| Line 178: |
Line 178: |
| | :::My comment about [[quantum mechanics]] was in response to a question about why synchronization is needed. Unless someone thinks that [[perpetual motion machines]] are possible (have you answered my question about that?), then synchronization will be needed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:00, 13 April 2012 (EDT) | | :::My comment about [[quantum mechanics]] was in response to a question about why synchronization is needed. Unless someone thinks that [[perpetual motion machines]] are possible (have you answered my question about that?), then synchronization will be needed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:00, 13 April 2012 (EDT) |
| | ::::Could you please clarify what the connection between synchronisation, quantum mechanics and perpetual motion machines is? From what I've learned, clock synchronisation between the satellites is necessary because any signal between them travels at a finite speed, namely the speed of light. Do you deny that? The claim is that in order to compute the signal travel time and thus to synchronize the clocks correctly, the relative velocities and the differences in gravitational potential due to the different altitudes of the satellites (and Earth's surface) have to be taken into account. Do you think that is wrong? --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 11:56, 13 April 2012 (EDT) | | ::::Could you please clarify what the connection between synchronisation, quantum mechanics and perpetual motion machines is? From what I've learned, clock synchronisation between the satellites is necessary because any signal between them travels at a finite speed, namely the speed of light. Do you deny that? The claim is that in order to compute the signal travel time and thus to synchronize the clocks correctly, the relative velocities and the differences in gravitational potential due to the different altitudes of the satellites (and Earth's surface) have to be taken into account. Do you think that is wrong? --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 11:56, 13 April 2012 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | Lets stick to the subject (GPS and relativity); perpetual motion is a complete red herring, and I'm not sure how Nobel prizes come into the picture (we're debating science, not prizes). |
| | + | On the basis of '''actual evidence produced''' in this discussion so far, I think that we can confidently state four facts: |
| | + | #Prior to launch, the clock in a GPS satellite is set to run about 38 nanoseconds/day different from an otherwise identical clock on the earth's surface. |
| | + | #When in orbit the GPS clock then appears to tick at the same rate as an identical clock on the earth's surface. |
| | + | #Equations based on the theory of relativity accurately come up with this figure of around 38 nanoseconds. |
| | + | #No evidence has been produced to show how quantum mechanics is involved. |
| | + | |
| | + | If anyone disagrees with any of the above, they need to bear in mind ('''emphasis''' added): |
| | + | :from Conservapedia:Commandments 1 Everything you post must be true and '''verifiable'''. |
| | + | :from Conservapedia:Commandments 2 '''Always cite''' and give credit to your sources. |
| | + | :from Conservapedia:Guidelines/Reliability 4 A major difference between Liberalism and Conservatism is how much each group is willing to have its pronouncements checked, its actions reviewed and evaluated. |
| | + | |
| | + | Hope this summary helps. [[User:RolandPlankton|RolandPlankton]] 14:41, 13 April 2012 (EDT) |
| | | | |
| | == Logic and the GPS == | | == Logic and the GPS == |