GPS

GPS proves the earth is round with geometric precision. Can anyone disprove this fact?

Wow.  You've got us there.  Who would have known that a three letter abriviation could blow this website out of the water? 

Perhaps you should go back to Above Top Secret or where ever you came from.  This site is for serious scientific discussion and debate among adults. 

This site is for serious scientific discussion and debate among adults.

I have been seriously misled...

Wow.  You've got us there.  Who would have known that a three letter abriviation could blow this website out of the water? 

Perhaps you should go back to Above Top Secret or where ever you came from.  This site is for serious scientific discussion and debate among adults.

No doubt that GPS coordinates precisely prove the shape of the earth. It's simple mathematical fact. And I think you were attempting to spell "abbreviation", and GPS is an acronym, not an abbreviation. BTW, why is abbreviation such a long word? 

Let me save you some time on this topic since its come up before. 

Flat earth theory doesn't have a way to explain GPS.

Some pieces of evidence for a globe earth FE does have some interesting explanations for.  GPS is not one of them.

The GPS satellites (which do orbit at a much lower altitude using the Biefeld-Brown effect) are one of the most direct proofs of the fact that the Earth does not orbit the Sun: the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780

The GPS satellites (which do orbit at a much lower altitude using the Biefeld-Brown effect) are one of the most direct proofs of the fact that the Earth does not orbit the Sun: the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780

tl;dr and doesn't change the fact that GPS is one of the easiest ways to determine that the earth is geometrically a proven spheroid.

A stationary Earth can only have a flat surface, and not an outer spherical surface: terrestrial gravity is a force of pressure and not attractive.

that the earth is geometrically a proven spheroid.

I have very bad news for you: you are going to have to explain the Tunguska event.



The fight path of the cosmic object, as reconstructed from eyewitness testimony and ballistic wave evidence. Felix Zigel and other space experts agree that, prior to exploding, the object changed from an eastward to a westward direction over the Stony Tunguska region. The arc at the bottom of the map indicates the scope of the area where witnesses either saw the fiery object or heard the blast.


The information acquired by the Florensky and Zolotov expeditions about the ballistic shock effect on the trees provides a strong basis, in some scientists' view, for a reconstruction of an alteration in the object's line of flight. In the terminal phase of its descent, according to the most recent speculations, the object appears to have approached on an eastward course, then changed course westward over the region before exploding. The ballistic wave evidence, in fact, indicates that some type of flight correction was performed in the atmosphere.


The same opinion was reached by Felix Zigel, who as an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation has been involved in the training of many Soviet cosmonauts. His latest study of all the eyewitness and physical data convinced him that "before the blast the Tunguska body described in the atmosphere a tremendous arc of about 375 miles in extent (in azimuth)" - that is, it "carried out a maneuver." No natural object is capable of such a feat.


UFOs/Jet aircrafts/V2 rockets were invented by the Vril society, only after 1936.

In the archives of the former Irkutsk Magnetic and Meteorological Observatory, investigators managed to find notes written by A. K. Kokorin, who was an observer at a weather station on the River Kezhma, about 600 km from the Tunguska explosion site. In his observation journal for June 1908, the section headed "Notes" contains an exceptionally important entry.
 
It shows that there was certainly more than one body in the air at that time.

At 7 am, two fiery circles [spheres] of gigantic size appeared to the north; 4 minutes after appearing, the circles disappeared; soon after the disappearance of the fiery circles a loud noise was heard, similar to the sound of the wind, that went from north to south; the noise lasted about 5 minutes; then followed sounds and thundering, like shots from enormous guns, that made the windows rattle. Those shots continued for 2 minutes, and after them came a crack like a rifle-shot. These last sounds lasted 2 minutes. Everything took place in broad daylight.
At that time, T. Naumenko was observing the flight of a sphere from the village of Kezhma which stands on the River Angara.


BALL LIGHTNING: the demonstration that the Tunguska explosion was caused by a ball lightning phenomenon:

http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/ebooks/Chukanov-BallLightning.pdf (section II, the Tunguska "meteorite")

BALL LIGHTNING = SCALAR WAVES/TELLURIC CURRENTS/SUBQUARS STRINGS WHICH FORM A DOUBLE TORSION TORNADO (normally, the subquark strings/ether travel linearly in double torsion motion; through special methods [employed by Kozyrev, DePalma, Tesla, Brown] the scalar waves are directed into a double torsion tornado object, that is,  ball lightning)


Ball Lightning, Paradox of Physics: https://books.google.ro/books?id=OLbvX5UnxXoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=ball+lightning&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=VH0iVfL_KJeLaOCjgqAD&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ball%20lightning&f=false (includes extensive evidence, pages 7 - 102)


Tesla, ball lightning objects kept in wooden boxes:

https://books.google.ro/books?id=HIuK7iLO9zgC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=tesla+fireballs+wooden+boxes+lightning&source=bl&ots=Xa3Gs3ZYSU&sig=g4tZ2Wq5xgePKhMRY3ZWBSfAgTg&hl=ro&sa=X&ei=Jn4iVdXABJTdauv2gcAB&ved=0CDsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=tesla%20fireballs%20wooden%20boxes%20lightning&f=false



The ball lightning spheres seen at Tunguska defied not only terrestrial gravitation, but also showed that the Earth does not orbit the Sun, or rotates around its own axis: since ball lightning is a form of double torsion strings of subquarks, it does not obey in any form the accepted law of attractive gravity, given the 29km/s accepted orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun, the ball lightning objects would have disappeared instantly from sight - the fact that they did not means that the Earth is absolutely stationary.




In 1891, Nikola Tesla gave a lecture for the members of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers in New York City, where he made a striking demonstration. In each hand he held a gas discharge tube, an early version of the modern fluorescent bulb. The tubes were not connected to any wires, but nonetheless they glowed brightly during his demonstration. Tesla explained to the awestruck attendees that the electricity was being transmitted through the air by the pair of metal sheets which sandwiched the stage. He went on to speculate how one might increase the scale of this effect to transmit wireless power and information over a broad area, perhaps even the entire Earth. As was often the case, Tesla's audience was engrossed but bewildered.


Geo-magnetic disturbances were already observed even before the explosion!!

Many years later, researchers from Tomsk came across a forgotten publication by a Professor Weber about a powerful geo-magnetic disturbance observed in a laboratory at Kiel University in Germany for three days before the intrusion of the Tunguska object, and which ended at the very hour when the gigantic bolide exploded above the Central Siberian Plateau.


Tesla experimented with the ball lightning ether for YEARS before the Tunguska event; from the Wardenclyffe tower he sent longitudinal waves for days BEFORE the event itself in order to carefully set up the experiment.



If the light from the Sun could not reach London due to curvature and/or any light reflection phenomena, then certainly NO LIGHT from an explosion which occurred at some 7 km altitude in the atmosphere could have been seen at all, at the same time, on a spherical earth.

The Tunguska event WAS NOT caused by either a comet, an asteroid, a meteorite or a volcanic explosion:

In 1983, astronomer Zdenek Sekanina published a paper criticizing the comet hypothesis. He pointed out that a body composed of cometary material, travelling through the atmosphere along such a shallow trajectory, ought to have disintegrated, whereas the Tunguska body apparently remained intact into the lower atmosphere.

The chief difficulty in the asteroid hypothesis is that a stony object should have produced a large crater where it struck the ground, but no such crater has been found.

Fesenkov (1962) claims, "According to all evidence, this meteorite moved around the Sun in a retrograde direction, which is impossible for typical meteorites...." Fesenkov notes that meteorites rarely hit the earth in the morning, because the morning side faces forward in the planet's orbit. Usually the meteorite overtakes the earth from behind, on the evening side.


http://www.nuforc.org/GNTungus.html

“TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.”

“Sir,--I should be interested in hearing whether others of your readers observed the strange light in the sky which was seen here last night by my sister and myself. I do not know when it first appeared; we saw it between 12 o’clock (midnight) and 12:15 a.m.  It was in the northeast and of a bright flame-colour like the light of sunrise or sunset.  The sky, for some distance above the light, which appeared to be on the horizon, was blue as in the daytime, with bands of light cloud of a pinkish colour floating across it at intervals.  Only the brightest stars could be seen in any part of the sky, though it was an almost cloudless night.  It was possible to read large print indoors, and the hands of the clock in my room were quite distinct.  An hour later, at about 1:30 a.m., the room was quite light, as if it had been day; the light in the sky was then more dispersed and was a fainter yellow.  The whole effect was that of a night in Norway at about this time of year.  I am in the habit of watching the sky, and have noticed the amount of light indoors at different hours of the night several times in the last fortnight.  I have never at any time seen anything the least like this in England, and it would be interesting if any one would explain the cause of so unusual a sight.

Yours faithfully,
Katharine Stephen.
Godmanchester, Huntingdon, July 1.”


Let us remember that the first newspaper report about the explosion itself ONLY appeared on July 2, 1908 in the Sibir periodical.



A report from Berlin in the New York Times of July 3 stated: 'Remarkable lights were observed in the northern heavens on Tuesday and Wednesday nights, the bright diffused white and yellow illumination continuing through the night until it disappeared at dawn...'

On July 5, (1908) a New York Times story from Britain was entitled: 'Like Dawn at Midnight.' '...The northern sky at midnight became light blue, as if the dawn were breaking...people believed that a big fire was raging in the north of London...shortly after midnight, it was possible to read large print indoors...it would be interesting if anyone would explain the cause of so unusual a sight.'


The letter sent by Mrs. Katharine Stephen is absolutely genuine as it includes details NOBODY else knew at the time: not only the precise timing of the explosion itself (7:15 - 7:17 local time, 0:15 - 0:17 London time), BUT ALSO THE DURATION OF THE TRAJECTORY OF THE OBJECT, right before the explosion, a fact uncovered decades later only by the painstaking research of Dr. Felix Zigel, an aerodynamics professor at the Moscow Institute of Aviation.

Sandokhan,

I don't mean to embarrass you but I think you might have posted in the wrong thread. 

Perhaps you meant to join in the discussion regarding the existence of nuclear weapons?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11293.0

I find it funny that he needs fifty thousand effects and principles to explain how gravity works.

I find it funny that he needs fifty thousand effects and principles to explain how gravity works.

And still explains nothing.

Wow.  You've got us there.  Who would have known that a three letter abriviation could blow this website out of the water? 

Perhaps you should go back to Above Top Secret or where ever you came from.  This site is for serious scientific discussion and debate among adults.

Well, all the maps of the earth for centuries have been consistent with
          the equatorial circumference of the earth being just a bit over 40,000 km (about 24,900 miles) and
          the distance from the North Pole to the Equator just over 10,000 km (about 6,214 miles - quite consistent with "the Wiki").
These distances have been verified (though to much higher precision) by GPS^[1].

But these distances are not consistent with a Flat Earth, which would require the equatorial circumferential to by around 62,800 km (about 39040 miles).

Not only that, but those maps and the GPS figures indicate that the spacings between the meridians of longitude get progressively smaller from the equator to the South Pole, not increase as demanded by the Flat Earth map.

So yes, it is no secret that these maps and the GPS prove that the Earth is Really a Globe.

One does have to call our BS when one sees it, doesn't one!


[1] GPS, an acronym for Global Positioning System and not an "abriviation" as some claim.

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Quote from: İntikam on October 25, 2016, 02:17:40 PM

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Don't worry, you'll get there.

Quote from: Globetrotter on October 25, 2016, 04:19:57 PM

Quote from: İntikam on October 25, 2016, 02:17:40 PM

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Don't worry, you'll get there.

I pray for his Turkey god, that he not die before

Have 2 people quoted in your reply, and bam. Interrupted a conversation you should to be ignored (or something like that).

GPS proves the earth is round with geometric precision. Can anyone disprove this fact?

A GPS like system could be implemented using ground based towers. The math would all be completely different, which is how we know that it isn't done that way.

If only a few people were allowed to view the source code from GPS receivers, you could argue that the software is doing some kind of extra mathematical conversion to make the coordinates appear to be on a round surface. But you can buy a raw GPS IC and program up your own GPS receiver and verify the earth is round.

The only thing I can say is that I have personally never seen the source code for a GPS receiver and I imagine most people on these forums haven't either. When I worked with Texas Instruments they had an evaluation kit for a GPS chip which I thought about buying for fun. I think they sold the chip line though.

The fact that GPS can tell your altitude at all should be enough to tell that the earth is round.

The fact that GPS can tell your altitude at all should be enough to tell that the earth is round.

Why are you still a noob?  And an angry one at that...

I'm actually not angry at all, nor a noob.

How did he even make the jump from GPS to the Tunguska event? That's kind of impressive.

Quote from: İntikam on October 25, 2016, 02:17:40 PM

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Read to my signature and act as an idiot. If you arrive can be enought a brainless idiot, be sure  you will earn it. If you really want, you can.

Quote from: Globetrotter on October 25, 2016, 04:19:57 PM

Quote from: İntikam on October 25, 2016, 02:17:40 PM

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Read to my signature and act as an idiot. If you arrive can be enought a brainless idiot, be sure  you will earn it. If you really want, you can.

All you have to do is hit  "quote" and then type your reply. That interrupts his conversation, and places you on the "heroic NASA troll" list.

Quote from: İntikam on October 26, 2016, 02:35:57 PM

Quote from: Globetrotter on October 25, 2016, 04:19:57 PM

Quote from: İntikam on October 25, 2016, 02:17:40 PM

I recommend you look a phrase for meaning of fact.

How those guys bribed you that you included them in your Ignore List? Please, give me this same chance.

Read to my signature and act as an idiot. If you arrive can be enought a brainless idiot, be sure  you will earn it. If you really want, you can.

All you have to do is hit  "quote" and then type your reply. That interrupts his conversation, and places you on the "heroic NASA troll" list.

or prove him wrong.  Then he'll make something up and put you on the list.  That's how most got on there.

All you have to do is hit  "quote" and then type your reply. That interrupts his conversation, and places you on the "heroic NASA troll" list.

This technique is especially effective if you quote someone already on the naughty list.  And almost guaranteed to work if the person you quote was being disrespectful of the juvenile little Turkish child.

The GPS satellites (which do orbit at a much lower altitude using the Biefeld-Brown effect) are one of the most direct proofs of the fact that the Earth does not orbit the Sun: the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780

Missing "orbital Sagnac effect"? Any "Sagnac effect" from our orbiting the sun is far less than from the rotation of the earth, and that is corrected for.

The Sagnac effect requires EM signals to be traversing a loop in opposing directions. Where is the loop in the earth orbiting the sun?
The time delay from the Sagnac effect is derived here

2.7  The Sagnac EffectIf two pulses of light are sent in opposite directions around a stationary circular loop of radius R, they will travel the same inertial distance at the same speed, so they will arrive at the end point simultaneously. This is illustrated in the left-hand figure below.
 

The figure on the right indicates what happens if the loop itself is rotating during this procedure. Clearly the pulse traveling in the same direction as the rotation of the loop must travel a slightly greater distance than the pulse traveling in the opposite direction, due to the angular displacement of the loop during the transit. As a result, if the pulses are emitted simultaneously from the “start” position, the counter-rotating pulse will arrive at the "end" point slightly earlier than the co-rotating pulse. Conversely, if two pulses arrive simultaneously at the end point, the co-rotating pulse must have been emitted from the starting point earlier than the counter-rotating pulse.
 
Quantitatively, if we let w denote the angular speed of the loop, then the circumferential tangent speed of the end point is v = wR, and the sum of the speeds of the pulses and the receiver at the "end" point is c-v in the co-rotating direction and c+v in the counter-rotating direction. Both pulses begin with an initial separation of 2πR from the end point, so the difference between the travel times is

where A = πR² is the area enclosed by the loop.
From: Mathpages, Reflections on Relativity, 2.7 The Sagnac Effect.

The Sagnac Effect depends not only on the angular velocity, but on the area of the loop traversed.

You think that changing the venue will work for you?

It won't.


You simply haven't studied the missing orbital Sagnac effect, even though I posted the best available bibliography so that you'd be able to properly understand the issues involved.



If two pulses of light are sent in opposite directions around a stationary circular loop of radius R

Is this supposed to be a joke?

The path the receiver
followed during the time of flight of the signal is
completely irrelevant. This is consistent with the
argument of Ives [8] that even the original Sagnac
experimental results were not specifically due to rotation.
Ives suggested an experimental proof designed to show
the effect did not require rotation. In a beautiful
modification of Ives suggestion, Wang [9] has constructed
what he calls a Fiber Optic Conveyer (FOC) which
directly verifies that linear motion has the same effect as
circular motion.

Here is the seminal paper published by Professor Ruyong Wang:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242479763_First-Order_Fiber-Interferometric_Experiments_for_Crucial_Test_of_Light-Speed_Constancy



Any "Sagnac effect" from our orbiting the sun is far less than from the rotation of the earth, and that is corrected for.

On the contrary, the orbital Sagnac effect is much greater than the rotational Sagnac effect. Not only it is not corrected at all, IT IS COMPLETELY MISSING.

In GPS the actual magnitude of the Sagnac correction
due to earth’s rotation depends on the positions of
satellites and receiver and a typical value is 30 m, as the
propagation time is about 0.1s and the linear speed due
to earth’s rotation is about 464 m/s at the equator. The
GPS provides an accuracy of about 10 m or better in positioning.
Thus the precision of GPS will be degraded significantly,
if the Sagnac correction due to earth’s rotation
is not taken into account. On the other hand, the orbital
motion of the earth around the sun has a linear speed of
about 30 km/s which is about 100 times that of earth’s
rotation. Thus the present high-precision GPS would be
entirely impossible if the omitted correction due to orbital
motion is really necessary.


In an intercontinental microwave link between Japan and
the USA via a geostationary satellite as relay, the influence
of earth’s rotation is also demonstrated in a high-precision
time comparison between the atomic clocks at two remote
ground stations.
In this transpacific-link experiment, a synchronization
error of as large as about 0.3 µs was observed unexpectedly.


Meanwhile, as in GPS, no effects of earth’s orbital motion
are reported in these links, although they would be
easier to observe if they are in existence. Thereby, it is evident
that the wave propagation in GPS or the intercontinental
microwave link depends on the earth’s rotation, but
is entirely independent of earth’s orbital motion around
the sun or whatever. As a consequence, the propagation
mechanism in GPS or intercontinental link can be viewed
as classical in conjunction with an ECI frame, rather than
the ECEF or any other frame, being selected as the unique
propagation frame. In other words, the wave in GPS or the
intercontinental microwave link can be viewed as propagating
via a classical medium stationary in a geocentric
inertial frame.


http://qem.ee.nthu.edu.tw/f1a.pdf


Why is there no requirement for a Sagnac correction due to the earth’s orbital motion? Like the transit time in the spinning Mossbauer experiments, any such effect would be completely canceled by the orbital-velocity effect on the satellite clocks.

However, indirectly, the counteracting effects of the transit time and clock slowing induced biases indicate that an ether drift is present. This is because there is independent evidence that clocks are slowed as a result of their speed. Thus,
ether drift must exist or else the clock slowing effect would be observed.


The fact that the orbital Sagnac effect is not recorded by GPS satellites is a basic assertion of modern physics.


And things don't stop here.

In addition to the fact that GPS satellites do not record the orbital Sagnac effect, we have an even greater problem: the GPS clocks DO NOT RECORD the Sun's gravitational potential.

It is assumed that the orbital velocity of the Earth as it orbits the Sun is a variable; however, the GPS clocks show that the this velocity MUST BE CONSTANT, as it does not record the Sun's gravitational potential effect upon these clocks.


https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1782182#msg1782182

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780


Since GPS satellites do not record the orbital Sagnac effect, it means that the Earth does not revolve around the Sun.

I'm just gonna throw this in here, see what the big bad tiger does with it.

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