Piksekiirus ja väljamõeldis
#1
Olen lihtsalt segaduses pärast seda, kui kohtasin kedagi, kes üritas mulle Enelit (üks tükk) seletada.

Põhimõtteliselt oli idee, et kuna meie poolt välk pärineb tagasitulekust (mis tekitab välgu valguse), peab igaüks, kes reageerib piksenoolile, reageerima tagasituleku kiirusele (1/3 LS).

Mul on inimesi, kes ütlevad, et välgulappe ei saa enamasti tagasitulekuni mõõta, kuid miks see idee vale on?

Kas sellepärast, et tegelik välk pole sama kiirusega kui tagasitõmme?

Kui see nii on, siis miks ei saa lihtsalt öelda, et igaüks, kes reageerib välgule (mida me näeme), reageerib tagasilöögile?
192.168.0.1 routerlogin 192.168.l.l
Reply
#2
(2020-12-11, 08:24)actiopabs94 Wrote: Olen lihtsalt segaduses pärast seda, kui kohtasin kedagi, kes üritas mulle Enelit (üks tükk) seletada.

Põhimõtteliselt oli idee, et kuna meie poolt välk pärineb tagasitulekust (mis tekitab välgu valguse), peab igaüks, kes reageerib piksenoolile, reageerima tagasituleku kiirusele (1/3 LS).

Mul on inimesi, kes ütlevad, et välgulappe ei saa enamasti tagasitulekuni mõõta, kuid miks see idee vale on?

Kas sellepärast, et tegelik välk pole sama kiirusega kui tagasitõmme?

Kui see nii on, siis miks ei saa lihtsalt öelda, et igaüks, kes reageerib välgule (mida me näeme), reageerib tagasilöögile?



Angel I'm just as confused trying to use Google to translate Etonian into English... which translates your post as
Quote:I'm just confused after meeting someone trying to explain Enel (one piece) to me.

Basically, the idea was that since the lightning on our part comes from the return (which produces light from the flash), anyone who responds to the lightning bolt must respond to the rate of return (1/3 LS).

I have people who say that flashlights can't usually be measured until they come back, but why is this idea wrong?

Is it because the actual flash is not at the same speed as the retraction?

If so, why can’t we just say that anyone who responds to lightning (which we see) responds to a setback?



The System attempts to locate the ground point of a "Cloud to Ground" sferic ('discharge' point).. where and when the energy is released.  If it cannot see the actual discharge energy spectrum shape, or timing, such as in a skywave reflection, it will 'compute' one, based on the normalization and associated data from other stations being used in the computation. A stroke may be many kilometers long before grounding.  So the maximum energy point is chosen as reference, which happens to be the 'discharge' initial impulse.

Prior to, and after the discharge, other data is available in original un-reflected, space or ground wave signals, pointing to where the 'discharge' should exist, in terms of time, and provides more accurate data than a skywave or reflected wave, .

A light beam can be measured more accurately, for speed etc, using a reflection, since the exact emission of the beam at origination can be precisely determined, where at the 'reflecting' or 'receiving' element DOES NOT know the exact time the beam started it's journey, only the time it was received. Regardless of how accurate a 'sync' controller may be, such as GPS.  The emitter, however, by experimenter's configuration, knows in some combination, the speed of light, the distance travelled both to and from the reflector, and the exact time it was emitted, and therefore the exact times, speed of medium, or distance to 'target', even size, movement, position, construction, or other information about the 'target' he may require.
If there were any fallacy in this paradigm, radar systems would NOT function..

Blitzortung uses the 1PPS GPS generated timing signal, which should be in sync, with the same 1PPS timer at the server, and ALL other controller/receivers in the network, worldwide.  The Initial Station sending the impulse data theoretically contains the EXACT discharge 'time' at the initial station... and all others have their signal for that impulse 'shifted' relative to the 'best data' station's discharge image, which MAY NOT be the initial station.  This is further affected by the 'relative gain' computation which helps normalizes signals between stations... this based on an ADC (digital trigger level relative to 100mv computed against overall analog channel gain. Further affected by known signal delays based on antenna type and configuration, and any filters set in the analog chain. A very important algorithm analyses the curent signal against the 'stored patterns' for each specific station (its "DNA") (The Data Sieve contains the last 1000 signals sent by that station, and it constantly rewrites, and updates such "DNA")

So what you see on the Blitzortung signal page is a total variation on what you see locally... since a station in Kansas is widely separated in terms of configuration, distance, and time from a station in England also used for locating the same impulse.

Like the flashlight, in this case, the emission time, however, computed relative to a GPS standard timing signal, which despite all technology, will still have a 'deviation' error.  And the server doing the computing is NOT also the 'sending' element... it must rely on GPS and standardization of all components in the network... which obviously is NOT the case.

I've no idea how this will translate back into Estonian... looks pretty scary to me on a quick Google, however.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Piksekiirus ja väljamõeldis plexswein 0 380 2021-09-21, 16:25
Last Post: plexswein



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)