Question to Mxmanic

writes:

Duh.

The clock on your aircraft runs slower as you accelerate, due to relativistic
effects. But then it also runs faster as you climb, again due to relativistic
effects. Do you take these effects into account in your on-board
calculations?

[And while they may be trivial for aircraft, they are not in all cases--the
GPS has to be adjusted for these effects to maintain accuracy, for example.]

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

It is not acceleration. It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do. I
doubt we have clocks accurate enough to measure the relativistic effects at
our speeds.

And climbing has nothing to do with relativity.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

Duh.

The clock on your aircraft runs slower as you accelerate, due to
relativistic
effects. But then it also runs faster as you climb, again due to
relativistic
effects. Do you take these effects into account in your on-board
calculations?

[And while they may be trivial for aircraft, they are not in all
cases--the
GPS has to be adjusted for these effects to maintain accuracy, for
example.]

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

mike regish writes:

It is not acceleration. It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do.

No. There are nearly half a dozen relativistic effects that must be
compensated for in the GPS. The nominal clock frequencies, for example, must
be adjusted by slightly less than one part in two billion in order to adjust
for the cumulative relativistic effects.

I doubt we have clocks accurate enough to measure the relativistic effects at
our speeds.

Sure you do ... in your GPS receivers. The adjustments for relativistic
effects are necessary to make the receivers reasonably accurate.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
mike regish writes:

It is not acceleration. It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do.

No. There are nearly half a dozen relativistic effects that must be
compensated for in the GPS. The nominal clock frequencies, for example,
must
be adjusted by slightly less than one part in two billion in order to
adjust
for the cumulative relativistic effects.

I doubt we have clocks accurate enough to measure the relativistic
effects at
our speeds.

Sure you do ... in your GPS receivers. The adjustments for relativistic
effects are necessary to make the receivers reasonably accurate.


Wow! That's useful information!

Mxsmanic,

Sure you do ... in your GPS receivers. The adjustments for relativistic
effects are necessary to make the receivers reasonably accurate.


Again, you have no clue what you are talking about. First, you are dodging
the subject, since the GPS measurements have nothing to do with the
aircraft's flight or climb. Second, the accurate clocks in GPS are not at
all in the receivers, but rather in the satellites. The receiver clock is
"told" by the satellites what time it is.

Your attempts at being an expert (or even a decent researcher) in every
field are pathetic and only serve to show how very little you really know.
Not knowing stuff is not a problem at all - until you claim to be a
know-it-all, like you do.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

And those miniscule adjustments are only required at the speeds of the GPS
satellites, which are many thousands of miles per hour-not several tens of
miles per hour.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
mike regish writes:

It is not acceleration. It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do.

No. There are nearly half a dozen relativistic effects that must be
compensated for in the GPS. The nominal clock frequencies, for example,
must
be adjusted by slightly less than one part in two billion in order to
adjust
for the cumulative relativistic effects.

I doubt we have clocks accurate enough to measure the relativistic
effects at
our speeds.

Sure you do ... in your GPS receivers. The adjustments for relativistic
effects are necessary to make the receivers reasonably accurate.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mike,

It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do.


Actually, in the case of GPS, it's not only speed, but also the
gravitation of the earth - or, IOW, general relativity rather than only
special relativity.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

True. Making general relativity even less significant in aircraft. And the
act of climbing itself, has no effect. The different altitudes will, but not
the acceleration of climbing.

mike

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Mike,

It is speed. GPS travels much faster than we do.


Actually, in the case of GPS, it's not only speed, but also the
gravitation of the earth - or, IOW, general relativity rather than only
special relativity.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Apr 18, 7:04 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Duh.

The clock on your aircraft runs slower as you accelerate, due to relativistic
effects. But then it also runs faster as you climb, again due to relativistic
effects. Do you take these effects into account in your on-board
calculations?


Sure I do. I have to since I'm close to a Lightspeed in my C150.

-Kees