Questions concerning GPS Navigation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter edraganov
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gps Navigation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of relativity on GPS navigation systems, particularly focusing on how time dilation impacts the accuracy of GPS clocks and the calculations made by GPS receivers. Participants explore the implications of atomic clock adjustments and the relative measurements used in GPS technology.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Erik questions whether a GPS system would function at all if the GPS clock runs ahead of the Earth clock, suggesting that this could lead to negative distance measurements.
  • Some participants clarify that common GPS receivers do not contain atomic clocks and rely on relative measurements, which mitigates the issue of absolute timing errors.
  • It is noted that GPS satellites send their position and timestamps, and the differences in these timestamps are used to calculate relative distances, which helps maintain accuracy despite potential clock discrepancies.
  • One participant explains that if all satellite clocks run too fast, it would shift the timestamps but would not affect the relative positioning calculations significantly, as the differences would remain consistent.
  • There is mention of the necessity for satellites to adjust their positions over time to maintain accuracy, as it is not feasible to predict their orbits with high precision for extended periods.
  • Another participant references historical adjustments made to GPS atomic clocks to account for relativistic effects, indicating that these adjustments were necessary for the system's functionality.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the implications of relativistic effects on GPS systems. While some agree on the importance of relative measurements, others raise concerns about the potential for inaccuracies if adjustments are not made. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the implications of these effects.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the complexity of the calculations involved in GPS technology and the assumptions made regarding clock synchronization and relativistic adjustments. There are unresolved questions about the long-term effects of clock discrepancies on GPS accuracy.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in the technical aspects of GPS technology, relativity, and the practical implications of time measurement in navigation systems.

edraganov
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

Although I am not a physicist, I have been trying to understand the relativity effects on GPS clocks.

It's seems pretty logic, however I've stumbled upon on a specific issue:

Given a atomic clock without any kind of relativistic adjustment, if the GPS clock is running ahead of the Earth clock, the time when the signal was received is probably going to be behind the time the signal was sent. If the distance is measured by C(T1-T0), this will lead to a negative distance.

In my mind, the GPS system wouldn't be imprecise, it simply would not work at all! Am I right?

Thanks in advance,
Erik
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Common GPS receivers do not have an atomic clock inside - they cannot do absolute distance measurements, just relative measurements. The calculated position of the satellites would drift away from the real position if their clocks are "wrong", so you would get some errors after a while if the error does not get corrected.

A GPS receiver with an atomic clock would get wrong distances, indeed - but it would take a long time for them to become negative.
 
mfb said:
Common GPS receivers do not have an atomic clock inside - they cannot do absolute distance measurements, just relative measurements. The calculated position of the satellites would drift away from the real position if their clocks are "wrong", so you would get some errors after a while if the error does not get corrected.

A GPS receiver with an atomic clock would get wrong distances, indeed - but it would take a long time for them to become negative.

Mfb, would you mind explaining (briefly) how GPS receivers without atomic clocks actually make those calculations, just for me to understand how a clock running ahead can affect the calculated position?
 
GPS satellites send their position and their current timestamp.

A receiver gets data which looks a bit like that:
Code: 
Satellite 1: [Position in space 1], 9.6.13 1:25:03.454625364
Satellite 2: [Position in space 2], 9.6.13 1:25:03.452124145
Satellite 3: [Position in space 3], 9.6.13 1:25:03.455839951
Satellite 4: [Position in space 4], 9.6.13 1:25:03.453602913
The is a difference of 0.002501219 seconds between satellite 1 and 2, indicating that satellite 1 is 750km closer to the receiver than satellite 2. Satellites 3 and 4 give two additional differences, so we have three parameters to determine the position in space (and the time can be determined, too).

If all clocks run too quick by 2 parts in a billion, this shifts all times by 250ms in 20 years - it will break any direct comparison with atomic clocks on earth, but it does not influence the usual method to determine the position. The differences are shifted by the same amount, of course, but 2 parts in a billion just correspond to a few millimeters - not an issue.
Within 250ms, the satellites move about 1km. If you do not correct that, the position will be wrong.
 
mfb said:
GPS satellites send their position and their current timestamp.

A receiver gets data which looks a bit like that:
Code: 
Satellite 1: [Position in space 1], 9.6.13 1:25:03.454625364
Satellite 2: [Position in space 2], 9.6.13 1:25:03.452124145
Satellite 3: [Position in space 3], 9.6.13 1:25:03.455839951
Satellite 4: [Position in space 4], 9.6.13 1:25:03.453602913
The is a difference of 0.002501219 seconds between satellite 1 and 2, indicating that satellite 1 is 750km closer to the receiver than satellite 2. Satellites 3 and 4 give two additional differences, so we have three parameters to determine the position in space (and the time can be determined, too).

If all clocks run too quick by 2 parts in a billion, this shifts all times by 250ms in 20 years - it will break any direct comparison with atomic clocks on earth, but it does not influence the usual method to determine the position. The differences are shifted by the same amount, of course, but 2 parts in a billion just correspond to a few millimeters - not an issue.
Within 250ms, the satellites move about 1km. If you do not correct that, the position will be wrong.

Thank you very much, MFB! Everything is much more clear to me now!

Just to make sure I'm really in the same page: since the receiver does not rely on an internal atomic clock and thereby calculates relative distances based on satellites timestamps, relativistic effects are not much of a problem, since the differences between satellites are going to shift accordingly. However, after many years, when satellite clocks are running well ahead, given that the satellite is orbiting Earth on a certain speed, the receiver will get consecutive timestamps from all satellites with a greater variance in time in comparison with the last ones received from the same satellites. This will lead to wrong calculations since it will look like all satellites are in a position far ahead than their current one. Am I correct?
 
Well, the calculated position in space for the satellites gets wrong, if the satellites do not adjust their own position from time to time. They have to do this anyway, it is not possible to determine the orbit for 20 years in advance with a precision of centimeters.
 
mfb said:
Well, the calculated position in space for the satellites gets wrong, if the satellites do not adjust their own position from time to time. They have to do this anyway, it is not possible to determine the orbit for 20 years in advance with a precision of centimeters.

Got it! Thank you very much, once again!
 
edraganov said:
Hello everyone,

Although I am not a physicist, I have been trying to understand the relativity effects on GPS clocks.

It's seems pretty logic, however I've stumbled upon on a specific issue:

Given a atomic clock without any kind of relativistic adjustment, if the GPS clock is running ahead of the Earth clock, the time when the signal was received is probably going to be behind the time the signal was sent. If the distance is measured by C(T1-T0), this will lead to a negative distance.

In my mind, the GPS system wouldn't be imprecise, it simply would not work at all! Am I right?

Thanks in advance,
Erik

Did you know that the GPS atomic clocks (which are in the satellites, and not the recievers) had to have their frequency adjusted to account for relativistic time dilation effects?

In the early days, people weren't sure about GR yet, so they "turned off" the clock frequency adjustment (they built the clocks so the adjustment could be turned on and off), saw that it was needed, and of the correct value, and turned it back on again.

Also, the atomic satillite clocks are updated occasoinally, to insure they remain synchronized with the ground statitons.
 

Similar threads

High School A question about warp bubbles and navigation
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
Graduate GPS satellite and satnav receiver clock synchronisation
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Graduate How Critical Are Relativistic Effects in GNSS Accuracy?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
Undergrad GPS and Cs atomic clock question
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad How do GPS Satellites work exactly?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate Why Does Understanding GPS and Relativity Matter for Black Hole Exploration?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
How Does Differential GPS Handle Timing and Satellite Malfunctions?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Undergrad Einstein clock syncing with one way light emission absorber
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
What is the purpose of the fourth satellite in GPS navigation?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
Graduate GPS, GR, satellites and clock speed on the satellites
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K