My bad lol! The 14ns from gps to ground then back is 28ns multilpied by both sender and reciever detectors to 56ns plus or minus 10 ns of error. It still seems a little large. a 60 ns difference in relativity could also be caused by a mass of around 6 solar masses entering our system but it would also change the dopplar shift on the sun. monitering the dopplar shift of the sun would be a pretty good way of detecting if we were nearing a dark star or other invisible mass. Is anyone measuring the suns shift monthly? I was of the understanding the newer gps units had an accuracy improved to 3ns to improve the accuracy of weapons from 960 feet down to 1 feet using ulf frequency modulation. But then CERN and Fermi may not have the use of the latest military tech. Cheers Steve Dunklee
--- On Sun, 11/20/11, Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_w...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > From: Sterling K. Webb <sterling_k_w...@sbcglobal.net> > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Second experiment confirms > faster-than-lightparticles gps accuracy > To: "Steve Dunklee" <steve.dunk...@yahoo.com>, > meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com, "JoshuaTreeMuseum" > <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com> > Date: Sunday, November 20, 2011, 10:48 PM > Steve, List, > > An explanation of the experiment's relativistic error > can be found here: > > van Elburg, R. A. J., 2011, Times of Flight between a > Source and a Detector observed from a GPS satelite. > arXiv:1110.2685v1 [physics.gen-ph] > http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2685 > > PDF file at > http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.2685v1 > > The relativistic error is 32 ns each way, so the total > error is 64 ns, which is exactly the time-beating pace > of the faster-than-light neutrinos reported. It's a > pretty straightforward error, using the baseline reference > frame rather than the clock reference frame. > > > Sterling K. Webb > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Dunklee" <steve.dunk...@yahoo.com> > To: <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com>; > "JoshuaTreeMuseum" <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 11:21 AM > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Second experiment confirms > faster-than-lightparticles gps accuracy > > > This article contains gps info and accuracy . It states it > depends on the earths movement and other factors and gives > an accuracy of 14 nanoseconds. A 60 nanosecond difference in > measurements is way off the accuracy of the gps clocks. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS#Relativity > > cheers > Steve Dunklee > > --- On Sat, 11/19/11, JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com> > wrote: > > > From: JoshuaTreeMuseum <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com> > > Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Second experiment > confirms faster-than-light particles > > To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > Date: Saturday, November 19, 2011, 2:07 AM > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matson, Robert > D." > > <robert.d.mat...@saic.com> > > To: "JoshuaTreeMuseum" <joshuatreemus...@embarqmail.com>; > > <meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com> > > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 6:44 PM > > Subject: RE: [meteorite-list] Second experiment > confirms > > faster-than-light particles > > > > > > Hi Phil, > > > > It was my understanding that the mystery of the CERN > > faster-than- > > light-speed neutrino result was solved over a month > ago: > > failure > > to account for the relativistic motion of the GPS > clocks > > used to > > time the neutrinos. > > > > GPS satellites orbit in planes inclined 55 degrees > relative > > to > > the equator, coincidentally somewhat parallel to the > > neutrino > > flight path bearing on the ground. From the > satellite's > > perspective, > > both the positions of the neutrino source and the > neutrino > > detector > > are changing: in this particular case, from the > perspective > > of the > > GPS clock, the detector is moving towards the > neutrino > > source, and > > consequently the distance travelled by the particles > -- as > > measured > > in the frame of the clock -- is shorter than the > distance > > measured > > on the ground. As a result, the neutrinos should > arrive > > about 32 > > nanoseconds early: an amount that must be doubled > because > > the same > > error occurs at each end of the experiment. So the > total > > correction > > is 64 nanoseconds: almost exactly what the OPERA team > > observed. > > > > If they ran the experiment a second time and got the > same > > result, > > it seems to me that it is only confirming a prediction > of > > special relativity. --Rob > > > > --------------------- > > > > It seems unbelievable that the relativistic satellite > > motion has not been brought to their attention. I mean > if > > you guys know about it, wouldn't they? I've also read > > elsewhere about this effect and how it could be > skewing the > > results. I find it hard to believe they don't know > about > > this and would not make the necessary corrections. > > > > Phil Whitmer > > > > ______________________________________________ > > Visit the Archives at > > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > > Meteorite-list mailing list > > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > > ______________________________________________ > Visit the Archives at > http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html > Meteorite-list mailing list > Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list > > ______________________________________________ Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
