parameters of each satellite. This almanac data is embedded in the signals transmitted by each GPS satellite.
Also, if the receiver doesn't know where the signal source is located, then the timing is pretty much useless, don't you think?
No, its not useless at all.
If it gives the correct times it doesn't matter where it is, so long as where we think it is fits (which it does).
I feel like I"m just repeating myself over and over again.
-
And you can't compensate for the bending because we can't directly observe their location.
The actual paths do not matter. What matters is the time it takes to traverse these paths.
At no point does a radio receiver ask "Where did this signal come from". At best it can determine how long it took to get to it.
Actually, the receiver works out the location of the satellite by using the almanac data that describes the orbital parameters of each satellite. This almanac data is embedded in the signals transmitted by each GPS satellite.
Also, if the receiver doesn't know where the signal source is located, then the timing is pretty much useless, don't you think?
No, its not useless at all.
If it gives the correct times it doesn't matter where it is, so long as where we think it is fits (which it does).
I feel like I"m just repeating myself over and over again.
What good is knowing the time if you don't have a known reference point?
-
You do have a reference point. Where the satellite appears to be.
-
You do have a reference point. Where the satellite appears to be.
But where it appears to be is exactly where it should be on an RE. FE requires bendy light and aetheric currents that cannot be tested.
The physics of the earth make it appear as though the earth is round, even though it is not. You can launch a satellite into orbit using RE trajectory calculations, and it will be swept up into a current that exactly corresponds to that orbit. And when the satellite takes a picture of the earth, the earth will look round, though it is actually flat. And you can use RE triangulations to determine one's location on the flat earth.
This would require physics to perfectly mimic a round earth, not NASA.
-
You do have a reference point. Where the satellite appears to be.
But where it appears to be is exactly where it should be on an RE. FE requires bendy light and aetheric currents that cannot be tested.
The physics of the earth make it appear as though the earth is round, even though it is not. You can launch a satellite into orbit using RE trajectory calculations, and it will be swept up into a current that exactly corresponds to that orbit. And when the satellite takes a picture of the earth, the earth will look round, though it is actually flat. And you can use RE triangulations to determine one's location on the flat earth.
This would require physics to perfectly mimic a round earth, not NASA.
No, you've got it wrong. The physics of earth is a flat earth.
This round earth malarkey is the result of building a model around what shape you want the world to be and the inherent flaws in the scientific method.
-
You do have a reference point. Where the satellite appears to be.
But where it appears to be is exactly where it should be on an RE. FE requires bendy light and aetheric currents that cannot be tested.
The physics of the earth make it appear as though the earth is round, even though it is not. You can launch a satellite into orbit using RE trajectory calculations, and it will be swept up into a current that exactly corresponds to that orbit. And when the satellite takes a picture of the earth, the earth will look round, though it is actually flat. And you can use RE triangulations to determine one's location on the flat earth.
This would require physics to perfectly mimic a round earth, not NASA.
No, you've got it wrong. The physics of earth is a flat earth.
This round earth malarkey is the result of building a model around what shape you want the world to be and the inherent flaws in the scientific method.
One of the reasons I am confused is that I have looked for, but have never seen a theory for AE or EA other than "AE moves satellites in orbits" and "EA bends light". I would like as quantitative a model of both of these phenomena as you can manage.
Because GPS satellites are theoretically based, launched, and put in orbit using the simple RE model of gravitation and assuming that light goes in a straight line. From what I am reading of your posts, somehow RE is a good enough model to launch these satellites, but it is physically incorrect.
Having a AE and an EA model would help the discussion. (They would have to have predictions that match the predictions of the RE model, because those predictions worked.)
-
You do have a reference point. Where the satellite appears to be.
How do you determine where the satellite appears to be?
-
In this case, they use the round earth model which is close enough apparently for the application at hand.
-
Sputnik made the Gagarin story more plausible. And yes. The space race was really a photoshop/film studio type technology race. To control the media, is to control the world. Its worth winning.
The FAQs say that temporary space travel is possible, thus it is possible that an object named Sputnik did indeed make space flight and then disappeared sometime later.
Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"
A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites cannot orbit the Earth. The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. However, temporary space-flight is possible.
Orbit is indeed possible with a Flat Earth. The sun and moon are explained as spotlights which travel in a circular fashion above the Earth. This theory was shown by Voliva's map. I don't like using silly words like pseudolites. I call things as they are normally called and they are called satellites.
If we use the Universal Acceleration Theory and the FAQs answer to how airplanes work it is indeed possible to propel objects into a circular type orbit that the sun, moon, and planets have above the Flat Earth or even at a stationary position like a "geosynchronous" satellite. If you place a satellite say 10 miles above the Earth at say 80w Lat and the satellite maintains an upward acceleration of 9.8m/s2, which is the same as the Earth then you are going to have a stationary satellite sitting there all the time.
How do GPS works without satellites? Well I don't believe in this radio wave theory of transmitters on towers, because the frequencies used by satellites are the same ones used as your mircowave oven. To use those in an omni directional pattern from an Earth based tower would literally cook you and anything that got too close to the tower. Earth based transmissions on those frequencies are point to point telephone relays or studio to transmitter links. There are Global Positioning Satellites above the Earth using a circular orbit above the Flat Earth, much like the sun an moon. At what height they are I don't know, but they are obviously in such an orbit.
Then your GPS receiver is not as good quality as your car radio.
Before you answer KNOW what you are talking about. And frankly by that remark it is obvious you have no idea what you are talking about!
GPS uses mircrowave frequencies. Standard broadcasts use UHF and VHF frequencies. The wavelengths of the transmissions are very different and behave differently. VHF and UHF frequencies have a wavelength that can pass through some objects. Mircowaves have a wavelength that is very short and are absorbed by objects instead of passing through them. Thus mircowaves can't pass through say a bridge or dense clouds, or leaves.
-
This is a map of earth.
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth-1.png)
Around the edge (south) you will notice an ice wall. This is a place where few people can go. The psuedollites are arranged around the ice in a circle around earth allowing triangulation. This is why your dish must point the shortest distance towards South for TV etc.
Um, excuse me, but another thing you obviously do not know about and proceed to make things up. Seeing that people south of 0 degrees latitude typically point their dishes NORTH!!! Satellites can be placed anywhere. Television, and communication satellites are placed at 0 degrees latitude. Thus there are a ring of satellites at 0 lat above the Flat Earth. Depending on where the satellite has been placed and your location determines where the dish points. Every dish in the US looking at the same satellite are not going to be looking in the same direction relative to the satellite. At my location 82w long is exactly south, a satellite placed at 119w isn't going to be directly south is it? When I tune in a satellite at 22w long my dish is almost pointing EAST.
Why does the signal go out if you move you dish an inch? Satellites don't transmit an omni directional pattern. It is a very tight pattern at a focused area. The reception pattern of your dish is very narrow so that interference does not occur from unwanted signals from adjacent satellites. This is true of any antenna. All antennas even OTA ones have receive patterns. If the signal is located outside of the receive pattern of the antenna you won't receive it. Some antennas have a wider pattern than others. My OTA antenna has a narrow pattern, If I move it an ince or two some of my OTA stations go out and I begin to receive others. That is why in the old days we would put our OTA antennas on rotators.
-
Some diagrams. Sometimes visual aides help :)
(http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x371/Flat-Moon/Sun-MoonSmall.png)
BTW those are the orbits as they are on the solstice and equinox. The orbits slowly move from a maximum north in June to a maximum south in December.
(http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x371/Flat-Moon/SatelliteOrbitSmall.png)
If I was able to draw I would make more diagrams, such as from a side view, etc... I might try some crude ones later.
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
I've seen satellites in the sky, they look like stars, but they move. they move to fast to be planes(and the make no noise so they can't be planes) also planes usually have multiple colors, satellites are just a white light. you can track satellites with websites like this http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST (http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST) you just have to enter a zip code and you'll get the specific times a satellite should be passing over head.
-
Some diagrams. Sometimes visual aides help :)
(http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x371/Flat-Moon/Sun-MoonSmall.png)
BTW those are the orbits as they are on the solstice and equinox. The orbits slowly move from a maximum north in June to a maximum south in December.
(http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x371/Flat-Moon/SatelliteOrbitSmall.png)
If I was able to draw I would make more diagrams, such as from a side view, etc... I might try some crude ones later.
If this is the correct FE map then what is the distance from the Falkland Islands to Australia?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
I've seen satellites in the sky, they look like stars, but they move. they move to fast to be planes(and the make no noise so they can't be planes) also planes usually have multiple colors, satellites are just a white light. you can track satellites with websites like this http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST (http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST) you just have to enter a zip code and you'll get the specific times a satellite should be passing over head.
High flying jets make no noise when seen from the Earth. They are simply too far away for the noise to be heard. And, are you really trying to say that the color of the light proves what it is? That is one of the most childish statements that I have heard an RE'er proclaim.
-
I'll ask again - If this is the correct FE map then what is the distance from the Falkland Islands to Australia?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
Pseudolites ? I thought it was stratelites ? There is no end to the FE imagination for creating imaginary words.
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
I've seen satellites in the sky, they look like stars, but they move. they move to fast to be planes(and the make no noise so they can't be planes) also planes usually have multiple colors, satellites are just a white light. you can track satellites with websites like this http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST (http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST) you just have to enter a zip code and you'll get the specific times a satellite should be passing over head.
High flying jets make no noise when seen from the Earth. They are simply too far away for the noise to be heard. And, are you really trying to say that the color of the light proves what it is? That is one of the most childish statements that I have heard an RE'er proclaim.
ok smartass then you explain why http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST (http://www.heavens-above.com/PassSummary.aspx?satid=25544&lat=44.7402&lng=-85.6019&loc=875&alt=191&tz=EST) is accurate in telling you when satellites fly over head. I've used it before. go ahead I'm listening.
-
Pseudolites ? I thought it was stratelites ? There is no end to the FE imagination for creating imaginary words.
Pseudolite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite) is a real word. Basically, it's a pseudo-satellite. Stratellite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratellite) is the trademarked name of a pseudolite that is in the form of a stratospheric airship.
-
Pseudolites ? I thought it was stratelites ? There is no end to the FE imagination for creating imaginary words.
Pseudolite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite) is a real word. Basically, it's a pseudo-satellite. Stratellite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratellite) is the trademarked name of a pseudolite that is in the form of a stratospheric airship.
An explanation of how GPS works please, with details of actual locations of the transmitters.
-
HA that wont ever happen..
My God these people are thick, their knowledge on GPS is non existent, well their knowledge on anything in the real world is non existent..
I'll point out one of the countless errors in their silly theory on GPS.. Ground based Pseudolites 'could' give an approximate location in a similar vein to Cell Tower triangulation.. however you would only get a 2D position, no altitude.. for that you need a third measuring point which must be high.
Also the reason why you lose GPS signal under solid objects is that the signals form the satellites are VERY weak... Imaging the power source they'd need to provide a strong signal 24/7. They can be weal though because they are penetrating atmosphere vertically.. which is in order of magnitude MUCH easier than horizontally.
This is of course what happens in the real world.. in FE land where the sky is purple and the people more than a little stupid, god only knows.
Its a good laugh but one wonders how such people exist.
-
HA that wont ever happen..
My God these people are thick, their knowledge on GPS is non existent, well their knowledge on anything in the real world is non existent..
I'll point out one of the countless errors in their silly theory on GPS.. Ground based Pseudolites 'could' give an approximate location in a similar vein to Cell Tower triangulation.. however you would only get a 2D position, no altitude.. for that you need a third measuring point which must be high.
Also the reason why you lose GPS signal under solid objects is that the signals form the satellites are VERY weak... Imaging the power source they'd need to provide a strong signal 24/7. They can be weal though because they are penetrating atmosphere vertically.. which is in order of magnitude MUCH easier than horizontally.
This is of course what happens in the real world.. in FE land where the sky is purple and the people more than a little stupid, god only knows.
Its a good laugh but one wonders how such people exist.
And yet here you are trying to give out your wisdom to those very people you claim are thick/stupid, all for the reward of a few internet back pats.
Of course, you're just another one who will claim that it's hilarious to actually watch people who believe the Earth is not what you have been brainwashed into believing and will cite that you've never had so much fun, all whilst expending all your efforts into trying your utmost best to explain in detail what you believe you know - aided by wiki.
If you want to laugh, then laugh. Scream in fits of laughter if you want. Just do it behind your little desk or in your slippers on the couch, because trying it on here will (I guarantee you) render you a complete, quivering wreck who will eventually complain that people are not being nice to you and it's not fair, etc, etc,etc.
Stop pretending you know what satellites are. You can't even put up a picture of one, except for a cartoon. There's supposedly thousands up there, isn't there? Are you telling me that they can't photograph any of them in real time or video them?
There's a reason they're all cartoon pictures. Can you guess why?
-
So please explain how live news pictures come back fron Iraq etc.
-
So please explain how live news pictures come back fron Iraq etc.
Pseudolites. Please keep up and stop trying to derail threads.
-
So please explain how live news pictures come back fron Iraq etc.
Pseudolites. Please keep up and stop trying to derail threads.
Please explain exactly what they are and where they are located. Broadcast and communications satellites are stationary over the equator, GPS ones, about 20 from various countries, orbit the earth.
-
So please explain how live news pictures come back fron Iraq etc.
Pseudolites. Please keep up and stop trying to derail threads.
Please explain exactly what they are and where they are located. Broadcast and communications satellites are stationary over the equator, GPS ones, about 20 from various countries, orbit the earth.
Are you really so lazy that you will not even google a word that you do not know?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudolite)
-
So where are some locations, remembering GPS works over the whole world including aircraft in flight over oceans.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence?
Evidence of one would be good.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Is this a Zetetic position? Why do you say "likely", without and data to arrive at this probability assessment?
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Surely any GPS transmitter, satellite or psuedolite, relies on a stable platform in a known position. Even though satellites are in orbit they travel a precisely predictable route. If the distance between you and the sea-pseudolite is constantly changing due to unpredictable sea swells how is the position measured accurately?
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence?
Evidence of one would be good.
Are you saying that Pseudolites do not, in fact, exist? If you answer that they do exist, then why should I need to give the location of one?
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Is this a Zetetic position? Why do you say "likely", without and data to arrive at this probability assessment?
It is called logic and simple deduction. I say likely because the conclusion has been deduced using logic, not through direct evidence. I will not try to pass something off as absolute truth when I know that there is a chance of it being false; therefore words like "likely" or "possibly" are use in some of my statements.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Surely any GPS transmitter, satellite or psuedolite, relies on a stable platform in a known position. Even though satellites are in orbit they travel a precisely predictable route. If the distance between you and the sea-pseudolite is constantly changing due to unpredictable sea swells how is the position measured accurately?
Is it really a big deal if my average altitude of my ship is actually 4 meters above sea level instead of 6 meters? Am I not going to get to the same place, either way? Would anyone even notice if this happened? Probably not.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Surely any GPS transmitter, satellite or psuedolite, relies on a stable platform in a known position. Even though satellites are in orbit they travel a precisely predictable route. If the distance between you and the sea-pseudolite is constantly changing due to unpredictable sea swells how is the position measured accurately?
How come these satellites work, even though they would be constantly getting interfered with by constant cloud cover?
I mean, when we are shown pictures of earth in daylight, it's generally chocka block with thick clouds. It's different at night, of course when the clouds are folded up and took in, so they can show us clear pictures of cities and lights. ::)
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Surely any GPS transmitter, satellite or psuedolite, relies on a stable platform in a known position. Even though satellites are in orbit they travel a precisely predictable route. If the distance between you and the sea-pseudolite is constantly changing due to unpredictable sea swells how is the position measured accurately?
How come these satellites work, even though they would be constantly getting interfered with by constant cloud cover?
I mean, when we are shown pictures of earth in daylight, it's generally chocka block with thick clouds. It's different at night, of course when the clouds are folded up and took in, so they can show us clear pictures of cities and lights. ::)
like this ? Earth HD| Time Lapse View from Space, Fly Over | NASA, ISS (http://#ws) seems pretty cloudy to me.. ::)
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
Surely any GPS transmitter, satellite or psuedolite, relies on a stable platform in a known position. Even though satellites are in orbit they travel a precisely predictable route. If the distance between you and the sea-pseudolite is constantly changing due to unpredictable sea swells how is the position measured accurately?
How come these satellites work, even though they would be constantly getting interfered with by constant cloud cover?
I mean, when we are shown pictures of earth in daylight, it's generally chocka block with thick clouds. It's different at night, of course when the clouds are folded up and took in, so they can show us clear pictures of cities and lights. ::)
rain droplets in clouds are not sufficient to affect satellite microwaves, it was designed and developed as an all weather system.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
seems like a series of succint questions to me.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
Can you tell me where every single cell phone transmitter is? If you can do the research and do actually find this information, it is because this is not hidden information.
Why do you keep demanding unreasonable amounts of information?
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
Can you tell me where every single cell phone transmitter is? If you can do the research and do actually find this information, it is because this is not hidden information.
Why do you keep demanding unreasonable amounts of information?
the location of one transmitter is hardly an unreasonable amount of information? I can tell you where the nearest cell phone transmitter is from me, its less than a mile away. Your turn, name the location of one of your gps alternative transmitters.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
Can you tell me where every single cell phone transmitter is? If you can do the research and do actually find this information, it is because this is not hidden information.
Why do you keep demanding unreasonable amounts of information?
I am asking for details of one, not every one, just as a start. GPS receivers show the satellites moving across the sky, 19 in view currently here, including some Russian GLONASS ones.
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
Can you tell me where every single cell phone transmitter is? If you can do the research and do actually find this information, it is because this is not hidden information.
Why do you keep demanding unreasonable amounts of information?
the location of one transmitter is hardly an unreasonable amount of information? I can tell you where the nearest cell phone transmitter is from me, its less than a mile away. Your turn, name the location of one of your gps alternative transmitters.
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/LORAN_Station_Malone-Outside-Large.jpg)
-
You expect me to just know the location of every transmitter in existence? Your demands get more and more ridiculous all the time.
Over the ocean, they likely use buoys and/or air ships.
So can you provide any information about these transmitters, just anything like the location of one. How do people developing receivers work without this information?
Has anyone seen air ships transmitting, what keeps them in position?
Are you claiming that deep water buoys do not exist? Or maybe that air ships do not exist? I am confused as to what you are confused about.
I am asking for specific information on the location of land bases, air ships and buoys that transmit signals that my GPS receiver uses to give me accurate details of my location and elevation. There is no reason for this information not to be in the public domain like easily found details of TV broadcast satellites and TV/radio transmitters.
Can you tell me where every single cell phone transmitter is? If you can do the research and do actually find this information, it is because this is not hidden information.
Why do you keep demanding unreasonable amounts of information?
the location of one transmitter is hardly an unreasonable amount of information? I can tell you where the nearest cell phone transmitter is from me, its less than a mile away. Your turn, name the location of one of your gps alternative transmitters.
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
How do you know it transmits GPS, where are the antenna?
-
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
How do you know it transmits GPS, where are the antenna?
You don't see that antenna tower sticking out of the ground? Are being serious, or just pulling my leg now? You are either the worst troll this site has seen, or just the laziest one. Tell me which one you are, please.
-
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
How do you know it transmits GPS, where are the antenna?
You don't see that antenna tower sticking out of the ground? Are being serious, or just pulling my leg now? You are either the worst troll this site has seen, or just the laziest one. Tell me which one you are, please.
That is the mast, not the antenna. Unless it is a low frequency transmitter, which means it is not for GPS. Do you know what frequencies are used for GPS, and the antenna size?
-
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
How do you know it transmits GPS, where are the antenna?
You don't see that antenna tower sticking out of the ground? Are being serious, or just pulling my leg now? You are either the worst troll this site has seen, or just the laziest one. Tell me which one you are, please.
That is the mast, not the antenna. Unless it is a low frequency transmitter, which means it is not for GPS. Do you know what frequencies are used for GPS, and the antenna size?
Are you now claiming that GPS is transmitted on LF? Please provide some evidence instead of just making stuff up as you go.
-
what is the location of that antenna out of interest? I assume you took the photo yourself.
-
Well, fine, then. Here is one.
How do you know it transmits GPS, where are the antenna?
You don't see that antenna tower sticking out of the ground? Are being serious, or just pulling my leg now? You are either the worst troll this site has seen, or just the laziest one. Tell me which one you are, please.
That is the mast, not the antenna. Unless it is a low frequency transmitter, which means it is not for GPS. Do you know what frequencies are used for GPS, and the antenna size?
Are you now claiming that GPS is transmitted on LF? Please provide some evidence instead of just making stuff up as you go.
No, read what I said. If that is an LF transmitter it will not be for GPS. Where is it?
Just asking for a validated, non satellite, live, in service, GPS transmitter. If not they must be the moving satellites I am seeing on my tablet app. All documentation on GPS is wrong according to you?
How can I being receiving Russian ones?
-
LORAN Station Malone, Malone, Florida Great Lakes chain (GRI 8970)/Southeast U.S. chain (GRI 7980)
Happy now?
-
LORAN Station Malone, Malone, Florida Great Lakes chain (GRI 8970)/Southeast U.S. chain (GRI 7980)
It can't be anymore - LORAN was phased out in Northern America in 2010:
The current LORAN system has been phased out in the United States and Canada. The United States Coast Guard (USCG) and Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) ceased transmitting LORAN-C (and joint CHAYKA) signals in 2010.[2][3]
-
LORAN Station Malone, Malone, Florida Great Lakes chain (GRI 8970)/Southeast U.S. chain (GRI 7980)
Happy now?
I asked for a GPS site.
-
LORAN Station Malone, Malone, Florida Great Lakes chain (GRI 8970)/Southeast U.S. chain (GRI 7980)
It can't be anymore - LORAN was phased out in Northern America in 2010:
The current LORAN system has been phased out in the United States and Canada. The United States Coast Guard (USCG) and Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) ceased transmitting LORAN-C (and joint CHAYKA) signals in 2010.[2][3]
Yes, it is old an out of commission now. That does not mean that other stations have not replaced it. I was asked to provide a single example of LORAN, which I did. Stop changing the goal posts.
-
LORAN Station Malone, Malone, Florida Great Lakes chain (GRI 8970)/Southeast U.S. chain (GRI 7980)
It can't be anymore - LORAN was phased out in Northern America in 2010:
The current LORAN system has been phased out in the United States and Canada. The United States Coast Guard (USCG) and Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) ceased transmitting LORAN-C (and joint CHAYKA) signals in 2010.[2][3]
Yes, it is old an out of commission now. That does not mean that other stations have not replaced it. I was asked to provide a single example of LORAN, which I did. Stop changing the goal posts.
how does loran calculate altitude as is possible with gps?
-
LORAN is just an example of ground based positioning systems. It is not what I am claiming to be a GPS cover. Are you trying to imply that ground based positioning is not possible? Stop harping on LORAN or I will be forced to produced other ground based technology. My point is that it is possible. Please show evidence that ground based positioning is not possible.
-
No one has asked for LORAN. Yes, ground based positioning is possible. The discussion is sbout GPS. One site please.
-
LORAN is just an example of ground based positioning systems.
Not a very good one, as it is being phased out and it could never calculate altitude. It was also never global.
It is not what I am claiming to be a GPS cover. Are you trying to imply that ground based positioning is not possible? Stop harping on LORAN or I will be forced to produced other ground based technology. My point is that it is possible.
The usual passive aggressive shtick. Are you suggesting that there is a super secret ground based system that is not documented anywhere, has no witnesses to it's building and somehow spoofs exactly how a satellite positioning system would operate?
Please show evidence that ground based positioning is not possible.
Please provide evidence that any ground based system can calculate altitude.
-
Once again, please provide evidence that it is not possible.
-
Once again, please provide evidence that it is not possible.
You are asking me to prove an negative.
If you are saying ground based systems can calculate altitude, then it is your claim and the burden of proof is with you.
I can't see how they would do it with any accuracy or reliability, or maybe even at all, but I'm honestly open to evidence.
GPS calcuates altitude from at least 4 different satellites using trilateration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateration) and it's very difficult to see how any ground based system could possibly spoof this.
-
You are positively claiming that it can not be done. That is not a negative claim, but in fact a positive one. Once again, can you provide any evidence at all that supports your claim?
-
Please explain how GPS sees moving satellites.
-
You are positively claiming that it can not be done.
I'm not - I'm open to the idea. I think it is highly unlikely however. I'm not aware of any ground based system that has ever done it, and I suspect it is practically impossible.
That is not a negative claim
It clearly is. If you want me to provide evidence that ground based positioning systems don't calculate altitude then I will do that as soon as you provide evidence that FES members don't kick dogs for fun.
-
It clearly is. If you want me to provide evidence that ground based positioning systems don't calculate altitude then I will do that as soon as you provide evidence that FES members don't kick dogs for fun.
You are not claiming that they don't calculate altitude, your are claiming that they can not calculate altitude. That is your positive claim, one that should be supported.
-
Please explain how GPS sees moving satellites.
Why is it that every time you are proven wrong, you change the subject and make more demands? How about you start actually proving something instead of just demanding for us to offer proof?
-
The simple answer is that ground based systems can only provide information on location - longitude and latitude information.
In order for altitude information the transmitter must be higher than the object in question. No ground based system could ever have an antenna located high enough for this. And since the GPS satellites are at such an altitude above the earth , that is why they can supply altitude as well as location information . Correct me if I'm wrong, but your GPS receiver must receive at least three satellites for altitude information.
-
The simple answer is that ground based systems can only provide information on location - longitude and latitude information.
In order for altitude information the transmitter must be higher than the object in question. No ground based system could ever have an antenna located high enough for this. And since the GPS satellites are at such an altitude above the earth , that is why they can supply altitude as well as location information . Correct me if I'm wrong, but your GPS receiver must receive at least three satellites for altitude information.
I am currently looking at my altitude on my phone with the GPS turned off. Do I have a satellite phone and I never realized it before? ???
-
What make and model is it?
-
What difference does it make?
-
What difference does it make?
I'm interested in one that does location and altitude without GPS. On the ground and in the air.
-
You are not claiming that they don't calculate altitude,
If you re-read the thread you'll see I haven't actually made that claim.
I see no evidence that they can however - do you have any?
That is your positive claim, one that should be supported.
It is clearly negative, and I never made it. You are simply playing games because you have nothing.
Lets forget the game playing. Answer me one simple question: do you have any evidence of ground based positioning systems that can calculate altitude?
-
You are not claiming that they don't calculate altitude,
If you re-read the thread you'll see I haven't actually made that claim.
I see no evidence that they can however - do you have any?
That is your positive claim, one that should be supported.
It is clearly negative, and I never made it. You are simply playing games because you have nothing.
Lets forget the game playing. Answer me one simple question: do you have any evidence of ground based positioning systems that can calculate altitude?
Or...even if you think it is theoretically possible, then some theory?
-
Lets forget the game playing. Answer me one simple question: do you have any evidence of ground based positioning systems that can calculate altitude?
Yes, my phone. I thought I already said that? Maybe you should read posts more carefully.
-
What land based system does it use?
Believe it or not, I don't have access to your phone, so it doesn't represent very good evidence does it? You won't even tell us the model.
You are just making a bunch of claims - have you even checked the altitude is correct?
-
What land based system does it use?
Believe it or not, I don't have access to your phone, so it doesn't represent very good evidence does it? You won't even tell us the model.
You are just making a bunch of claims - have you even checked the altitude is correct?
I have to leave for work in less than an hour and my phone is charging. I will take out the battery and give you the exact model once I get to work. I just need to let it completely charge before I leave today.
-
Fair enough.
Enjoy your night out. Just re-read - enjoy your work! We are clearly on different time zones, or you do shifts.
It's just if it's Google phone it may have a barometer in it - I believe a few others do it now. This would give you an altitude, though it would need to be calibrated first.
-
Why altitude is difficult for a ground based system to show:
Say you have 3 towers (minimum for triangulation). A plane could be drawn between those three points, all of which would be above sea level. Now, one GPS receiver is, say, 1,000ft below that plane, and another is 1,000ft above it. How does either receiver calculate whether it is above or below the plane?
Add a 4th tower: This might give you enough to get a rough altitude estimate, but with variations in signal strength due to changes in atmospheric condition, it would be a very rough estimate.
Compare to satellites: it is expected that all receivers will be below the satellites, but with the angles involved, and the reduced atmospheric interference achieved by the steeper angles, it's a lot easier to calculate accurate position data, even for someone in a deep valley with no towers nearby...
-
Once again, please provide evidence that it is not possible.
You're the fool that's claiming GPS doesn't exists and that the earth is flat.. The onus is squarely on you to provide evidence.. which all of us know you can't.
Stop smoking tat weed and answer the questions!!
As I have stated earlier, a ground based system CANNOT give altitude.
-
The simple answer is that ground based systems can only provide information on location - longitude and latitude information.
In order for altitude information the transmitter must be higher than the object in question. No ground based system could ever have an antenna located high enough for this. And since the GPS satellites are at such an altitude above the earth , that is why they can supply altitude as well as location information . Correct me if I'm wrong, but your GPS receiver must receive at least three satellites for altitude information.
You're spot on.. in the real world.. remember this is fantasy land though.
-
What land based system does it use?
Believe it or not, I don't have access to your phone, so it doesn't represent very good evidence does it? You won't even tell us the model.
You are just making a bunch of claims - have you even checked the altitude is correct?
I have to leave for work in less than an hour and my phone is charging. I will take out the battery and give you the exact model once I get to work. I just need to let it completely charge before I leave today.
you are online and replying to other threads, any chance of you telling us the model of your phone now?
-
The simple answer is that ground based systems can only provide information on location - longitude and latitude information.
In order for altitude information the transmitter must be higher than the object in question. No ground based system could ever have an antenna located high enough for this. And since the GPS satellites are at such an altitude above the earth , that is why they can supply altitude as well as location information . Correct me if I'm wrong, but your GPS receiver must receive at least three satellites for altitude information.
You're spot on.. in the real world.. remember this is fantasy land though.
Oh yes ! Of course ! This is the Flat Earth Society Forum
-
What land based system does it use?
Believe it or not, I don't have access to your phone, so it doesn't represent very good evidence does it? You won't even tell us the model.
You are just making a bunch of claims - have you even checked the altitude is correct?
I have to leave for work in less than an hour and my phone is charging. I will take out the battery and give you the exact model once I get to work. I just need to let it completely charge before I leave today.
you are online and replying to other threads, any chance of you telling us the model of your phone now?
My phone does not have a barometer. If you still want the model, I can give that to you.
-
What land based system does it use?
Believe it or not, I don't have access to your phone, so it doesn't represent very good evidence does it? You won't even tell us the model.
You are just making a bunch of claims - have you even checked the altitude is correct?
I have to leave for work in less than an hour and my phone is charging. I will take out the battery and give you the exact model once I get to work. I just need to let it completely charge before I leave today.
you are online and replying to other threads, any chance of you telling us the model of your phone now?
My phone does not have a barometer. If you still want the model, I can give that to you.
Just a thought. If your phone can give you your altitude, does it give you your altitude whether you are on the ground or in the air ? If it is just when you are on the ground, this information could come from a table showing the altitude where you are located, such as those shown on maps. Nothing to with any land based system and maybe compiled from a gps reading but nothing in the phone itself as to a direct gps reading.
-
I don't know. I am at work right now. I can try it outside and then go to the roof (approximately 30 ft.) and compare the two. I just tried it outside and there is a 10' difference between the reading I get with the GPS turned on and off.
-
Here's an idea: Pick the phone up, look at it. The make will be stamped on it in big bold letters.
Unless it's an iPhone - look for the picture of an apple!
Your phone will either be running GPS, or its getting a data feed from some place with topo information or it has some form of Altimeter built in..
It will not be estimating altitude on triangulation and if it is displaying an Alt number without a GPS installed, then the number will be wrong, assuming it is NOT taking data feeds from somewhere.
-
Here's an idea: Pick the phone up, look at it. The make will be stamped on it in big bold letters.
Unless it's an iPhone - look for the picture of an apple!
Your phone will either be running GPS, or its getting a data feed from some place with topo information or it has some form of Altimeter built in..
It will not be estimating altitude on triangulation and if it is displaying an Alt number without a GPS installed, then the number will be wrong, assuming it is NOT taking data feeds from somewhere.
This is just my theory.:
I'm just guessing that jroa's phone is just getting the altitude off a data base for his location. The phone can get the location and just match it up with the data base for the altitude at that location. Just a guess ?
-
Here's an idea: Pick the phone up, look at it. The make will be stamped on it in big bold letters.
Unless it's an iPhone - look for the picture of an apple!
Your phone will either be running GPS, or its getting a data feed from some place with topo information or it has some form of Altimeter built in..
It will not be estimating altitude on triangulation and if it is displaying an Alt number without a GPS installed, then the number will be wrong, assuming it is NOT taking data feeds from somewhere.
This is just my theory.:
I'm just guessing that jroa's phone is just getting the altitude off a data base for his location. The phone can get the location and just match it up with the data base for the altitude at that location. Just a guess ?
That's a reasonable guess.. I have an iPhone which uses GPS.. so I can't really comment.. But I'm pretty sure he knows what phone he has, he's just deflecting.
-
Ok, I checked my altitude outside at ground level, at floor level (approximately 4 ft. above ground level), and on the roof top (approximately 32 ft above ground level) both with the GPS and without GPS, and I got some very odd readings. The internet says the average altitude for my town is 180 ft above sea level and the city seems fairly level (and flat too).
Earlier tonight, I had a reading of 151 ft (GPS) and 141 ft (non-GPS). When I went out side at ground level this time, the first reading I got was 162 ft (GPS) and 137 ft (non-GPS). Soon, the GPS reading dropped to 28 ft, and slowly rose back up to 82 ft and stabilized there. I waited around 5 minutes to make sure it was locked onto the "satellites".
I then walked to the floor level of the building, approximately 4 ft higher. The GPS shot up to 121 ft. and the non-GPS reading stayed the same at 137 ft. I then waited around 3 minutes to make sure the altitude had stabilized.
Next, I went to the roof of the building, approximately 32 ft. above ground level. The GPS actually went down to 110 ft. and the non-GPS altitude was at 141 ft.
Google Earth says the altitude of the driveway I was standing in is 194 ft. above sea level. Both methods seem like they are very inaccurate; however, the GPS method for altitude measuring was not only inaccurate, it was also very inconsistent. This probably has a lot to do with my phone, though.
-
I obviosly don't know anything about where you work but if you work in a built up area, GPS is hopeless.
The signal bounces around way too much of the concrete and other buildings.. so it will give you erroneous readings.
Aviation GPS units have a safety feature built in, if the information they are giving is not accurate to with x amount, the system will tel you.
Cheap, simple systems in phones do not have that, plus they're cheap and simple lol
Remember, GPS was designed to locate you in remote areas.. the designers reckoned that if you were in a city, the chances of you being lost or stranded were minimal :)
Whenever I drive through the CBD here in Melbourne my Tom Tom App on my iPhone puts me on a totally different block! Let alone street.
-
Well, I'll try to go to the state park in the next day or two and try it again out there. Maybe the accuracy will improve. I am around a lot of concrete and steel at the moment.
-
It should sort the accuracy out.. if not, then the phone is at fault.
Phone GPS"s will never be as good as proper stand alone gps units. But, I guess they are fit for purpose... Are you using a street GPS app? Or is it reading raw coordinates?
The street apps are very in accurate, their software estimate where you are compared to the nearest street and places you on the street, which may not be exactly where you are.. if that makes sense.
-
No, it was raw coordinates and altitude. I was able to check the GPS altitude with two different apps, and got the same numbers on both. For the non-GPS altitude, I was only able to measure that with one app.
-
any danger of telling us the make and model of phone yet? ::)
-
It's a ZTE Z796C. I hope there is a point to you asking for my personal information.
-
um.. .what's personal about the type of phone you have?
We didnt ask you for your DNA sequence, or your bank account number... ..... .........................
Soooooooooooooooooooooooooo.. whats your bank account number...?
Only kidding..... I'll hack it later! bwahahaha! ;D
-
It's a ZTE Z796C. I hope there is a point to you asking for my personal information.
well its pretty basic info to request the model of the instrument which is at the center of your argument to be able to tell your altitude without gps. Although you then went on to show there is no consistency when you tried at different locations. I would be surprised if you were using an iphone or sony or other tried and tested phone. I have never heard of a zte majesty is that a common phone where you live?
-
It's a ZTE Z796C. I hope there is a point to you asking for my personal information.
The reason you're getting varying altitude numbers is that the phone does not have GPS... it's estimating your altitude using triangulation - which as you can see now, is rather pointless.
-
That is not correct. Unless there is something I am not understanding, there is a GPS feature on the phone that I can enable or disable, just like wifi and bluetooth.
-
That is not correct. Unless there is something I am not understanding, there is a GPS feature on the phone that I can enable or disable, just like wifi and bluetooth.
i would be interested in seeing a side by side comparison with a name brand high end model say an iphone or samsung. I cant find any reviews on the gps function on your phone as i cant find any reviews at all really. Thanks for offering up the info though.
-
That is not correct. Unless there is something I am not understanding, there is a GPS feature on the phone that I can enable or disable, just like wifi and bluetooth.
I was just going on the specs - no mention of GPS..
http://www.smartphonezero.com/zte-z796c-majesty-specs/ (http://www.smartphonezero.com/zte-z796c-majesty-specs/)
Some phones use pseudo - they have a 'gps' function but really its just network triangulation... it might be that???? I have no idea though in reality.
-
I've done more reading.. I've found different specs on your phone that says that it does have GPS.. so there you go..
However, Altitude will be very inaccurate in the city around structures.
In fact, GPS Alt is not the most accurate measurement in the first place, in the order of 10 to 25 metres vertically. Good ones will get you to within 1 metre on the ground (Long/Lat).. generally for altitude you'd use an altimeter (Baromoter) - that will give you an exact number as long as you enter in the correct reference pressure for the area you're in..
It looks like your phone is one of those el cheapo's you get in the cigarette section of the supermarket.. (no offence!).. so I wouldnt expect it to give you much.
My iPhone never ceases to amaze me on how accurate it is...
If we get back to the original argument, to get a 3D reference on a GPS, it MUST have at least 4 sat's connected... for Altitude (albeit not that accurate) the 4th satellite must be high.. as in.. in space. ground based system will only give you an inaccurate 2D reference.
-
Just found this.. thought it was pertinent..
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/126843-think-gps-is-cool-ips-will-blow-your-mind (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/126843-think-gps-is-cool-ips-will-blow-your-mind)
-
looks like your phone is one of those el cheapo's you get in the cigarette section of the supermarket.. (no offence!).. so I wouldnt expect it to give you much.
My iPhone never ceases to amaze me on how accurate it is...
thanks I didnt want to be the one to say that! :)
-
Another intersting find.. seems a ground based GPS system has been developed - it has more accurate reference and can give you your altitude to 2 inches! :-\
http://www.locata.com/technology/locata-tech-explained/ (http://www.locata.com/technology/locata-tech-explained/)
Current the best ground based tech available, and very very new.
-
Another intersting find.. seems a ground based GPS system has been developed - it has more accurate reference and can give you your altitude to 2 inches! :-\
http://www.locata.com/technology/locata-tech-explained/ (http://www.locata.com/technology/locata-tech-explained/)
Current the best ground based tech available, and very very new.
interesting read - good find :)
-
You still have not explained how the altitude is displayed on my phone with more consistency without GPS than with it.
-
You still have not explained how the altitude is displayed on my phone with more consistency without GPS than with it.
Because altitude, however inaccurate due to the quality of your phone's sensors, is being calculated on the fly. When it is being displayed when GPS is turned off it is simply getting the information from a database.
-
You still have not explained how the altitude is displayed on my phone with more consistency without GPS than with it.
both gps and cell readings you gave are consistently inconsistent. Dare I suggest a budget phone gives budget performance? what app are you using?
-
You still have not explained how the altitude is displayed on my phone with more consistency without GPS than with it.
Well, what is your hypothesis? We haven't actually got access to your phone.
-
Well, considering that everyone is saying that you can only get altitude readings with Satellites, I suppose that I would have to conclude that I have a satellite phone. ::)
-
Well, considering that everyone is saying that you can only get altitude readings with Satellites, I suppose that I would have to conclude that I have a satellite phone. ::)
An altitude derived from a database is not an altitude reading, at least not in the way we are discussing it here. We are talking about using an instrument (such as a phone) that calculate's the altitude. A calculation is not the same as pulling info from a database.
-
Well, considering that everyone is saying that you can only get altitude readings with Satellites, I suppose that I would have to conclude that I have a satellite phone. ::)
Whst app are you using for altitude?
Clearly GPS uses orbiting satellites, as shown on an app or satnav or professional receivers in aircraft or used for surveying.
-
Many mapping apps, including iPhons's Apple Map, use a mapping database that includes terrain topography. If the phone can find your location then it will know the elevation too. No need for satellite reception for this as the phone can, and does, triangulates position using nearby cell towers. This is how your phone knows your elevation with GPS disabled. If you left the GPS disabled and lifted off in a hot air balloon your elevation would not change.
Now, take your phone away from cell phone reception and disable the GPS and you will have no idea what your elevation is.
Try this: GPS reception is weak inside an airliner...especially away from windows...and there is no cell phone recaption at altitude so next time you're on a plane disable the GPS then check out your position and elevation. Does the elevation say 35,000'? I think not. It won''t know where you are either. Now turn on the GPS and place the phone next to the window. Your mapping feature likely will not work because it relies on cell reception to download maps but the phone will show an accurate lat/long and will show your actual altitude.
You do not have a satellite phone...this is how all smart phones work.
-
I don't flat out disregard what you are saying. However, I just find it odd that when I went up 30 ft., the GPS altitude went down 10 ft., while the non-GPS altitude went up 4 ft.
-
I don't flat out disregard what you are saying. However, I just find it odd that when I went up 30 ft., the GPS altitude went down 10 ft., while the non-GPS altitude went up 4 ft.
just one of many inconsistencies with your litte experiment but hold onto that if it makes your feel better :)
-
I don't flat out disregard what you are saying. However, I just find it odd that when I went up 30 ft., the GPS altitude went down 10 ft., while the non-GPS altitude went up 4 ft.
That may be so but GPS is designed to be used outdoors and clear of obstructions such as buildings and tress. Your GPS signals come from satellites so best if they can "see" you. Even when outdoors on a city street surrounded by tall buildings it's common to lose the GPS signal due to interference.
You might still get a GPS signal indoors but it will be weak and full of errors....hence the results of your 30' climb. Cell phone tower triangulation is pretty good at calculating your position but not as good as GPS (when outdoors) and will have errors too...particularly in the vertical because, remember, it's using a mapping database to find your elevation and if the calculated position is slightly off so will be your elevation. Also, your experiment sample scale is far too small using your relatively basic instruments. Try it again by climbing a tall tower.
Incidentally, did you know GPS, SatPhone and Sat-TV antennas are always mounted on the TOP of the airplane so there is no interference between the transmitter and receiver? If GPS is a Ground Based system as FEers suggest wouldn't it be better to mount the GPS antenna on the belly of the plane as is done with antenna that use ground based radio and navigation systems?
-
I don't flat out disregard what you are saying. However, I just find it odd that when I went up 30 ft., the GPS altitude went down 10 ft., while the non-GPS altitude went up 4 ft.
It might also be that your phone has a crappy GPS.
Dedicated GPS units (I have one for hiking) thrash phones in terms of performance, especially for altitude. Though my iPhone does a pretty good job.
-
I do have a dedicated GPS unit. However, I use my phone most of the time for convenience; especially because it allows me to easily download Geochache information, where as my dedicated GPS does not.
One of these days, I will need to do a side by side comparison between the dedicated unit and my phone.
-
I do have a dedicated GPS unit. However, I use my phone most of the time for convenience; especially because it allows me to easily download Geochache information, where as my dedicated GPS does not.
One of these days, I will need to do a side by side comparison between the dedicated unit and my phone.
I've done a bit of that hiking in places like Scotland - the iPhone is pretty good - bang on most of the time in terms of longitude and latitude, but sometimes seems confused over altitude (which is much less important when walking).
-
I do have a dedicated GPS unit. However, I use my phone most of the time for convenience; especially because it allows me to easily download Geochache information, where as my dedicated GPS does not.
One of these days, I will need to do a side by side comparison between the dedicated unit and my phone.
I've done a bit of that hiking in places like Scotland - the iPhone is pretty good - bang on most of the time in terms of longitude and latitude, but sometimes seems confused over altitude (which is much less important when walking).
Well, I have a cheap smart phone and it is the same way, so I feel a little better now.
-
You still have not explained how the altitude is displayed on my phone with more consistency without GPS than with it.
Yeah i did, GPS altitude is accurate to 10 to 25 metres. Worse in built up areas.
-
Well, considering that everyone is saying that you can only get altitude readings with Satellites, I suppose that I would have to conclude that I have a satellite phone. ::)
Nooooo, its the only way a GPS system can show Altitude.. thats the only point we are making.
You're phone can get that info from a database, from an internal barometer, or it can simply guess it to make itself look important. I't can't get that information by triangulation from transmitters based on the ground.
Google maps provide that information..
-
I do have a dedicated GPS unit. However, I use my phone most of the time for convenience; especially because it allows me to easily download Geochache information, where as my dedicated GPS does not.
One of these days, I will need to do a side by side comparison between the dedicated unit and my phone.
I've done a bit of that hiking in places like Scotland - the iPhone is pretty good - bang on most of the time in terms of longitude and latitude, but sometimes seems confused over altitude (which is much less important when walking).
Off topic.. the iPhone is an amazing bit of kit.... accelerometers, compass, gps, gyro's.. i find it amazing... all the processing power, the apps.. the list goes on..
-
Sooo...is anyone going to tell me how GPS calculates altitude without using satellites?
-
Sooo...is anyone going to tell me how GPS calculates altitude without using satellites?
Well jroa seems to be the authority on that question but he seems to be busy playing the number game. It seems the flat earth forums most popular thread is one where you can display your ability to +1 to a number...if only they put the same effort into their theories ;D
-
You would be surprised about how many people screw that up.
-
You would be surprised about how many people screw that up.
I'd be much more surprised if you told me how the GPS system provides altitude without the use of orbiting satellites.
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
Where are the pseudoliti stations in Balkans?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
GPS does not use technology LORAN
GPS VERSUS LORAN-C FOR
VEHICULAR NAVIGATION IN URBAN
AND MOUNTAINOUS AREAS
From the limited test results presented here, it appears that GPS is now better than Loran-C in term of signal availability in a urban area The use of fast t-e-acquisition receiver technology is a significant factor, especially in areas of high buildings and forestry canopy. The use of an integrated GPS/Loran-C results only in an availability increase of a few percent. A more extensive study is however required to confirm these findings and ascertain the availability percentages presented herein
http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf (http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf)
-
Please don't necro 5 year old threads.
-
Please don't necro 5 year old threads.
please answer. I just look for answers
-
Why don't you ask Thork? Oh, wait, he hasn't been here in 3 years. ::)
-
Why don't you ask Thork? Oh, wait, he hasn't been here in 3 years. ::)
I ask you.
It says here that GPS not use technology LORAN
http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf (http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf)
satellites exist? GPS? explain this
-
Why don't you ask Thork? Oh, wait, he hasn't been here in 3 years. ::)
I ask you.
It says here that GPS not use technology LORAN
http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf (http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf)
satellites exist? GPS? explain this
There are more pseudolites mounted on cell phone towers now.
-
Why don't you ask Thork? Oh, wait, he hasn't been here in 3 years. ::)
I ask you.
It says here that GPS not use technology LORAN
http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf (http://www.novatel.com/assets/Documents/Papers/File10.pdf)
satellites exist? GPS? explain this
There are more pseudolites mounted on cell phone towers now.
Proof please.
-
Has anybody thought about figuring out what satellite dishes are pointed?
They are directional.
They need to be set up with a certain azimuth and elevation.
Wouldn't just using triangulation using different locations at the very least give an idea of the altitude and location of the signal source?
This site gives you the information you need to set up a sat dish. I think it is safe to assume the information provided is accurate. If it was not people could just set up the dish and not worry about LOS and just set up the antenna.
http://www.sadoun.com/Sat/Installation/Satellite-Heading-Calculator.htm (http://www.sadoun.com/Sat/Installation/Satellite-Heading-Calculator.htm)
You can find other sources if you wish or find friends and family using a satellite service and ask them where their dish is pointed. You could also ask them what happens when they start moving the dish around to prove it is not an omnidirectional antenna.
-
Wow. I did not realized the GPS uses satellite dishes. Please tell us more of this fictional land that you made up.
-
Wow. I did not realized the GPS uses satellite dishes. Please tell us more of this fictional land that you made up.
They do not which I assume you already suspect I know that. Satellite TV services claim they are sending you a signal from space. If you can triangulate where the signal is coming from then a conclusion can be made that satellites exist. If satellites exist then why would they feel the need to lie how GPS works?
I assumed you and others have the capability to infer what evidence this would give to the argument that GPS uses satellites. Am I wrong and you were unable to make the connection?
-
So, your whole spiel about satellite signals needing precisely aimed dish receivers was just BS? :(
-
So, your whole spiel about satellite signals needing precisely aimed dish receivers was just BS? :(
I have used Dish network when not living on a boat. If I did not have the dish set up correctly I did not receive a signal. Which means it was a directional antenna.
I have used satellite comms in the military and the same applied. I had different azimuths and angles I needed to set the dish at. I could not just set up the antenna any way I wanted. The closer I set it to the correct azimuth and elevation the stronger the signal I got.
The difference between GPS and sat TV is the bandwidth used.
The amount of data needed to be sent is different.
GPS satellites are not in geostaionary orbits.
For GPS to work it can not use a directional antenna since the signal needs to be received from other satellites and the satellites need to send signals to each other.
Basically the receiver does not need to be directional for PS to work.
Triangulating the position of a GPS sat would be relatively more difficult considering the equipment most people have access to. Triangulating where a TV sat in geostationary orbit is poses less problems. Since it remains in the same position over the Earth and just a matter of figuring out where the antennas need to be pointed at different locations. Draw lines from those antenna and see where they intersect.
-
So, your whole spiel about satellite signals needing precisely aimed dish receivers was just BS? :(
Satellite tv proves satellites exists. Hence satellites can be and are used for GPS (the specific GPS service we use today).
-
So if your GPS position is based off of pseudoliti or what ever you call them. Would there not have to be a station mounted on every ridge to give an accurate location. The GPS frequency is very weak and will not transmit through anything that you cannot see through. As well the elevation irregularities on you phone has to do with the fact that the gps signals that it is receiving are only the L1 frequency. While only the L1 frequency can give a good a altitude location it does have to log the data from the satellites for a considerable amount of time as well as be post processed by the data provided from the NGS CORS sites. Now to the comments about good gps handhelds, it really has more to do with software that is interpreting the data than actually with the hardware in the units. All of your standard handhelds, including your phone only operate on the L1 signal, and in all reality are the same. A major difference in performance does occur when you add the L2 Frequency and the soon coming L5 Frequency, but those two are only found on Survey Grade Gps Units.
-
Is there a cell phone tower on every ridge? My cell phone can tell me exactly where I am, even with the GPS turned off.
-
Is there a cell phone tower on every ridge? My cell phone can tell me exactly where I am, even with the GPS turned off.
Try it out at sea.
-
Is there a cell phone tower on every ridge? My cell phone can tell me exactly where I am, even with the GPS turned off.
Try it out at sea.
You think I have never been to sea?
-
Is there a cell phone tower on every ridge? My cell phone can tell me exactly where I am, even with the GPS turned off.
Try it out at sea.
You think I have never been to sea?
No, I'm just saying that location services on your phone (when it's GPS is switched off) don't work when out of sight of the land-based cell phone masts.
-
The point I was making is that the gps signals are very weak and can't transmit through mountains. An anology that is used is that the strength of the gps frequency is as bright as a 60 watt light bulb in New York and seen in LA.
-
The point I was making is that the gps signals are very weak and can't transmit through mountains. An anology that is used is that the strength of the gps frequency is as bright as a 60 watt light bulb in New York and seen in LA.
In order for that 60 watt bulb to be detected in LA, the world would have to be pretty flat, wouldn't you say? :-\
-
Analogies not your strong suit I see. After reading 10 pages of thoughts on how GPS works. I was just trying to explain how it actually works and why a land based system would not at this time. Don't get me wrong I would love to see a enertial positioning system like you think GPS is we just are not there yet.
-
Analogies not your strong suit I see. After reading 10 pages of thoughts on how GPS works. I was just trying to explain how it actually works and why a land based system would not at this time. Don't get me wrong I would love to see a enertial positioning system like you think GPS is we just are not there yet.
It's an analogy if you say something that contradicts your own view of the shape of the Earth?
-
I don't really understand your way of thinking, and I can see you don't actually want to have an intelligent conversation. But I have to ask this, in your world is a mile not 5280 feet? I know the distance from NY to LA would be slightly different on a flat earth as opposed to the real one we live, but not that significant of a difference to effect my anology.
-
I don't really understand
We know...
-
clap clap jroa
i bet the government paid you to be a mod
-
Do you know how AM radio works? How you can get AM radio stations from different parts of the world. Especially if you're next to a body of water? That how GPS can work without Satellites. The signal bounces off our atmosphere and also bounces of WATER.
-
Do you know how AM radio works? How you can get AM radio stations from different parts of the world. Especially if you're next to a body of water? That how GPS can work without Satellites. The signal bounces off our atmosphere and also bounces of WATER.
Wrong.
-
Funny how if my Dish Network dish moves 1cm and it loses signal. Bet they don't have an answer for that one.
Your dish could move 10 meters and suffer no loss of signal.
You probably were trying to say degrees off target.
That would be measured in . . . degrees. Not distance.
Always make your reader guess what you are trying to say
while smugly insinuating they are stupid.
:-*
-
GPS does not work by satellites.
GPS works by entities which deliver the data numbers and information to the computer or device,thats all.
instead of thinking paradoxical, which lead you to nothing, you have to know that there are innumerable entities which give us the wrong impression about technology and science. humans being are being fooled by those entities.
-
First off, I don't believe in a flat earth, I'm just doing this as a thought experiment.
What about this dome that some models of the flat earth have?
You could explain how GPS works without satellites by saying the signal sources are actually outside of the antarctic wall and pointed at the dome. So now you have a way to explain the fact that the signal sources seem to come from space and some new information on the whole antarctic quarantine zone conspiracy theory.
Of course it would fall apart if you applied basic trigonometry but that's most of flat earth theory(sorry guys, I didn't invent trigonometry).
jroa, your phone uses several different navigation technologies such as dead reckoning, cell phone tower triangulation, wifi triangulation and probably a few others I can't think of simultaneously to come up with a location. To accurately test what a technology is capable of you would need to make sure you're only using one navigation method at a time. Try disabling the wifi, bluetooth, cell radio and accelerometer and use an app like https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.eclipsim.gpsstatus2&hl=en. Which reads the raw gps data.
-
GPS does not work by satellites.
GPS works by entities which deliver the data numbers and information to the computer or device,thats all.
instead of thinking paradoxical, which lead you to nothing, you have to know that there are innumerable entities which give us the wrong impression about technology and science. humans being are being fooled by those entities.
Please identify these objects.
-
GPS does not work by satellites.
GPS works by entities which deliver the data numbers and information to the computer or device,thats all.
instead of thinking paradoxical, which lead you to nothing, you have to know that there are innumerable entities which give us the wrong impression about technology and science. humans being are being fooled by those entities.
Please identify these objects.
Everything has a mind or consciousness, frankly I have never seen one of those friends, only people with mind can see them, I have no mind I have consciousness, they choose to stay behind curtains for definitive reason.
-
I was vacationing in Norfolk Virginia and the satellite dishes on a tv or radio station were pointed south at about a 45 degree angle. Please explain that.
-
I was vacationing in Norfolk Virginia and the satellite dishes on a tv or radio station were pointed south at about a 45 degree angle. Please explain that.
That makes no sense, please rewrite with more detail like the stations the dishes were recriving.
-
The satellites used for telephone and television (and internet) communication are pointed at geosynchronous satellites, which, by necessity, must orbit above the tropical zone, roughly within a few degrees of the Equator. There are several such satellites and a dish antenna must be carefully aimed at the specific satellite associated with a communication service. Each satellite is replaced after several years and occasionally the dish antenna must be re-aligned.
-
I was vacationing in Norfolk Virginia and the satellite dishes on a tv or radio station were pointed south at about a 45 degree angle. Please explain that.
That makes no sense, please rewrite with more detail like the stations the dishes were recriving.
It was a four story station called WGNT. I'm not sure what type of dishes they were but they were pointing south at a 45 degree angle.
-
GPS does not work by satellites.
GPS works by entities which deliver the data numbers and information to the computer or device,thats all.
instead of thinking paradoxical, which lead you to nothing, you have to know that there are innumerable entities which give us the wrong impression about technology and science. humans being are being fooled by those entities.
Evidence please, not guesswork!
You just have to realise that Mr TruthTerra saying something does not mean anything at all!
There is tons of evidence that GPS and GLONOSS use satellites, so unless you can come up with more than empty claims your posts is worthless.
-
Funny thing. The "pseudollites" are planted around the ice wall to pretend to be GPS satellite signals .... yet (1) how high are the poles they're fixed on? Must be plenty high to get a radio signal to my GPS receiver when a view of something a good deal closer - like the Empire State Building - is impossible to see, (2) and the radio signal is ultra-high frequency, which does not bounce off the ionosphere but penetrates it so the radio signal must be coming straight to me, but light from the Eiffel Tower, which is a good deal closer, is not coming to me at all.
Also, telescopes aimed at the sky can see satellites, sometimes even during the daytime. Something's up there.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
Not to the extent that you think they do. Pseudolites only exist in local, specialized contexts.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
Not to the extent that you think they do. Pseudolites only exist in local, specialized contexts.
And you know this how?
-
GPS works by having satellites with uber-precise atomic clocks measure how long it takes for a signal to reach the satellite and it uses that to figure out exactly how far away the object is. That means that there is a special shell of possible points that the object could be in. A second satellite does the same thing, and combined with the first satellite, it makes a ring of possible points. A third satellite makes two possible points, of which one is probably unrealistic, so that is how it knows exactly where you are. Forth and fifth satellites are added for extra precision.
A fun fact, these satellites had to use both general and special relativity in their calculations because of the difference in gravity wells between the ground and space where they are orbiting.
That's how they work in Round Earth, no idea how they would work in any of the Flat Earth Theories.
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
The existance of A does not prove the non existance of B.
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
The existance of A does not prove the non existance of B.
Nor does your insistence that B exists negate the existence of A. Kind of funny how logic works, am I right?
-
Pseudolites could be anywhere, not just at the "ice wall". Why are you making things up?
He's not the one making things up.
Oh, so, pseudolites can only be found at the "ice wall"? Idiot.
You have no evidence that GPS satellites are actually pseudolites, yet you assert that they are anyway.
Are you saying thar pseudolites don't exist? ???
The existance of A does not prove the non existance of B.
Nor does your insistence that B exists negate the existence of A. Kind of funny how logic works, am I right?
However GPS uses satellites.
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
JROA answer his questions if you can.
-
They are floating in the ocean... Hundreds, no thousands, no billiions of them are floating in the ocean. Don't you see them?
-
Are satellites an impossible technology ? not at all.
Let me take a guess, there are no satellites in space, and no one can't penetrate space because it's like the cuipher belt just a belt of teleportation gates that bring you back to your position or to other position.
-
Are satellites an impossible technology ? not at all.
Let me take a guess, there are no satellites in space, and no one can't penetrate space because it's like the cuipher belt just a belt of teleportation gates that bring you back to your position or to other position.
Do you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about?
And, have you any idea of what the Kuiper Belt is?
Ever thought of writing "Science Fantasy" stories. You ideas are far too way out to ever be called "Science Fiction".
-
Are satellites an impossible technology ? not at all.
Let me take a guess, there are no satellites in space, and no one can't penetrate space because it's like the cuipher belt just a belt of teleportation gates that bring you back to your position or to other position.
Do you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about?
And, have you any idea of what the Kuiper Belt is?
Your offensive comments are doing great time in showing my point.
Ever thought of writing "Science Fantasy" stories. You ideas are far too way out to ever be called "Science Fiction".
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
JROA answer his questions if you can.
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
JROA answer his questions if you can.
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
But not the slightest bit of evidence they might be used for global navigation. Don't say they could be, prove that they are.
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
JROA answer his questions if you can.
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
But not the slightest bit of evidence they might be used for global navigation. Don't say they could be, prove that they are.
Do you think that I am privy to top secret information that I am free to just spread around the internet as I see fit? Are you really this naive?
-
My question is why fake GPS? LORAN was being used prior and the main complaint from users was the coverage. Nobody using it was demanding satellites be used. The demand was for more coverage, mainly by the military since large areas of the world were not covered.
Why fake GPS when people already accepted a terrestrial based system?
Then there is the added cost of faking launches and building functional satellites to crash into the ocean after launch. So now they are not only maintaining the ground base system they are wasting money launching useless satellites.
The extensive ground based system, under the assumption GPS satellites are being faked, needs to be maintained in secrete instead of openly. Adding to the complexity and number of people involved.
It makes much more sense to just say LORAN is more suitable for navigation than faking a system based on satellites.
-
My question is why fake GPS? LORAN was being used prior and the main complaint from users was the coverage. Nobody using it was demanding satellites be used. The demand was for more coverage, mainly by the military since large areas of the world were not covered.
Why fake GPS when people already accepted a terrestrial based system?
Then there is the added cost of faking launches and building functional satellites to crash into the ocean after launch. So now they are not only maintaining the ground base system they are wasting money launching useless satellites.
The extensive ground based system, under the assumption GPS satellites are being faked, needs to be maintained in secrete instead of openly. Adding to the complexity and number of people involved.
It makes much more sense to just say LORAN is more suitable for navigation than faking a system based on satellites.
Does LORAN provide an accurate timing source?
-
OK let's suppose that those "pseudollites" are posted wherever it was convenient, or possible.
GPS receivers work even in the middle of the ocean. Even in the middle of the Atlantic or Pacific, far far out of sight of any land, even the smallest island or reef. Where was the pseudollite? (Actually, I think there'd have to be more that one pseudollite position required to get this effect.) Is it possible that, somehow, the govts of the world pounded poles with signal generators on them in the middle of the ocean - poles long enough to reach to the sea bottom and still post a signal generator high enough over the water that it would be picked up by a ship at sea hundreds of miles away. The enormous expense of posting so many huge poles, and the number of men and boats used in pounding these posts into the ocean floor .... and the fact that you've never heard a word about even one of those men or boats. And the fact that no ship has ever bumped into one of the pseudollite poles.
You should ask yourself, how much work and manpower and money is involved in maintaining this supposed hoax - contrasted to what money or advantage there is in maintaining the hoax, and the fact that nobody involved has ever spilled the beans?
JROA answer his questions if you can.
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
But not the slightest bit of evidence they might be used for global navigation. Don't say they could be, prove that they are.
Do you think that I am privy to top secret information that I am free to just spread around the internet as I see fit? Are you really this naive?
Nice diversion. GPS operation with satellites is documented openly and proven, receiver manufacturers and others make it work. Typically receive from 20 satellites at any more time.
-
My question is why fake GPS? LORAN was being used prior and the main complaint from users was the coverage. Nobody using it was demanding satellites be used. The demand was for more coverage, mainly by the military since large areas of the world were not covered.
Why fake GPS when people already accepted a terrestrial based system?
Then there is the added cost of faking launches and building functional satellites to crash into the ocean after launch. So now they are not only maintaining the ground base system they are wasting money launching useless satellites.
The extensive ground based system, under the assumption GPS satellites are being faked, needs to be maintained in secrete instead of openly. Adding to the complexity and number of people involved.
It makes much more sense to just say LORAN is more suitable for navigation than faking a system based on satellites.
Does LORAN provide an accurate timing source?
Originally I do not think it required accurate timing. The receiver would calculate position by determining the direction it was from any transmitters in range.
To increase accuracy LORAN began using a primary tower and secondary towers. The secondary transmitters needed to be in sync. The signals would pulse and be sent at the same times. Then the receiver would time the difference between when the signals were received to get distance.
I am not really sure if the receivers did not continue to determine direction the signal was coming from.
I think over time the timing of the signals improved and more towers synced together improve accuracy.
The above is to the best of my knowledge. I had LORAN on my first boat and it was fairly accurate. It was never as consistently and reliably accurate as any GPS navigation system I have used.
-
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
I seriously laughed when I read this. You honestly believe a buoy is tall enough to grant any kind of range? What do you possibly think could be powering such powerful transmitters? Can you possibly be this stupid?
-
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
I seriously laughed when I read this. You honestly believe a buoy is tall enough to grant any kind of range? What do you possibly think could be powering such powerful transmitters? Can you possibly be this stupid?
Uhm, lets do the math...
Lets assume those buoyas are 10m tall and arranged in a hexagonal grid, which is the most optimal one. 10m tall tower can cover a circle of ~11km~ in radius. Turning it to one hexagon we obtain ~314km^2. Oceans have 361.4m km^2, so we need 1,150,955 buoyas. Uhm... ???
Also, such tall towers would be easily visible for millions of poeple sailing across the seas, yet I haven't seen or read any relation about weird grid of towers.
Also, GPS based on such towers would be very inaccurate. How would they remain perfectly still on the water?
How can one have such a stupid idea?
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
-
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
I seriously laughed when I read this. You honestly believe a buoy is tall enough to grant any kind of range? What do you possibly think could be powering such powerful transmitters? Can you possibly be this stupid?
You people do know that radio waves can skip off of water, right? Have you ever skipped a stone all the way across a pond? Now, think about that stone traveling at the speed of light. Do you think it would go pretty far?
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
-
You people do know that radio waves can skip off of water, right? Have you ever skipped a stone all the way across a pond? Now, think about that stone traveling at the speed of light. Do you think it would go pretty far?
Stone is pulled towards the Earth each time it bounces. The radio wave isn't. Your analogy makes absolutely no sense.
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
You made it up on fly, don't you?
You are trying to protect laughable argument. You still have to hide from masses over 1.1m towers.
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
Still no evidence of GPS not using satellites.
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it
(https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.M21679bdf373054684ec4a198c5af30ceH0&pid=15.1)
-
Not to mention the problem of getting power to such a massive network. This is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
I love this website haha
I am sorry, but do you not believe in solar panels, or do you think there is no sun light out in the ocean?
Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it
(https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.M21679bdf373054684ec4a198c5af30ceH0&pid=15.1)
If you believe those solar panels are large enough to emit powerful enough frequencies to make GPS work, then you are sadly mistaken.
Even if the panels were big enough, the buoy itself is not tall enough to provide sufficient range.
Your picture means nothing. That solar panel is for a light.
-
If you believe those solar panels are large enough to emit powerful enough frequencies to make GPS work, then you are sadly mistaken.
Even if the panels were big enough, the buoy itself is not tall enough to provide sufficient range.
Your picture means nothing. That solar panel is for a light.
Powerful enough frequencies? Output power has nothing to do with frequencies.
Those panels are to power a radio, but, that's not the point.
You said, "Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it".
-
This is a map of earth.
(http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r36/Persistenxe/Flat_earth-1.png)
Are you sure?
Print that map. Mark Cape Town.
March 21st, equinox, Sun directly over the Equator.
At 6 PM in Cape Town, Sun is setting directly at the west.
Now mark Sun position above the Equator, 6 hours to the west from Cape Town.
Should be somewhere above northwest Brazil.
Draw tangent to the Cape Town parallel. It will show where the west is from there.
Draw line from Cape Town to your marked position of Sun.
What is the angle? Is it 52 degrees instead of zero?
Is the Earth-Map-Sun in the same direction as the Real-World-Sun?
Does the map you show work as "map of earth"?
-
If you believe those solar panels are large enough to emit powerful enough frequencies to make GPS work, then you are sadly mistaken.
Even if the panels were big enough, the buoy itself is not tall enough to provide sufficient range.
Your picture means nothing. That solar panel is for a light.
Powerful enough frequencies? Output power has nothing to do with frequencies.
Those panels are to power a radio, but, that's not the point.
You said, "Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it".
That doesn't matter. There are still few problems like how those buoyas remain perfectly still and how there are no reports about the worldwide grid of them.
-
There are buoys all across the oceans, even ones anchored to the deepest depths. It is not unfathomable that they are used for more than one purpose.
I seriously laughed when I read this. You honestly believe a buoy is tall enough to grant any kind of range? What do you possibly think could be powering such powerful transmitters? Can you possibly be this stupid?
You people do know that radio waves can skip off of water, right? Have you ever skipped a stone all the way across a pond? Now, think about that stone traveling at the speed of light. Do you think it would go pretty far?
;D So radio waves propagate like stones skipping across a pond! Wish I knew when I sat for those exams on EM propagation. ;D
-
It is impossible to fake GPS. Not a single radio amateur has come forwards to say the cheap mass produced receivers are not receiving a signal which is only useful if you use the transmitters 3 D position in space and use the speed of light to calculate your position. People who say the GPS system is fake are only demonstrating their ignorance and gullibility.
There is nothing secret about a system that is being broadcast to the entire world. How are we supposed to use fake information to find where we are when we must know where the transmitter is or just get garbage results?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
LORAN ?? Really ? That got discontinued in the 80ies. It had a range of up to 1500 miles and an accuracy to about 10 miles.
Just be honest. You just pulled that one out because it was the first google result didnt you ?
So a system that have a 10 mile accuracy and 1500 miles in total range that havent been operating since 1980 is the answer ?
You might want to reconsider that. The antennas for 40 meter band alone would be around a small fishing pole. Thats not going to fit inside a phone.
-
If you believe those solar panels are large enough to emit powerful enough frequencies to make GPS work, then you are sadly mistaken.
Even if the panels were big enough, the buoy itself is not tall enough to provide sufficient range.
Your picture means nothing. That solar panel is for a light.
Powerful enough frequencies? Output power has nothing to do with frequencies.
Those panels are to power a radio, but, that's not the point.
You said, "Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it".
That doesn't matter. There are still few problems like how those buoyas remain perfectly still and how there are no reports about the worldwide grid of them.
I never said it was a GPS buoy.
He said, "Show me an ocean buoy with a solar panel on it".
I did.
Saying "powerful enough frequencies" shows he has absolutely no idea
what he is talking about.
Words mean things.
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
LORAN ?? Really ? That got discontinued in the 80ies. It had a range of up to 1500 miles and an accuracy to about 10 miles.
Just be honest. You just pulled that one out because it was the first google result didnt you ?
So a system that have a 10 mile accuracy and 1500 miles in total range that havent been operating since 1980 is the answer ?
You might want to reconsider that. The antennas for 40 meter band alone would be around a small fishing pole. Thats not going to fit inside a phone.
You don't think it is possible that LORAN got upgraded and now we call it GPS?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
LORAN ?? Really ? That got discontinued in the 80ies. It had a range of up to 1500 miles and an accuracy to about 10 miles.
Just be honest. You just pulled that one out because it was the first google result didnt you ?
So a system that have a 10 mile accuracy and 1500 miles in total range that havent been operating since 1980 is the answer ?
You might want to reconsider that. The antennas for 40 meter band alone would be around a small fishing pole. Thats not going to fit inside a phone.
You don't think it is possible that LORAN got upgraded and now we call it GPS?
No. Where is the technical specification for the upgrade?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
LORAN ?? Really ? That got discontinued in the 80ies. It had a range of up to 1500 miles and an accuracy to about 10 miles.
Just be honest. You just pulled that one out because it was the first google result didnt you ?
So a system that have a 10 mile accuracy and 1500 miles in total range that havent been operating since 1980 is the answer ?
You might want to reconsider that. The antennas for 40 meter band alone would be around a small fishing pole. Thats not going to fit inside a phone.
You don't think it is possible that LORAN got upgraded and now we call it GPS?
No. Where is the technical specification for the upgrade?
Why would you assume I am privy to top secret information?
-
How did Loran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN) work with no satellites?
Pseudollites are stationed around the disk, and your position is triangulated from these beacons.
I picked satellites. Please do not expect answers to multiple questions in a thread. It makes them jump all over the place as people answer different parts..
LORAN ?? Really ? That got discontinued in the 80ies. It had a range of up to 1500 miles and an accuracy to about 10 miles.
Just be honest. You just pulled that one out because it was the first google result didnt you ?
So a system that have a 10 mile accuracy and 1500 miles in total range that havent been operating since 1980 is the answer ?
You might want to reconsider that. The antennas for 40 meter band alone would be around a small fishing pole. Thats not going to fit inside a phone.
You don't think it is possible that LORAN got upgraded and now we call it GPS?
No. Where is the technical specification for the upgrade?
Why would you assume I am privy to top secret information?
Strangely, the operation of GPS is published for all.
-
It is impossible to fake GPS. Not a single radio amateur has come forwards to say the cheap mass produced receivers are not receiving a signal which is only useful if you use the transmitters 3 D position in space and use the speed of light to calculate your position. People who say the GPS system is fake are only demonstrating their ignorance and gullibility.
You can fake GPS. Its called gps- spoofing.
-
It's possible people take by photo technology's of airplane? Then save the all information from its to their server? I never found satellites when I was look the stars from my telescope
-
Probably because you weren't looking for them. You have to know where a satellite is in order to see it.
I saw the ISS with my telescope.
-
It's possible people take by photo technology's of airplane? Then save the all information from its to their server? I never found satellites when I was look the stars from my telescope
WTF?
-
Note that you can make your own GPS receiver (see here : http://www.aholme.co.uk/GPS/Main.htm ), and that the GPS almanach is public.
Can someone explain how static Earth transmitters can give you correct results even when your receiver assumes moving satellites (and corrects for general relativity) ?.
-
It is likely that GPS chips are programmed by the conspiracy.
-
It is likely that GPS chips are programmed by the conspiracy.
;D Isn't the whole Flat Idea so wonderful? Any evidence you can't explain you can blame on "the conspiracy"! ;D
You don't convince anyone, just make yourself look ridiculous.
Like the existence of the South Pole - oh no that's just "the conspiracy" or
the air routes in the Southern Hemisphere - oh no, the airlines are part of "the conspiracy".
It really is laughable.
-
Are you laughing all the way to the bank?
-
It is likely that GPS chips are programmed by the conspiracy.
My point is that you can indeed program your own GPS chip. It is a project accessible to anyone with a good understanding of electronics and radio (eg, any radioamateur), and understanding of the GPS system.
You don't need any specialized tooling to do so, or be a member of a conspiracy.
-
I would be laughing all the way to the bank if I were in your shoes.
-
Are you laughing all the way to the bank?
I don't see how it's helping my bank account.
Dream on, when did you graduate from the Society's indoctrination school. You seem to have all the answers off pat.
-
Questions usualy are puntuated with a question mark in civilized countries.
-
It's possible people take by photo technology's of airplane? Then save the all information from its to their server? I never found satellites when I was look the stars from my telescope
WHAT? you didn't see satellite in your telescope? Probably you are:
0) not looking for them
1) you look through wrong end of telescope
2) You are FE retard
3) your option.
-
Questions usualy are puntuated with a question mark in civilized countries.
Yes, until you are talking to civilized person. In case of FE-er it's not worthy as the questions are never answered.