Skip Navigation

FCC chair says we’re too dependent on GPS and wants to explore ‘alternatives’.

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
92 comments
  • A single satellite defines a sphere around itself (not just a circle—you exist in 3D space).

    You are not getting a 3 dimensional location. That's why GPS coordinates only exist on 2 planes. You don't know what you're talking about.

    Final Verdict

    You're not just wrong, you're wrong AND you're a dick about it.

    • You are not getting a 3 dimensional location. That’s why GPS coordinates only exist on 2 planes. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

      Coordinates on a sphere is a 3 dimensional location. The earth isn't flat.

      Edit: Please education yourself before you're so confident in your own bullshit answer. https://gisgeography.com/trilateration-triangulation-gps/ and https://www.gps.gov/multimedia/tutorials/trilateration/

      Satellites broadcast a sphere, not a circle. And that sphere doesn't land on the earth as a perfect circle for relatively obvious reason... since the ground isn't perfect flat, nor is the earth perfectly spheroid.

      • The earth isn't flat.

        So which coordinate accounts for elevation? Latitude or Longitude?

        • Lat/Long is only valid if elevation is valid. You can't reference a lat/long that is miles into space... or beneath the crust of the earth.

          • It's like you're making my point for me.

            • A watch... or other simple gps device doesn't know what the elevation is.

              Only one of the 2 selected points in a 3 satellite setup will be valid. And your device would have no idea which one is valid without elevation knowledge or a 4th satellite. Some devices can figure it out with just 3 satellites. Many/most won't. But ultimately it's the same thing. You need 4 pieces of input. Either 3 satellites AND elevation. Or 4 satellites.

              So no. I've not made a point "for" you. You're just ignorant or specifically being obtuse on something you clearly don't understand.

              • A watch... or other simple gps device doesn't know what the elevation is.

                My point, exactly

                • Which is why they'd need 4 satellites. Read the whole post. Read the given sources. Stop being stupid.

                  • I did read the whole post. Stop being an asshole.

                    • Clearly you didn't... You keep asserting false statements that have already been disproven with sources.

                      But ultimately it’s the same thing. You need 4 pieces of input. Either 3 satellites AND elevation. Or 4 satellites.

                      If a watch doesn't "know" elevation (barometer or other sensor providing such information) as the fourth data point... Then it NEEDS 4 satellites to make the data points whole. Making your statements yet again wrong. I've covered the cases... but you keep pushing false statements like "gps is triangulation" (completely incorrect) or "GPS uses 3 satellites" which is also only correct in one very specific case... Where it's largely 4 or more, with reality being more like as many satellites as the device can read the pulses for. Often being a dozen or even more...

                      I am making accurate and complete statements. You are the one peddling misinformation.

                      Hell to prove the point... my time server grabs GPS as it's primary source. It grabs up to 12 satellites to sync time. It shows me my sync status for lat/long as well... At 3 satellites it CANNOT get a lock for location OR time. At 4 it gets a weak lock.

                      • You keep asserting false statements that have already been disproven with sources.

                        I don't. You just aren't paying attention to what I'm saying. You keep arguing up a strawman.

92 comments