"George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| Hexenmeister wrote:
| > "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1142343231.504861.198340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Henri Wilson wrote:
| > | > On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 21:41:28 -0000, "George Dishman"
| > <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > | I think even with ballistic theory, the dip would
| > | suggest near grazing, but that's the point, you
| > | have complete freedom to determine an
| > | alternative orbit from the data using your
| > | program.
| > |
| > | > We simply cannot believe any of these readings.
| > |
| > | Of course we can trust the readings, they aren't
| > | in question, it is the _interpretation_ of the readings
| > | that you need to revise using ballistic theory. If you
| > | can't, ballistic theory is falsified by observation again.
| > |
| > | George
| > What observation?
You are not just an ugly face, but stupid as well.
| > Three clocks were synchronized locally (really).
| > One was sent to Mars (really) and another was sent to Saturn (really)
| > The third little piggy stayed at home (really).
| > Are these three clocks still synchronized today?
| Almost, good enough for operations but not
| navigation for which they use a fully relativistic
"The time it takes for a signal - which moves at the speed of light through
space - to travel from the spacecraft to Earth. From Saturn, one-way light
time can range from about one hour and 14 minutes to one hour and 24
An Earth orbit satellite can almost complete an orbit in that time.
So, according to shithead George, 84 minutes error is "almost"
synchronized and good enough for navigation.
| > According to NASA - JPL they are.
| ... not.
I thought you said they almost were, now you say they are not.
| > http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/operations/saturn-time.cfm
| "Unless otherwise noted, all times on this website
| have been converted to U.S. Pacific Time ..."
But 84 minutes slow.
Yawn... such a shithead, who but a fellow shithead would