It seems like even if the effect is small, as you allege, they are still using the Lorentz equations.
They do that "just in case", because "scientists insisted" or for whatever other reason, but definitely not because it is really necessary for positioning.
They use Lorenz equations on GPS satellites, but Lorenz equations are not used for GPS positioning, because their effect is unnoticeable.
Also, in any case once a day staellite clocks synced with Earth UTC time from ground stations.
So, statement that existence of GPS impossible without relativivty and GPS is a proof of relativity is a bullshit. Not because GPS disprove relativity or prove something different, but because whole system designed to minimize or completely exclude influence of clock instability or drift of whatever reason on positioning.
During finding position following happens in receiver: To determine position on one coordinate receiver need 2 satellites. Receiver measure static delay (phase shift) between signals from satellites. This way receiver find out by what distance it is closer to one of satellites. Pay attention to that - receiver does not measure absolute distance to satellite by comparing local time and received satellite time where Lorenz transforms matter, but local phase shift between signals from two satellites. What matters here is syncronicity between satellites which is not subject to Lorenz, not their absolute times or frequency drifts. Knowing absolute positions of both satellites from ephemeris (almanac) data and how it is closer to one or another, receiver calculate its absolute position. To calculate 3D position receiver need 4 satellites in view. With 3 satellites in view you will see empty field for altitude (height) value in NMEA sentence from GPS receiver and only longitude and latitude will be shown.
Say, receiver get 3.333 mS shift between signals from two satellites. This means receiver is 1000km closer to one of satellites. 38 μS/day is 38e-6 / 86400 = ~4.4e-10 adjustment to clock and so to position measurement, because receiver clock synced with received satellite frequency signal and is used to measure phase shift. On the distance of 1000km it is 0.44 millimeter difference. Could you tell that 0.44 millimeter on 1000km is anywhere practical or significant? Was it really necessary to make this Lorenz adjustment to the staellite clock, especially taking into account that other things add meter order errors?
Point of GPS and relativists who lie about it is very simple - Why relativists need this lies if their theory so cool and correct? Why do they need to pose GPS positioning example as a proof of relativity theories, when principle of GPS positioning made in the way it just cancels relativity effects if any? They slowed clocks on GPS satellites to some value, yes, but this value could be arbitrary, not -38μS/day, but, say -70 or +10 or 0 μS/day and this still will have no any noticeable effect on precision of GPS positioning.
Meanwhile, time shift is not the only possible relativistic effect. F.e. engineers examined other cases where relativistic effects could have some influence on positioning - https://archive.org/download/DTIC_ADA516975/DTIC_ADA516975.pdf about using GPS from high-speed plane or another satellite, i.e. when receiver moves too and this probably could add some relativistic effects.
Conclusion was: (see p197)
Eq. (17) "is just what one would expect by a Lorentz transformation from the center of rotation to the instantaneous rest frame of the accelerated origin" ([6], p. 23). Except for the leading γ factor, it is the same as the formula derived in classical physics for the signal travel time from the GPS satellite to the ground station. As we have shown, introducing the γ factor makes a change of only 2 or 3 millimeters to the classical result. In short, there are no "missing relativity terms." They cancel out.
It is really amasing that GPS engineers created a system that cancels out all possible uncertainites and minimize possible errors as much as possible fundamentally, by design. But still some use GPS that is designed to cancel out errors of different kind including relativity as a proof of relativity. It's just plain dishonesty in a nutshell. Why relativists ever have to use such dishonesty in attempts to support and propagandise their theory?
It seems like even if the effect is small, as you allege, they are still using the Lorentz equations.
They do that "just in case", because "scientists insisted" or for whatever other reason, but definitely not because it is really necessary for positioning.
They use Lorenz equations on GPS satellites, but Lorenz equations are not used for GPS positioning, because their effect is unnoticeable.
Also, in any case once a day staellite clocks synced with Earth UTC time from ground stations.
So, statement that existence of GPS impossible without relativivty and GPS is a proof of relativity is a bullshit. Not because GPS disprove relativity or prove something different, but because whole system designed to minimize or completely exclude influence of clock instability or drift of whatever reason on positioning.
During finding position following happens in receiver: To determine position on one coordinate receiver need 2 satellites. Receiver measure static delay (phase shift) between signals from satellites. This way receiver find out by what distance it is closer to one of satellites. Pay attention to that - receiver does not measure absolute distance to satellite by comparing local time and received satellite time where Lorenz transforms matter, but local phase shift between signals from two satellites. What matters here is syncronicity between satellites which is not subject to Lorenz, not their absolute times or frequency drifts. Knowing absolute positions of both satellites from ephemeris (almanac) data and how it is closer to one or another, receiver calculate its absolute position. To calculate 3D position receiver need 4 satellites in view. With 3 satellites in view you will see empty field for altitude (height) value in NMEA sentence from GPS receiver and only longitude and latitude will be shown.
Point of GPS and relativists who lie about it is simple - Why relativists need this lies if their theory so cool and correct? Why do they need to pose GPS positioning example as a proof of relativity theories, when principle of GPS positioning made in the way it just cancels relativity effects if any? They slowed clocks on GPS satellites to some value, yes, but this value could be arbitrary, not -38μS/day, but, say -70 or +10 or 0 μS/day and this still will have no any noticeable effect on precision of GPS positioning.
Meanwhile, time shift is not the only possible relativistic effect. F.e. engineers examined other cases where relativistic effects could have some influence on positioning - https://archive.org/download/DTIC_ADA516975/DTIC_ADA516975.pdf about using GPS from high-speed plane or another satellite, i.e. when receiver moves too and this probably could add some relativistic effects.
Conclusion was: (see p197)
Eq. (17) "is just what one would expect by a Lorentz transformation from the center of rotation to the instantaneous rest frame of the accelerated origin" ([6], p. 23). Except for the leading γ factor, it is the same as the formula derived in classical physics for the signal travel time from the GPS satellite to the ground station. As we have shown, introducing the γ factor makes a change of only 2 or 3 millimeters to the classical result. In short, there are no "missing relativity terms." They cancel out.
It is really amasing that GPS engineers created a system that cancels out all possible uncertainites and minimize possible errors as much as possible fundamentally, by design. But still some use GPS that is designed to cancel out errors of different kind including relativity as a proof of relativity. It's just plain dishonesty in a nutshell. Why relativists ever have to use such dishonesty in attempts to support and propagandise their theory?
It seems like even if the effect is small, as you allege, they are still using the Lorentz equations.
They do that "just in case", because "scientists insisted" or for whatever other reason, but definitely not because it is really necessary for positioning.
They use Lorenz equations on GPS satellites, but Lorenz equations are not used for GPS positioning, because their effect is unnoticeable.
Also, in any case once a day staellite clocks synced with Earth UTC time from ground stations.
So, statement that existence of GPS impossible without relativivty and GPS is a proof of relativity is a bullshit. Not because GPS disprove relativity or prove something different, but because whole system designed to minimize or completely exclude influence of clock instability or drift of whatever reason on positioning.
During finding position following happens in receiver: To determine position on one coordinate receiver need 2 satellites. Receiver measure static delay (phase shift) between signals from satellites. This way receiver find out by what distance it is closer to one of satellites. Pay attention to that - receiver does not measure absolute distance to satellite by comparing local time and received satellite time where Lorenz transforms matter, but local phase shift between signals from two satellites. What matters here is syncronicity between satellites which is not subject to Lorenz, not their absolute times or frequency drifts. Knowing absolute positions of both satellites from ephemeris (almanac) data and how it is closer to one or another, receiver calculate its absolute position. To calculate 3D position receiver need 4 satellites in view. With 3 satellites in view you will see empty field for altitude (height) value in NMEA sentence from GPS receiver and only longitude and latitude will be shown.