Non-Inertial Navigation Technology...

[Joe Gwinn]

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

..<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation>

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 18:35:25 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 18:35:25 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 6:35:35 PM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

There\'s Hippolyte Fizeau\'s experiment*.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment
Which is about Frensel drag. It\'s a pretty small effect.

George H.
*I never knew his first name.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 6:35:35 PM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

There\'s Hippolyte Fizeau\'s experiment*.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment
Which is about Frensel drag. It\'s a pretty small effect.

George H.
*I never knew his first name.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 6:35:35 PM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

There\'s Hippolyte Fizeau\'s experiment*.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment
Which is about Frensel drag. It\'s a pretty small effect.

George H.
*I never knew his first name.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

 

[Joe Chisolm]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 18:35:25 -0400, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?, S.E.D.,
July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same problem,
Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard his talk in
2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal navigation and
time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

Smart the way he setup his LLC. Made his wife the CEO and
principal owner. That way it can get classified as women
owned disadvantaged business. That opened some doors for
\"NSF-National Science Foundation awards the grant to Non-Inertial
Navigation Technology, LLC for support of the Navigation Independent
Relative Positioning System (NIRPS) SBIR Phase I Project.\"

( from the web site)

[snip]

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still around.
I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so often.


Joe Gwinn

--
Chisolm
Texas-American

 

[Joe Chisolm]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 18:35:25 -0400, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?, S.E.D.,
July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same problem,
Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard his talk in
2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal navigation and
time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

Smart the way he setup his LLC. Made his wife the CEO and
principal owner. That way it can get classified as women
owned disadvantaged business. That opened some doors for
\"NSF-National Science Foundation awards the grant to Non-Inertial
Navigation Technology, LLC for support of the Navigation Independent
Relative Positioning System (NIRPS) SBIR Phase I Project.\"

( from the web site)

[snip]

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still around.
I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so often.


Joe Gwinn

--
Chisolm
Texas-American

 

[Andy Bennet]

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.

Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

 

[David Brown]

On 17/07/2020 00:35, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

You can\'t measure velocity inside a black box - that was established by
Galileo long ago, and has been confirmed by all sorts of experiments
since. If you try to measure the time dilation effects due to your
velocity, you\'ll get zero - because your clock is affected in exactly
the same way.

You could, theoretically, compare the time on your local clock to that
of an external reference, and use the difference to calculate your
velocity without using inertial effects. You\'d have a very hard time
trying to do so with an accuracy that was remotely useful. And you\'d
need access to a high quality external time reference wherever you are -
something like the time signal you get from GPS. In which case, you
already have the GPS signal and can use that for your position and speed
calculations.

 

[David Brown]

On 17/07/2020 00:35, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

You can\'t measure velocity inside a black box - that was established by
Galileo long ago, and has been confirmed by all sorts of experiments
since. If you try to measure the time dilation effects due to your
velocity, you\'ll get zero - because your clock is affected in exactly
the same way.

You could, theoretically, compare the time on your local clock to that
of an external reference, and use the difference to calculate your
velocity without using inertial effects. You\'d have a very hard time
trying to do so with an accuracy that was remotely useful. And you\'d
need access to a high quality external time reference wherever you are -
something like the time signal you get from GPS. In which case, you
already have the GPS signal and can use that for your position and speed
calculations.

 

[David Brown]

On 17/07/2020 00:35, Joe Gwinn wrote:

The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn

You can\'t measure velocity inside a black box - that was established by
Galileo long ago, and has been confirmed by all sorts of experiments
since. If you try to measure the time dilation effects due to your
velocity, you\'ll get zero - because your clock is affected in exactly
the same way.

You could, theoretically, compare the time on your local clock to that
of an external reference, and use the difference to calculate your
velocity without using inertial effects. You\'d have a very hard time
trying to do so with an accuracy that was remotely useful. And you\'d
need access to a high quality external time reference wherever you are -
something like the time signal you get from GPS. In which case, you
already have the GPS signal and can use that for your position and speed
calculations.

 

[server]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:24:21 +0100, Andy Bennet <andyb@andy.com>
wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.


Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

Well, we might only provide location information in places that are
inhabited.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[server]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:24:21 +0100, Andy Bennet <andyb@andy.com>
wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.


Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

Well, we might only provide location information in places that are
inhabited.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[server]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:24:21 +0100, Andy Bennet <andyb@andy.com>
wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.


Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

Well, we might only provide location information in places that are
inhabited.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Andy Bennet]

On 17/07/2020 16:55, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:24:21 +0100, Andy Bennet <andyb@andy.com
wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.


Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

Well, we might only provide location information in places that are
inhabited.

So no good for ship or air navigation then?

 

[Andy Bennet]

On 17/07/2020 16:55, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:24:21 +0100, Andy Bennet <andyb@andy.com
wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:56, John Larkin wrote:

Relativity says that if you\'re inside a box, you can\'t measure your
velocity. But you can measure acceleration. Any position calculation
based on acceleration will pile up errors fast.

I wonder if the 5G cell network will replace the need for GPS in
phones. Seems like you could locate pretty well from microcells.


Not very useful in uninhabited parts of the planet.
GPS has planet wide coverage. the cell network does not.

Well, we might only provide location information in places that are
inhabited.

So no good for ship or air navigation then?

 

[Joe Gwinn]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 16:07:47 +0200, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:35, Joe Gwinn wrote:
The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn


You can\'t measure velocity inside a black box - that was established by
Galileo long ago, and has been confirmed by all sorts of experiments
since. If you try to measure the time dilation effects due to your
velocity, you\'ll get zero - because your clock is affected in exactly
the same way.

Galileo? How would he be able to prove any such thing?

Do you mean Lorentz?

..<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation>

You could, theoretically, compare the time on your local clock to that
of an external reference, and use the difference to calculate your
velocity without using inertial effects. You\'d have a very hard time
trying to do so with an accuracy that was remotely useful. And you\'d
need access to a high quality external time reference wherever you are -
something like the time signal you get from GPS. In which case, you
already have the GPS signal and can use that for your position and speed
calculations.

Well, ROMOS did not mention any need for accurate absolute
timekeeping, but cesium beam clocks are awfully good - no GPS needed.

Joe Gwinn

 

[Joe Gwinn]

On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 16:07:47 +0200, David Brown
<david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 17/07/2020 00:35, Joe Gwinn wrote:
The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

I was still mulling all this over as I walked out to the parking lot
on my way home when it hit me - the underlying principle is identical
to that of the Michelson–Morley interferometer, and the answer is
zero. And this is a foundation of Relativity, which holds that there
is no such thing as absolute velocity. So, what is actually measured
here?

The biggest clue was that it reported zero velocity when sitting on a
lab bench. Well, that lab bench is moving at 30 kilometers per second
with respect to the distant stars, due to the motion of the Earth and
Sun.

My impression was that they believe in what they are doing, and are
not scammers.

My theory is that Val had created the optical equivalent of a Doppler
radar navigation unit, only using laser beams, and there was just
enough light leakage out and back into the unit that it was detecting
Doppler with respect to the lab environment.

.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_radar#Doppler_navigation

One test would be to mount the unit on an arm that is clamped to the
lab bench, and enclose the unit with a box, and see if the unit
detects box motion even when the unit is bolted to the lab bench.

The next test is to attach the uint to the enclosing box, and see if
the unit can detect motion while boxed. And so on. There are many
ways to tease this apart without opening the unit.

Never did any of these tests. Was surprised that they are still
around. I guess they get research or demonstration grants every so
often.


Joe Gwinn


You can\'t measure velocity inside a black box - that was established by
Galileo long ago, and has been confirmed by all sorts of experiments
since. If you try to measure the time dilation effects due to your
velocity, you\'ll get zero - because your clock is affected in exactly
the same way.

Galileo? How would he be able to prove any such thing?

Do you mean Lorentz?

..<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation>

You could, theoretically, compare the time on your local clock to that
of an external reference, and use the difference to calculate your
velocity without using inertial effects. You\'d have a very hard time
trying to do so with an accuracy that was remotely useful. And you\'d
need access to a high quality external time reference wherever you are -
something like the time signal you get from GPS. In which case, you
already have the GPS signal and can use that for your position and speed
calculations.

Well, ROMOS did not mention any need for accurate absolute
timekeeping, but cesium beam clocks are awfully good - no GPS needed.

Joe Gwinn

 

[Joe Gwinn]

On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:32:02 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 6:35:35 PM UTC-4, Joe Gwinn wrote:
The thread about ROMOS (Re: Scam - but how do they make money?,
S.E.D., July 2020) reminded me of another approach to much the same
problem, Non-Inertial Navigation, as invented by Val Parker. I heard
his talk in 2017, when he was invited to speak at an online internal
navigation and time forum. He was invited more from curiosity than
conviction.

Here is his present company <https://nin-technology.com/>.

He has two relevant patents, US9753049 and US20120008149A1.

Basically, he claims to be able to detect absolute velocity by optical
means. His talk was all about how nice it would be if one could do
this, but had little on exactly how it worked - proprietary and so on.
They did say that they were having problems getting reliable
measurements, and were still debugging the then latest model.

I probed a bit at the principles of operation and what Val said was
that light waves basically travel at a fixed speed in space (true),
and that if one measured two-way time delay, one could therefore
detect velocity by differences in time. This sounds like the Doppler
effect for sound in air; electromagnetic waves don\'t work quite that
way.

There\'s Hippolyte Fizeau\'s experiment*.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment
Which is about Frensel drag. It\'s a pretty small effect.

Hmm. I do recall that effect. Don\'t think that the ROMOS folk are
thinking that way, or that Frensel drag would work as an absolute
velocity sensor. If it were, somebody would have used it to refute
Relativity.

Joe Gwinn