e63707e2   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh   
   From: relativity@paulba.no   
      
   Den 31.10.2025 16:19, skrev Maciej Woźniak:   
   > On 10/31/2025 2:48 PM, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:   
   >> Den 31.10.2025 13:21, skrev Maciej Woźniak:   
   >>>   
   >>> GPS clocks are adjusted down by (1 - 4.4647e-10)   
   >>> so the adjusted clock will measure a mean solar day   
   >>> to last 86400 s, and the clock will stay in sync with UTC.   
      
   >> Right.   
      
   >>> I.e. where The Shit is predicting the measurement   
   >>> result of 86400s+37(afair)us, the real measurement   
   >>> result is 86400, with the precision of an acceptable   
   >>> error. Common sense has been warning your idiot guru.   
      
   >> Lets take this one step at the time:   
   >>   
   >> 1. A clock on the ground which is running according to   
   >>     the SI definition will measure a mean solar day to   
   >>     last 86400 s.   
   >>   
   >> 2. GR predicts that a clock in GPS orbit which is running   
   >>     according to the SI definition will measure a mean solar   
   >>     day to last 86400⋅(1 + 4.4647e-10) s ≈ 86400s + 38.6 μs   
      
   You wrote:   
   "The Shit is predicting the measurement   
     result of 86400s+37(afair)us"   
      
   So we agree that this is what GR predicts.   
      
      
   >> 3. When a clock in GPS orbit is adjusted to run slow   
   >>     by the factor (1 - 4.4647e-10) compared to the SI-definition,   
   >>     then the clock will measure a mean solar day to last 86400 s.   
      
   >>   
   >> Please explain why the real measurement in 3.   
   >> do not confirm SR's prediction in 2.   
      
      
   > And while SOME of Shit's predictions may fit   
   > the reality - others don't.   
   "SOME prediction" can only refer to the prediction   
   in point 2. above.   
      
   Progress!   
   You have finally realised that point 3. above   
   confirms GR's prediction in point 2.   
      
   Well done! Seriously!   
      
   Can you name at least one example where a prediction   
   of GR is not in accordance with measurements?   
      
   If you can, you will have falsified GR!   
      
   > You know very   
   > well, according to The Shit 86400s + 38.6 μs   
   > is not a conditional result, it's the only   
   > result possible.   
   >   
      
   Of course GR has but one prediction for what   
   the clock will show.   
      
   Did you have a point?   
      
   --   
   Paul   
      
   https://paulba.no/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)