Re: Pulsar Nav accuracy

KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de wrote:
> 
> Indy schrieb:
> > True. But it should not be difficult at all to determine
> > this quite precisely. We already know to 1/10 ly or better the
> > distances to nearby stars. Once we actually *travel* to them,
> > all we have to do is turn a sensitive receiver back toward
> > Earth and pick up signals. From this we can
> > determine *extremely* well the distance (you know when a
> > given signal was transmitted - such as, oh, a Weather Channel show
> > which carries the timestamp in the program - and with calibrated
time
> 
> > instruments you can determine to with lightseconds or tighter
> accuracy how
> > long it took the signal to reach your location, and from that,
derive
> the
> > distance to some small number).
> 
> You have all this worked out have you ?
> :-)

Oh yes! I've been collecting and beaming the GZG posts to beta Pictoris
for a couple of years now, in the hopes that by the time we get there
we'll have a signal to work with directly (of course the tricky part is
not beaming the signal directly at beta Pic, but rather beaming it to
where beta Pic will be when we get there - that's taken a bit of
hand-waving to ascertain, what with clairvoyance being such a rigorous
discipline and all).