Does Science Reveal Truth?

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Again you go on with the intellectual laziness inherent in a true metal brain.
This took me about ten SECONDS to find:
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
I know you don't like to read, but just read the last couple of paragraphs.

All that says is time dilation proves relativity. If you accept temps and air pressure do not affect the speed of atomic clocks then you have faith in relativity.

Satellites are not reliant on relativity equations to function properly. That is a myth.

@metal-brain said
All that says is time dilation proves relativity.

Time dilation DOES prove relativity. So what's you point?

If you accept temps and air pressure do not affect the speed of atomic clocks ...

And temps and air pressure indeed do NOT affect the speed of atomic clocks. Do you deny this scientific fact? YES OR NO?

Satellites are not reliant on relativity equations to function properly. That is a myth.

Straw man. GPS satellite clocks are designed to have a 'tick' rate that ARE reliant on relativity being taken into account to do their job properly. That is NOT a myth.

@humy said
Time dilation DOES prove relativity. So what's you point?

If you accept temps and air pressure do not affect the speed of atomic clocks ...

And temps and air pressure indeed do NOT affect the speed of atomic clocks. Do you deny this scientific fact? YES OR NO?
[quote] Satellites are not reliant on relativity equations to function properly. That is a myth. [/qu ...[text shortened]... hat ARE reliant on relativity being taken into account to do their job properly. That is NOT a myth.

GPS doesn't need relativity equations to work properly. I already proved you wrong. Go back and read the article I posted that proves that.

Time dilation supports GR, not GPS.
The time difference can be adjusted for without GR equations. You are wrong.

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm

Read the article from the link above. If you can find fault in the article show it to me. If not, shut up!

@metal-brain said
GPS doesn't need relativity equations to work properly. I already proved you wrong. Go back and read the article I posted that proves that.

Time dilation supports GR, not GPS.
The time difference can be adjusted for without GR equations. You are wrong.

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm

Read the article from the link above. If you can find fault in the article show it to me. If not, shut up!

GPS doesn't need relativity equations to work properly. I already proved you wrong. Go back and read the article I posted that proves that.

You have proved nothing. I have already read ALL of that article and debunked it. It falsely claimed that the GPS receiver doesn't use its own clock and then based its argument on that false premise and then I proved that premise false.
Here is that proof yet again;

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1716
"....GPS receivers are usually equipped with quartz crystal clocks, which are relatively inexpensive and compact. They have low power requirements and long life spans
...
It really isn't necessary for a GPS receiver clock to be wonderful, because we are solving for time. There are four unknowns (x, y, z, and time) and, therefore, four observations to make the solution.

Still we can't get along without an oscillator in the receiver. It is necessary for producing the replica code, for example. The replica code needs to match the incoming signals from the satellites. So, obviously, a receiver clock is necessary, but it doesn't need to be anything like an atomic standard.
..."

Well?

Time dilation supports GR, not GPS.

Who said time dilation "supports" GPS, whatever the hell that's supposed to mean? Not me. GPS is designed to take it into account, that's all. Hypothetically, if relativity was wrong and no time dilation exists then GPS simply wouldn't be designed to take into account time dilation and GPS would still work so don't know where you got this time dilation "supports" GPS from.

The time difference can be adjusted for without GR equations. You are wrong.

The people that designed the GPS sat's clock speed for the time difference DID use GR (and also SR) equations for that. We have now REPEATEDLY shown you the links that explained how. So exactly WHICH part of that fact do you contest here?

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm

Read the article from the link above. If you can find fault in the article show it to me. If not, shut up!

I HAVE read the link above, ALL of it in fact, and I HAVE found fault in it and I HAVE shown you the fault.
Here it is yet again;
https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/science/sea-level-rise.179816/page-53
It is RIGHT THERE! Just look at the 5th post down on that page. Are you completely BLIND? Or are you just pretending to be stupid?

Well?

@humy said

GPS doesn't need relativity equations to work properly. I already proved you wrong. Go back and read the article I posted that proves that.

You have proved nothing. I have already read ALL of that article and debunked it. It falsely claimed that the GPS receiver doesn't use its own clock and then based its argument on that false premise and then I proved that p ...[text shortened]... post down on that page. Are you completely BLIND? Or are you just pretending to be stupid?

Well?

You are a liar. You never debunked it at all. The excerpts from your last post say nothing of what you falsely claimed.

You obviously never read the article from the link I posted. Either that or you found out I was right and decided to lie about it as you often do.

Read the article and show me excerpts from it that you think are wrong. GPS satellites do NOT use GR equations. You are a liar!

@metal-brain said
You are a liar. You never debunked it at all. The excerpts from your last post say nothing of what you falsely claimed.

As I have repeatedly said before, your pseudoscientific link claimed this:

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm
"...Problem is, GPS receivers contain no atomic clock ...
That ‘time at the receiver’ must instead be determined from the satellites’ clocks...."
Thus, to any none-moron, it is clearly claiming (and falsely so) that GPS receivers don't use a clock.

Do you deny this fact? Yes or no?
If yes, explain how that's NOT true...
If not, then lets continue;

OK, lets yet again check the REAL facts to see if that claim is correct;

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1716
"....GPS receivers are usually equipped with quartz crystal clocks, which are relatively inexpensive and compact. They have low power requirements and long life spans
...
It really isn't necessary for a GPS receiver clock to be wonderful, because we are solving for time. There are four unknowns (x, y, z, and time) and, therefore, four observations to make the solution.

Still we can't get along without an oscillator in the receiver. It is necessary for producing the replica code, for example. The replica code needs to match the incoming signals from the satellites. So, obviously, a receiver clock is necessary, but it doesn't need to be anything like an atomic standard.
..."

Thus, to any none-moron, it is clearly says (and correctly so) that GPS receivers DO use a clock, thus contradicting the claim made by your link. And you can find other REAL science links that all say/imply the same thing.

Do you deny this fact? Yes or no?
If yes, explain how that's NOT true...
If not, then you admit I didn't lie about that.

Well?

@humy said
As I have repeatedly said before, your pseudoscientific link claimed this:

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm
"...Problem is, GPS receivers contain no atomic clock ...
That ‘time at the receiver’ must instead be determined from the satellites’ clocks...."
Thus, to any none-moron, it is clearly claiming (and falsely so) that GPS receivers don't use a ...[text shortened]... ?
If yes, explain how that's NOT true...
If not, then you admit I didn't lie about that.

Well?

"That ‘time at the receiver’ must instead be determined from the satellites’ clocks...."
Thus, to any none-moron, it is clearly claiming (and falsely so) that GPS receivers don't use a clock."

Nobody claimed receivers don't use a clock. That has nothing to do with general relativity. You still fail to show satellites use GR equations. You are not fooling anybody here. GPS does not prove anything.

@metal-brain said

Nobody claimed receivers don't use a clock.

Your pseudoscientific link claimed just that and then I proved it wrong and thus you wrong.
Thus, as I proved, GPS sat clock 'tick' rates are designed to take into account relativity thus they do (indirectly) take into account relativity equations and they do (indirectly) show relativity to be correct: -Exactly which part of that do you deny?
You convince nobody here.

@humy said
Your pseudoscientific link claimed just that and then I proved it wrong and thus you wrong.
Thus, as I proved, GPS sat clock 'tick' rates are designed to take into account relativity thus they do (indirectly) take into account relativity equations and they do (indirectly) show relativity to be correct: -Exactly which part of that do you deny?
You convince nobody here.

You are a liar. You did nothing of the sort.

It is not a pseudoscientific link. Everything in that article is accurate and you never once proved any of it wrong. GPS does not prove GR. GR equations are not necessary for GPS to work. If you want to say time dilation confirms GR that is fine, but stop making the bone headed assertion that GPS is somehow reliant on GR to function properly. It is a myth.

@metal-brain said
You are a liar. You did nothing of the sort.

It is not a pseudoscientific link. Everything in that article is accurate

Does that include its clearly implied claim that GPS receivers do NOT use their own clock, which was just one of the false premises that whole 'essay' (pseudoscientific BS) was based on?
If yes; I just proved that above claim false thus "Everything in that article" is certainly NOT "accurate"!
If no, then how can you explain to us the REAL science links, like the one I just showed you, all clearly say GPS receivers DO use their own clock and indeed HAVE to!?
Exactly where in the above do you claim I "lied" or at least not proven?

@humy said
Does that include its clearly implied claim that GPS receivers do NOT use their own clock, which was just one of the false premises that whole 'essay' (pseudoscientific BS) was based on?
If yes; I just proved that above claim false thus "Everything in that article" is certainly NOT "accurate"!
If no, then how can you explain to us the REAL science links, like the one I just sh ...[text shortened]... clock and indeed HAVE to!?
Exactly where in the above do you claim I "lied" or at least not proven?

Stop lying. The article I posted clearly says the GPS satellites have their own clocks.

From the link below:

"The basics of how GPS receivers work is fairly straightforward. An array of orbiting satellites surrounds Earth. Each satellite holds one or more highly-accurate atomic clocks. As they orbit, a satellite transmits the time signal (or ‘timestamp&rsquo😉 of its on-board clock. Since these signals travel at a finite speed – the speed of light – we can determine how far away each satellite is from the receiver and thus figure out where we are located."

http://alternativephysics.org/book/GPSmythology.htm

Stop making up lies.

NASA Saw Something Come Out Of A Black Hole For The First Time Ever.

https://science-andinfo.blogspot.com/2019/12/nasa-saw-something-come-out-of-black.html?fbclid=IwAR1zpVHJNozRTCgI790LAIojcnguIYDUm3XRMfrg2u9IIo9B3-MOMezfYF4

@metal-brain said
Stop lying. The article I posted clearly says the GPS satellites have their own clocks.

WOW you really like making up your straw man lies don't you!
And you pretend to be so stupid as not able to read!
I DID NOT EVER SAY the article you posted said that the GPS satellites do not have their own clocks and YOU KNOW THIS!

I very clearly REPEATEDLY said (and last time with the words " ...it is clearly claiming (and falsely so) that GPS receivers don't use a clock. " ) the article you posted very clearly implied that the GPS RECEIVERS, NOT the GPS satellites, do not have their own clocks.
In reality, BOTH the GPS satellites AND, as I proved, the GPS receivers have their own clocks but your article said the former but contradicted the latter thus showed the article (and thus you) to be wrong.



And you accuse ME of lying!

@humy said
WOW you really like making up your straw man lies don't you!
And you pretend to be so stupid as not able to read!
I DID NOT EVER SAY the article you posted said that the GPS satellites do not have their own clocks and YOU KNOW THIS!

I very clearly REPEATEDLY said (and last time with the words " ...it is clearly claiming (and falsely so) that GPS receivers don' ...[text shortened]... ed the latter thus showed the article (and thus you) to be wrong.



And you accuse ME of lying!

"In reality, BOTH the GPS satellites AND, as I proved, the GPS receivers have their own clocks but your article said the former but contradicted the latter thus showed the article (and thus you) to be wrong."

What is your source of information?

@humy said

GPS doesn't need relativity equations to work properly. I already proved you wrong. Go back and read the article I posted that proves that.

You have proved nothing. I have already read ALL of that article and debunked it. It falsely claimed that the GPS receiver doesn't use its own clock and then based its argument on that false premise and then I proved that p ...[text shortened]... post down on that page. Are you completely BLIND? Or are you just pretending to be stupid?

Well?

You even said GPS receivers are usually equipped with quartz crystal clocks and provided a link to prove it. They don't usually contain atomic clocks.

Dude, you proved yourself wrong.