Men's Solar System Astronomy Solar Outer Space Novelty Skinny Narrow Tie Necktie

Product Information

The TRF is the realization of the TRS and is currently provided by precisely determined coordinates and velocities of physical points on the Earth’s surface. The main physical and mathematical properties of a TRS (at the definition and conventions level) or of the TRF (at the realization level) include each its origin, scale, orientation, and their time evolution. The center of mass (CM) of the Earth System, or geocenter, as the realized origin of the TRF on long-term scales, needs to be accurately determined including its temporal motion (e.g., Petit and Luzum 2010). The temporal variations of the geocenter represent a component of mass change (at spherical harmonic degree one) that is not directly observable from a mass-change mission such as GRACE-FO (Wu et al. 2012). While the degree one component of mass change can be derived from a combination of GRACE data with ocean model output (e.g., Swenson et al. 2008; Sun et al. 2016, 2017) or space geodetic techniques such as GNSS, SLR (e.g., Fritsche et al. 2009; Glaser et al. 2015), a high-quality TRF solution furnished by space geodesy that allows a matching with the temporal resolution of the GRACE-FO data would be highly desired (see section Long-wavelength gravity field for more details). The ITRF long-term origin is defined by SLR, the most accurate satellite technique in sensing the Earth’s CM. The ITRF long-term scale, however, is defined by an average of the SLR and VLBI intrinsic scales. The consistency of these scales still needs to be improved, since both techniques are subject to systematic errors and other technical limitations, such as time and range biases for SLR, antenna deformation for VLBI, etc. The GENESIS mission will help to solve these inconsistencies. The ITRF orientation and its time evolution are defined to be the same for the successive ITRF realizations. The geocenter motion is accessible by ground station observations (tied to the crust’s CF), used to observe the natural orbital motion of the satellites about the Earth’s CM. Yet, space geodetic observation of the geocenter motion is still in its infancy. Independent solutions derived using different techniques have systematic differences as large as the signal level. Estimating geocenter coordinates is one of the most demanding applications of high-precision geodetic techniques due to the current precision of the geodetic data, and the nature and magnitude of different types of systematic error. For example, the definition of "space" is the absence of anything, ie, nothing. Since space is nothing at all, then space cannot be bent, since one cannot bend nothing. There is nothing to bend. Of course, there is another way of looking at it: in the time it has taken you to read this article, you've already travelled seven minutes or so into the future. You're welcome.

sward said:Mind boggling!Yup a mind boggler. Considering also in 1952 Einstein wrote, “Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept ‘empty space’ loses its meaning.” The only remaining loophole is that the theories this is based on are incomplete. Relativity and quantum mechanics work very well for certain aspects of the Universe, but they also aren't compatible. This suggests we need a deeper theory that unifies the two, but despite decades of effort we don't have one. "Until we have that theory, we cannot be sure," says Shoshany. Buy if: You want a detailed Star Wars build that won't break the bank or frustrate you. You want to drop torpedos on your LEGO Rebel Alliance. The VLBI technique provides direct access to the ICRS and is the best technique for observing the full set of EOP. Specifically, VLBI is the only technique able to determine the position of the celestial intermediate pole in the ICRF, expressed as celestial pole offsets to a conventional precession/nutation model, and the Earth’s rotation angle, typically referred to as Universal Time or UT1–UTC. Table 1 summarizes the parameter types and the space geodetic techniques contributing to their determination. The table also shows the parameters that can be used for a co-location of the techniques, both, on the surface of the Earth and in space. Satellite techniques rely on measurements between stations on the Earth’s surface and satellites, whose orbits are subject to various gravitational and non-gravitational forces (e.g., SRP). As a consequence, SLR, GNSS and DORIS depend on a reference frame that is dynamically realized by satellite orbits and thus completely different in nature from the kinematic realization of the ICRS by VLBI. Presently, the only physical connection between the VLBI frame and frames of SLR, GNSS and DORIS is via the local ties on the ground; however, these ties reveal significant discrepancies with respect to the terrestrial frames delivered by the individual space geodetic techniques. We don't know whether this exists anywhere in the Universe," says Vedral. "This is really purely theoretical, there's no evidence."Despite its intricacy, relativity remains the best way to account for the physical phenomena we know about. Yet scientists know that their models are incomplete because relativity is still not fully reconciled with quantum mechanics, which explains the properties of subatomic particles with extreme precision but does not incorporate the force of gravity. To say the gravity is caused by the bending of nothing and nothing fairy tale is an extra illogical fairy tales which tries to explain the unexplainable, gravity. (The only real explanation if our loving Creator made gravity function.) The GENESIS proposal is dedicated to improving and homogenizing time and space references on Earth and, more specifically, to realizing the Terrestrial Reference System (TRS) with an accuracy of 1 mm and a long-term stability of 0.1 mm/year. These numbers are relevant for many scientific and societal endeavors for which a precise realization of the TRS and the knowledge of the Earth’s kinematic parameters are crucial.

VLBI in its current application is a purely geometric technique, thus, it has no connection to the Earth’s gravity field (including the CM of the Earth). VLBI can currently be connected to the satellite techniques only via the station network and the local ties, and is not able to contribute to the geocenter determination. However, numerical simulations demonstrated that geodetic VLBI is able to observe geocenter motion using observations of Galileo satellites (Klopotek et al. 2020), suggesting that the GENESIS mission will enable a VLBI-contribution to the estimation of geocenter motion. So physical objects being 4D spatially-extended, as @jimdodds put it "fluctuations of density," reflects the fact that what the CERN LHC high-energy physics experiments actually measure is 4D electromagnetic energy density pressure concentrations. Just as AI pattern recognition famously aided in the discovery of the Higgs boson by recognizing collision pattern energy densities. SJBauer said:A well written summary for the definition of space-time. I like the history and the introduction of how space-time works, but the focus on a reconciled quantum mechanical model to explain gravity seems like a math problem. A more logical approach might be to consider the 'Big Bang' theory from a pre-existing fabric of space-time without any real matter, as a proposed one dimensional determinant, its inception starts with the unfolding perspective of this dimensional determinant for space-time fabric towards existence. The sequence is somewhat understood from an expansion from our one dimensional space-time into a two dimensional space-time fabric, and then into a three dimensional space-time fabric, and so on. The expectation is that ordinary matter creation took place within a pre-existing dark energy medium of space-time. Indeed, the existence of matter would be an intrusion upon this pre-existing universal medium of space-time which maintains a zero sum difference that is the balance of our cosmological continuum.

Cancellation & Returns

For one thing, our observations of non-locality have all involved tiny numbers of particles. Scaling up to a human, or even something smaller like a piece of paper, would be an enormous challenge.

On shorter timescales, GNSS stations also record Earth’s elastic response to surface mass redistribution within the climatic system (mainly continental water storage, atmosphere and ocean). Dense networks of permanent GNSS stations can now be used to derive soil and snow water content at seasonal timescales, but has also provided evidence for extreme droughts, especially in California (see, e.g., Argus et al. 2014; Fu et al. 2015; Jiang et al. 2022). GNSS time series from dense networks can be used to refine the information provided by space gravimetry missions (GRACE and GRACE-FO) at longer spatial wavelengths (see section Long-wavelength gravity field). Amplitude and spatial extent of surface water mass variations can be inferred from both vertical and horizontal deformation measurements. In particular, horizontal displacements help to refine the determination of the location and the spatial extent of the load. This elastic Earth’s response to surface loads has to be separated from a longer-term deformation, which can only be obtained with a more accurate and stable reference frame as proposed by the GENESIS project.Reference frames provide the necessary absolute basis for the relative-only geodetic measurements. They are indispensable to study the dynamic Earth, and to be able to meaningfully relate changes across space and time. They are also essential for positioning and navigation in the civil society and for proper georeferencing of geospatial information. The provision of accurate and stable reference frames is one of the major tasks of geodesy. Direct local observations and space geodetic techniques including gravimetry, radar and laser altimetry, optical and synthetic aperture radar imagery and GNSS, have provided clear evidence for large changes in the world’s glaciers and ice sheets, in response to present climate change (e.g., Shepherd et al. 2018, 2020; Millan et al. 2022; Fox-Kemper et al. 2022). However, despite the extensive literature on the subject, the ice mass balances over the different ice sheets and smaller glacier regions are associated with large uncertainties (e.g., Cazenave et al. 2018; Métivier et al. 2010; Khan et al. 2015). In particular, the question of possible local accelerations of ice mass loss in Greenland is still open (e.g., Velicogna and Wahr 2013; Velicogna et al. 2014, 2020). Just as Paul Sutter pointed out in Where Are All the 'Sparticles' That Could Explain What's Wrong with the Universe?:"Or, more depressingly, they don't exist. And that would mean that these creatures — along with their supersymmetric partners — are really just ghosts dreamt up by feverish physicists, and what we actually need is a whole new framework for solving some of the outstanding problems of modern physics." Reply