• TAI second vs SI second

    From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Fri Sep 22 07:09:15 2023
    It's a surprise that some of your bunch of
    idiots notice they differ. Smartness? It's
    also a surprise they admit it. . Honesty?
    Stupidity?

    Anyway, comparing Cs frequency on a
    GPS satellite to SI second we're getting
    9 192 631 770 . Comparing it to TAI second
    it's 9 192 631 774.

    The prophecies of your idiot guru are only
    fulfilled with your SI idiocy, and even you
    are not stupid enough to really apply it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to Maciej Wozniak on Fri Sep 22 15:14:29 2023
    On 9/22/23 9:09 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
    It's a surprise that some of your bunch of idiots notice they differ. Smartness? It's also a surprise they admit it. . Honesty? Stupidity?

    There is no significant difference. Your bogus CLAIMS of a difference
    are indeed due to YOUR Stupidity, and YOUR lack of Honesty.

    Anyway, comparing Cs frequency on a GPS satellite to SI second we're
    getting 9 192 631 770 .

    Yes. A second is ALWAYS 9 192 631 770 cycles of the Cs-133 ground-state hyperfine transition. As stated in the relevant BIPM documents, this is
    a clock's proper time, valid only in a local region of the clock.

    Comparing it to TAI second it's 9 192 631 774.

    Nope. TAI is defined ONLY on earth's geoid, and the satellite is nowhere
    near that; anywhere else requires a correction, and the difference you
    state is merely that requisite correction.

    [TAI does NOT define a second, it references the SI
    definition. TAI is a timekeeping system useful on
    or near the surface of the earth. When appropriately
    corrected it can be useful in other places as well.]

    Note the timekeeping system on a GPS satellite does NOT increment in
    seconds. It increments such that it displays GPS coordinate time, and in
    a satellite GPS coordinate time increments by 1 second slightly faster
    than 1 second of proper time. Remember, please, that the SI second
    applies ONLY to a clock's proper time, and is valid ONLY in a local
    region of the clock. GPS coordinate time increments by 1 second for 1
    second of proper time for a clock at rest on earth's geoid. That is also
    where TAI is defined, and TAI also increments by 1 second for 1 second
    of proper time for a clock at rest on earth's geoid.

    [NOTE: I did not create this terminology, which contains
    an important PUN on "second". While GPS coordinate time
    talks about "seconds", the word has a DIFFERENT MEANING
    from its usage in "SI second" or "proper time second".
    So one must ALWAYS specify which "second" one means --
    Wozniak violates that and confuses himself.]

    Basically what is going on is that the effect on clocks predicted by GR actually does happen to real clocks, such as those in the GPS. No amount
    of insults or screaming by Wozniak can change that simple physical fact.

    [Note also that this does NOT mean that "satellite clocks
    run faster" -- the situation is more subtle than that
    sound bite can express.]

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Fri Sep 22 13:59:25 2023
    On Friday, 22 September 2023 at 22:14:43 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 9/22/23 9:09 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
    It's a surprise that some of your bunch of idiots notice they differ. Smartness? It's also a surprise they admit it. . Honesty? Stupidity?
    There is no significant difference. Your bogus CLAIMS of a difference

    Even some of your fellow idiots do admit there is.


    are indeed due to YOUR Stupidity, and YOUR lack of Honesty.
    Anyway, comparing Cs frequency on a GPS satellite to SI second we're getting 9 192 631 770 .
    Yes. A second is ALWAYS 9 192 631 770 cycles of the Cs-133 ground-state hyperfine transition.

    Not in the world we inhabit, poor fanatic trash.
    Anyone can check GPS.

    Note the timekeeping system on a GPS satellite does NOT increment in
    seconds.

    What an idiotic lie. Especially idiotic is that you admit
    it's a lie some lines down, by saying they're seconds in
    different meaning.

    It increments such that it displays GPS coordinate time

    Right, poor halfbrain, It is incrementing such that it
    displays a time.
    BTW, is this time (GPS coordinate time, one of some
    times of the real world) dilating, as predicted by your
    idiot guru?


    , and in
    a satellite GPS coordinate time increments by 1 second slightly faster
    than 1 second of proper time. Remember, please, that the SI second
    applies ONLY to a clock's proper time

    I remember very well it applies only to your gedanken idiocies.


    [NOTE: I did not create this terminology, which contains
    an important PUN on "second". While GPS coordinate time
    talks about "seconds", the word has a DIFFERENT MEANING
    from its usage in "SI second

    Sure, TAI/GPS second is different than SI second.
    Even you're admitting it now. See, trash - a lie has
    short legs.

    " or "proper time second".
    So one must ALWAYS specify which "second" one means --
    Wozniak violates that and confuses himself.]

    A lie again, of course, I specified it very clearly,
    emphasizing that there are two different.
    Instead, you're violating it, together with your fellow
    idiots, to pretend there is only one, for ideological
    reasons.

    Basically what is going on is that the effect on clocks predicted by GR actually does happen

    Basically, time is what clocks indicate. Clocks of
    GPS indicate GPS coordinated time indeed; everything
    fits - except that it's neither local nor dilating.
    Common sense was warning your idiot guru.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to Maciej Wozniak on Tue Sep 26 11:21:26 2023
    On 9/22/23 3:59 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
    On Friday, 22 September 2023 at 22:14:43 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
    A second is ALWAYS 9 192 631 770 cycles of the Cs-133 ground-state
    hyperfine transition.

    Because that is the definition of what "1 second" means.

    Not in the world we inhabit, poor fanatic trash.
    Anyone can check GPS.

    Yes in the world we inhabit. One second of GPS COORDINATE TIME is not 1
    second except on earth's geoid.

    Basically, time is what clocks indicate.

    Yes. But 1 second of GPS COORDINATE TIME is not 1 second except on
    earth's geoid.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Tue Sep 26 10:39:17 2023
    On Tuesday, 26 September 2023 at 18:21:38 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 9/22/23 3:59 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
    On Friday, 22 September 2023 at 22:14:43 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
    A second is ALWAYS 9 192 631 770 cycles of the Cs-133 ground-state
    hyperfine transition.
    Because that is the definition of what "1 second" means.

    There are more than one definition as well.
    And you were dumb enough to admit that for GPS
    the world means somethimg else.


    Not in the world we inhabit, poor fanatic trash.
    Anyone can check GPS.
    Yes in the world we inhabit. One second of GPS COORDINATE
    TIME

    One second of GPS coordinate time, i. e. one second
    of real time doesn't match either your wannabe definition
    or anything else in your insane church. Compared to/measured
    with one second of GPS/real time - all of your idiocies fail.

    Common sense was warning your idiot guru. For whom,
    BTW, second was by definition like the one of GPS time.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)