[time-nuts] Impact of GPS antenna height measurments

Gary E. Miller gem at rellim.com
Mon Jun 27 19:32:48 EDT 2016

Yo Tom!

On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:49:00 -0700
"Tom Van Baak" <tvb at LeapSecond.com> wrote:

> Equating 22 m with 73 ns, or equating 1 foot with 1 ns is only true
> in the impossibly rare case of one satellite directly above you.

I should have mentioned that I made some simplifying assumptions:
The cow is sperical, its albedo is 1.0, and she is in a vacuum.  :-)

I could nit-pick your nit-picky analysis, but at least I came up with a
real number.  What is your real number?  I really would like to hear a
fully derived answer, and see how well my back of the hand calcuation

> An accurate position is desirable. No question about that. This note
> is just a plea not to apply the speed-of-light number or the
> "nanosecond a foot" rule-of-thumb out of context.

As a time-nut, you are right, but since I am an engineer, if I get it
within a factor of 4 I'm happy.  :-)

Almost all people when they hear 73 nanoSec, which is hardly more than 2
sigma of a good GPS, they say "Never Mind".

Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
	gem at rellim.com  Tel:+1 541 382 8588
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.febo.com/pipermail/time-nuts/attachments/20160627/5de690d3/attachment.sig>

More information about the time-nuts mailing list