/islam/ - 8kun Masjid

sorry for using America as an example and for copy/pasting, I originally posted this on /sci/ but it is relevant to us so I decided to share as they weren't being very keen on discussing this

>>33965

>a pocket watch should be able to ideally be [able] to wired to include such a thing

pocket compass*

>The obvious way to accomplish this is GPS. Why is that approach unsuitable for your purposes?

i agree, but gps can fail for numerous circumstances. plus it can be heavily inaccurate for many phones.

i am looking to be able to go out into the, or indeed possibly many rooms, with a camera and see which direction the location is, or use a compass which points out the direction. compasses are magnetic, however, so this is another obstacle.

for example, what if someone is out of range of cellular and satellite, and can not get a direct line?

is there a way to still orient to that direction with a camera, pointing a line directly to the location?

maybe their phone would be dead.

so this is where a compass without gps would be necessary.

otherwise, you would have to use a compass, consult exactly which direction on a map you are in vs the direction in the map you want to head,

and hopefully head in that cardinal direction.

the goal is bypassing this by using some sort of signal to already inform the compass (which would not be formal normal compass) of the cardinal direction of the location (being the qiblah in this instance)

this also has a lot of other applications;

what if a senior citizen gets lost and their family can open their camera on their phone and it points a line directly to where she is ?

or what if your child wants to find their way home and is lost, so they use their compass or app?

or what if someone is lost, and instead of making the location the Capitol, it could be their city, and they can make their way easily back to civilsation and their home after being lost?

there again, are numerous applications, but the main one i am looking for are not these, but for visibility to all who wish throughout the globe, with consent by those who have this marked location as an object of direction. it is meant to be a message visible to all who wish to receive it.

smeone might say to >>33966

>>GPS covers the whole earth's surface. The G stands for global.

>>>cellular

>you don't need cellular signal for gps.

>>>their phone would be dead

>how the f*** are you going to see infrared lasers without a special device

to which I would respond to the above with:

no, because it still uses GPS which has errors.

>>>out of range of satellite

>GPS covers the whole earth's surface. The G stands for global.

yeah well guess what? if i have no signal on my phone or no wifi, it isn't gonna tell me precisely where i am.

that's because it can't get an accurate location from me.

>>>their phone would be dead

no one said their compass would be, or that it couldn't be solar charged if it requires more than just magnetism to determine the direction of the location.

>how the f** are you going to see infrared lasers without a special device?

i kinda indicated that *i didn't want a solution ideally involving lasers or GPS and you gave both of them*…

op here, with some info I found

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direction_finding

RDF systems can be used with any radio source, although very long wavelengths (low frequencies) require very large antennas, and are generally used only on ground-based systems.

> These wavelengths are nevertheless used for marine radio navigation as they can travel very long distances "over the horizon", which is valuable for ships when the line-of-sight may be only a few tens of kilometres.

so this is out

>For aerial use, where the horizon may extend to hundreds of kilometres, higher frequencies can be used, allowing the use of much smaller antennas.

An automatic direction finder, which could be tuned to radio beacons called non-directional beacons or commercial AM radio broadcasters, was until recently, a feature of most aircraft, but is now being phased out

An automatic direction finder (ADF) is a marine or aircraft radio-navigation instrument that automatically and continuously displays the relative bearing from the ship or aircraft to a suitable radio station.[11][12] ADF receivers are normally tuned to aviation or marine NDBs operating in the LW band between 190 – 535 kHz. Like RDF units, most ADF receivers can also receive medium wave (AM) broadcast stations, though as mentioned, these are less reliable for navigational purposes.

/wiki/Non-directional_beacon

A non-directional (radio) beacon (NDB) is a radio transmitter at a known location, used as an aviation or marine navigational aid. As the name implies, the signal transmitted does not include inherent directional information, in contrast to other navigational aids such as low frequency radio range, VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) and TACAN.

>NDB signals follow the curvature of the Earth, so they can be received at much greater distances at lower altitudes, a major advantage over VOR.

>However, NDB signals are also affected more by atmospheric conditions, mountainous terrain, coastal refraction and electrical storms, particularly at long range.

NBD step in the right direction, some flaws, but ultimately doesn't seem to accomplish exactly what we're looking to make easier upon the civilian access.

is there a way for, hypothetically, some sort of NBD to be set on our analogous Captiol, and then implement a radio transmitter to transmit similar to RDF/ADF and receive tuning and communication, similar to NBD?

again though, this seems to be way too complicated of a solution.

for someone in the immediate city, infrared lasers from the Capitol/Kaaba would solve this simply, but not allow for the compasses to work.

NDB and ADF also is apparently over-complicating what GPS can essentially do.

Why is GPS data sometimes inaccurate?

Not enough satellites

GPS devices typically need to receive signals from at least 7/8 satellites to calculate location to within about 10m.

With fewer satellites contributing, the amount of uncertainty and inaccuracy increases.

With fewer than 4, many GPS receivers are unable to produce any location estimates, and will report "GPS signal lost".

The GPS unit is usually looking to find and acquire signals from more satellites,

so should eventually recover from situations where not enough satellites are found.

GPS receivers need some time to first acquire signals from satellites.

When investigating GPS accuracy, it may take plenty of time (5 or 10 minutes) for the receiver to acquire signals from satellites.

Cold start

>When first turned on, the GPS needs to download data from the satellites that describes the position and timing of all of the satellites in the system.

This helps it to acquire signals more quickly in the future.

>This initial cold start can take 5 or more minutes.

Warm start

If you use a GPS device frequently, the device will have up-to-date information about satellite positions and timing, so should acquire signals from satellites within about 1-3 minutes.

Assisted GPS (AGPS) start

Mobile phones take advantage of extra location information to bootstrap GPS initialization. This is called "Assisted GPS" or AGPS,

>and uses information from the mobile phone network's cell towers to provide a rough starting point.

Typically, when using AGPS, a receiver can acquire satellite signals in 10-30 seconds. After the initial acquisition, the GPS receiver uses only the satellite signals and no longer needs assistance from cell tower information to update its location estimates.

Signal obstruction

>Buildings, trees, tunnels, mountains, clothing, and the human body can prevent GPS signals from the satellites reaching the receiver.

When possible, put a GPS receiver in a place where it has a clear and unobstructed view of a large portion of the sky.

In some cases, this can be done by holding the GPS device in a back pocket, or on the outside pocket of a backpack, or in a handlebar mount.

>In other cases, the obstructions are unavoidable, like in downtown areas where tall buildings block view of the sky, or when in dense trees.

Multipath error

When signals from the GPS satellites bounce off buildings,

the GPS receiver can be confused by the extra time the signal took to reach it.

In these cases, you may observe sudden large errors in position.

There is not much that can done to reduce the effects of multipath errors - GPS is simply less accurate in canyons, whether they are made of buildings or natural formations.

> the US government would definitely use this technology for muslims.i have not considered that, and i hope that if we can find a solution to this it would not be weaponised.

they have already shown that people can be identified by their unique bioelectrical fields, apparently. and the muslim prayer changes those specific bioelectrical fields such as increasing alpha waves in the brain.

if you can identify and target individuals that are facing that direction at times of worship, especially espousing the increase in alpha waves, you can probably get a good map or even bioelectric thumbprint (from allegations, idk how true) of these people.

there was that thread about 5g being used to possibility manipulate people or gain information on their consciousness – all things are connected in some way, after all. separation is an illusion

tl;dr contemplating tech behind global qiblah for muslims, and its possible consequences as use against Muslims

>>33973

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/5110754/More-than-200-Mecca-mosques-face-wrong-direction.html

The old mosques were not built precisely based on the qibla, the official alignment with the holy Kaaba shrine at the centre of Mecca's Al-Haram mosque, according to the report in Arab News.

"There are no major errors, but corrections have been made for some old mosques, thanks to modern techniques. In any case, it does not affect the prayers," the newspaper quoted Sudairy as saying in its Saturday edition.

Mecca residents and experts have suggested that the errant mosques install inside a correct indicator of the qibla, or orient their prayer rugs more exactly in the direction of the Kaaba, Arab News said.

>Another suggestion is that laser beams be installed in the tall minarets of the Al-Haram mosque built around the Kaaba to help mosques and worshippers establish the correct qibla direction.

so my brothers and sisters, Makkah has already proposed similar ideas and they may implement them insha'Allah. it may bring good or it may bring bad, Allah knows best, but it is worth studying this technology and its implications and if it can be weaponised against foreign Muslims.

imagine if such a thing was implemented already before the chinese crackdown on Muslims – identifying Muslims based on their orientation to the Qiblah would be much easier.

this could spread to become a larger phenomenon.

so we must investigate and ponder these technologies and their consequences.

>>Calibrate a device with longitude and latitude.

>>It contains an accelerometer, gyro, GPS, compass and network connection. It also knows long/lat of capital building or other desirable location.

>>It uses gyro, compass, and accelerometer to update internal longitude and latitude, then takes the difference between it's long/lat and target long/lat to orient the green marker.

>>Occasionally it updates or recalibrates the internal long/lat when it has gps/internet connection when small enough error.

>>And it only needs to update when it's calculated error for it's internal position is too large. Still needs battery.

>>Alternatively long/lat can be input manually and the direction to capital building can be calculated manually for those who know how to use a map and have access to one.

>>Alternatively again you can just print a map that is capital building centric and orient yourself to the map with a normal compass, then the map will point to the capital.

>GPS, compass and network connection.

disqualifiers

>It also knows long/lat of capital building or other desirable location.

yes these are givens

>It uses gyro, compass, and accelerometer to update internal longitude and latitude, then takes the difference between it's long/lat and target long/lat to orient the green marker.

finally someone's giving some great advice in the right direction

>Occasionally it updates or recalibrates the internal long/lat when it has gps/internet connection when small enough error

not a bad idea, so maybe, but at the moment the goal is to avoid this and minimalise it as much as possible.

if the location of direction communicates at the proper frequencies

>>33969

>>33968

then maybe we can use these frequencies instead of GPS to recalibrate, using the given record of those frequencies & communication as well as calculating based on the gyro, compass, and accelerometer? this is just getting very complicated for a compass but is still not impossible

>>33975

>>Occasionally it updates or recalibrates the internal long/lat when it has gps/internet connection when small enough error

>Still needs battery.

look up automatic mechanical watches and manual watches for a way to give charge.

we could also simply give it a port if the long/lat is off to connect to a laptop and internet and re-calibrate.

or do so manually.

>You need incredibly accurate accelerometers and gryoscopes to be better than GPS like OP wants. These are INCREDIBLY expensive. Inertial navigation systems exhibit some pretty big drift after only 1 hour of operation

but in ideal circumstances, with proper advancements, what you are saying is this can eventually be accomplished.

>>33966

>what if a senior citizen gets lost and their family can open their camera on their phone and it points a line directly to where she is ?

>>Anon1:How does information from their tracker make it to whatever device you have without a network

>>Anon2:they sell things like this. The car emits a signal and you measure signal strength. It's easy to navigate toward the car by getting hotter or warmer. You can do direction finding measuring signal strength at two different locations or using a special polarized antenna. This typically isn't worth the cost and size increase.

>>Me paraphrased by anon3:I want to quickly determine a location electronically without triangulating it using electromagnetic waves emitting from some fixed sources.

>Anon3: The answer is no, you can't

proof needed.

i never said there couldn't be triangulation. but how do you propose this with a compass and not GPS?

small scale example with frame of reference I can determine the location of a fixed point charge based on the force it is applying to an unfixed and opposing point charge.

this would give me the direction via position, give me its acceleration, and allow me to calculate from that acceleration the distance of that point charge, and the precise direction by the direction unfixed point charge.

so there you go.

i just used electromagnetic waves from a fixed source,

and without triangulating,

found where that fixed location's electromagnetism was propelling an unfixed point charge in a direction, relative to their positions. in the opposite direction I can locate the position of that fixed location by its electromagnetic actions on an unfixed point charge.

this same method is what is applied in the things for cars that anon2 mentions are sold.

for the compass, the voltage build up from mechanical winding and automatic self-winding pendulums should be enough generated vibrate quartz at the proper frequency, either forwards or backwards, to the direction of the qiblah.

I however don't have much of a design for this – that is, sending out point charges, except one similar to anon2's, and the radio transmissions quoted above.

and i have no idea how to accomplish this with a phone – unless somehow an app can perform this without internet and without gps. which is not something I'm sure of yet

>>33978

>and i have no idea how to accomplish this with a phone – unless somehow an app can perform this without internet and without gps. which is not something I'm sure of yet

I mean speakers and microphones can get this data pretty well, but they're not specifically made for it.

so really it comes down to finding some simple way and compact way of determining relative position to the Ka'abah.

now, suppose we erected around the minarets of the Ka'abah, several very powerful and high altitude lasers that extended even into space.

i'm not sure if these would be 'visible' from around the world (ideally they'd use non-intrusive/invisible lights except maybe for athan and iqama in the Ka'abah), and i'm sure they would be accurate for the immediate vicinity, but they would not follow the curvature of the earth so I am not sure that if someone sees a light from the Ka'abah, that facing it is actually the proper direction to face.

however, an app SHOULD be able to, assuming those far extending lasers (ideally in an invisible frequency) locate those lasers, and based on their direction, orientation, and the known position of those lights, be able to allow someone to point their app with camera phone at the (invisible to eye, visible to camera) light from the minarets near Ka'abah, and use mathematical algorithms to pinpoint the precise location of the qiblah.

some vague diagram i'm trying to give to illustrate the concept

>>33982

I'm familiar, but I am trying to make that dial calibrate automatically and ideally without using something like GPS/qiblah direction/internet to recalibrate manually.

not only that, but it is also an aim at discerning the Ka'abah's location globally – that is, make it accessible to easily find and face the qiblah.

>>33983

imagine if you didn't need you compass but you could point a camera that showed the qibla exactly, be it in the sky or in a room.

>>33965

>>33982

>As for your idea, anything involving high power lights is going to draw a lot of power, and have line of sight issues.

so if I am at 90 degrees, and I see at 0 degrees rays of lasers, and I head to those lasers, will I or will I not have headed to the light (i.e. Makkah)., therefore, if I face this light in salah, am I not facing Makkah?

Can you disprove this mathematically that I wouldn't arrive in Makkah if I followed the lights from Makkah directly?

>Radio waves wrap around obstacles, and microwave radiation bounces off the atmosphere. Both draw less power, while sending signals further. If you want a solution involving broadcasting a signal, they are better options than a high power laser

I did cite some similar problems solved with radio waves and suggested they may be implemented in solving this.

>>33985

Lasers go in a straight line. If you're far enough that the curvature of the Earth gets in the way, your laser is useless. If you're a degree or so out of the way, you won't be able to see it. If it's powerful enough that you can see it at a distance, it's powerful enough to blind anyone nearby. Laser equipment heats up, so not only will you have to spend money on a high power laser and enough electricity to power it, you'll have to spend extra to stop it melting. Even if you solved those problems, you'd have an inconvenient lighthouse at best.

Your math is correct, in that you'd face Mecca if you faced the lasers coming from it. The problem is that lasers suck for sending signals.

>>33988

It doesn't make a difference whether you see it directly or with a camera, lasers are undetectable unless they're pointing directly at you. You won't see a red streak in the sky, regardless of the tools you use. In your diagram, that ray of light passing by the person cannot be detected.

All lasers are made of visible light, and can damage your eyes. Embed related is an example of a proper laser. If the person in the video fired it without that welding mask, it would permanently blind him. This is nowhere near the power required to build something like a laser beacon, and it's already that dangerous.

The light in your remote is an IR diode. It isn't a laser.

>>33989

>It doesn't make a difference whether you see it directly or with a camera, lasers are undetectable unless they're pointing directly at you.

they're refracting off of the atmosphere.

>All lasers are made of visible light, and can damage your eyes.

false, there are infrared lasers which are not visible.

>Embed related is an example of a proper laser. If the person in the video fired it without that welding mask,

false analogy, as a person wouldn't be firing it up close, it would be high up in a minaret.

>This is nowhere near the power required to build something like a laser beacon, and it's already that dangerous.

how do you figure that? E=hv, the energy being relative to the frequency (meaning the higher the wavelength, the more energy due to higher frequency v).

given that,

the video is a false analogy;

as the frequency is visible light, (we are discussing invisible), and therefore by planck's equation, your analogy emits much much much more energy than a laser that does so with a lower frequency, which is what we have been discussing, and have already decided that the laser would not be visible.

and, ultraviolet rays and infrared rays are not visible, but can still be produced by lases.

"A typical human eye will respond to wavelengths from about 390 to 700 nanometers." "1,000.00 nm converts to 1 µm"

so between .39 and .7µm is visible

>The light in your remote is an IR diode.

which is not visible to human eyes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-infrared_laser

"Far-infrared laser or terahertz laser (FIR laser, THz laser) is a laser with output wavelength in between 30-1000 µm"

This means these lasers operate outside of the visible spectrum of light

but you said

>All lasers are made of visible light, and can damage your eyes.

which clearly indicates that all lasers are not made of visible light. literally the first result on google;

https://www.wickedlasers.com/laser-tech/invisible_lasers.html

Invisible lasers are lasers that essentially operate outside the detection range of the human eye. First, we must understand that UV and IR wavelengths are invisible, lasers designated outside the 400nm ~ 700nm range would be considered undetectable to the human eye. Some IR diodes run at 808nm and 1064nm producing no visible light exposure which creates a potential health hazard if improperly used. Ultraviolet lasers (Invisible lasers) pose the same threat which can be very damaging to cell tissue, eyes and other organic materials. UV and IR lasers have been fielded in military experiments, research and development, nanotechnology and other sciences.

In the end, invisible lasers are merely beams of light our eyes cannot detect.

>>33991

so even the science supports that infrared is low energy and can penetrate the atmosphere (and what doesn't penetrate will be visible through cameras as reflections)

>>33992

What is infrared radiation?

Infrared (IR) radiation is simply one of the many types of 'light' that comprise the electromagnetic (EM) spectrum. Infrared light is characterized by wavelengths that are longer than visible light (4000-7000 Angstroms, or 0.4 0.7 micrometers; also denoted as microns).

Astronomers generally divide the infrared portion of the EM spectrum into three regions:

near-infrared (0.7 5 microns),

mid-infrared (5 30 microns)

and far-infrared (30 1000 microns).

Who discovered infrared light, and when did the discovery occur?

The famous astronomer William Herschel, who also discovered the first new planet since antiquity (Uranus) and studied sunspots, was the first to discover a form of light other than visible (optical).

In an 1800 experiment, Herschel used a glass prism to spread sunlight into a rainbow of colors.

He then measured the temperature of each color of visible light and noted differences.

Most intriguingly, he found a curious reading when the thermometer bulb was placed just beyond the red portion of the visible spectrum. He had discovered thermal radiation, which has come to be known as infrared. [The prefix "infra" means "below."]

Is infrared radiation dangerous?

In general, no – at least from naturally occurring physical processes.

Any form of radiation – including visible light or radio waves – could potentially be dangerous if highly concentrated into a narrow beam (that is the principle of lasers) of very high power. We are immersed in infrared radiation everyday. It is nothing more than heat.

On the other hand, you certainly would not want to place your hand on a hot stove, in which case IR radiation would be dangerous.

How does our atmosphere block infrared radiation from space?

Only certain parts of the electromagnetic spectrum (all light ranging from gamma ray to radio waves) can make it to the Earth's surface.

Much is absorbed by our atmosphere.

>Visible light, radio waves and a few small /ranges of infrared wavelengths/ do make it through.

Gamma rays, and most of the ultraviolet rays and infrared rays do not.

>Much of the infrared light is absorbed by water vapor in our atmosphere.

>This is why infrared telescopes are placed on high, dry mountains (like Mauna Kea in Hawaii) so that they can observe more infrared radiation.

What are the benefits of infrared technology?

There are several advantages to detecting and studying infrared radiation.

Infrared is basically heat radiation.

>Infrared radiation carries information about the temperature distribution of the objects studied. Infrared can also penetrate, thick smoke, clouds and dust.

This makes infrared cameras very useful in search (such as for the beacon in discussion) and rescue and firefighting.

>>33990

Last reply, because this is getting ridiculous.

Lasers draw too much power. You'd have to have a power grid dedicated to your laser.

Strong lasers can't be fired constantly. The only feasible way to power a laser big enough is with capacitors, which take time to charge.

Strong lasers need active cooling. Your laser will melt itself without spending extra to solve this.

Lasers affect a specific point, where the dot lands. Everything outside that is unaffected.

IR radiation is heat. An IR laser at the required power is literally a heat ray.

UV radiation causes cancer. A UV laser at the required power is a cancer ray.

Lasers do the same damage regardless of how close you are. People get arrested for blinding pilots with handheld laser pointers.

Copying from random websites won't make your idea any less terrible.

>UV and IR lasers have been fielded in military experiments

As rangefinders and weapons. Not as beacons.

>Refraction and reflection

You can't see lasers unless they're shining directly at you, regardless of any reflection or refraction, and regardless of whether the laser is in the visible spectrum or not.

You will not see a streak of light in the sky. You won't see it with your IR camera either. The laser has to hit you directly for you to detect it.

For a quick recap, you want to fire multiple military-grade death rays into space so that a compass can somehow sync up with them to magically set a waypoint to Mecca. It's useless to anyone who doesn't live in Arabia, unless they travel a lot. It's useless to anyone who knows where their country is, relative to Arabia. It's useless to anyone with a mosque nearby. The only way it could bring any value to us is if it pisses off an alien race enough that they decide to pay a visit. It just isn't going to work.

This is some seriously convoluted space-elevator tire garbage. Line of sight completely destroys this entire thing. If you shine a light from Mecca, America wouldn't see it at all. lrn2 actual science.

Unless you're a flat-earther … in which case you're a complete moron anyway.

There's already qiblah apps that use the micro accelerometers and magnetometers in the phone to calculate the direction to mecca. No extra infrastructure needed, just the natural magnetic field of the earth.

>>34013

>complete moron anyway.

speak good or remain silent.

>Line of sight completely destroys this entire thing.

already proven that an IR laser would escape the atmosphere, and be visible from refraction with the proper lens.

you've gotta prove to me the limitations of the line of sight that show your claim is impossible [i.e. one such IR laser would not be visible in america]. then we can implement the proper technology to make the line of sight possible.

>>34015

if im not mistaken those apps use gps, which are too inaccurate for our purpose and are what we are trying to avoid.

>>34019

>speak good or remain silent.

Never presume to tell me what to do.

>you've gotta prove to me the limitations of the line of sight

Look at a globe, do the math. Line of sight destroys this entire thread. Nowhere in the US shares line of sight with Mecca unless you bend the light. Earth's gravity isn't strong enough to bend light. Are you a flat-earther?

>gps, too inaccurate

Ok, now I know you're a fool.

>>34020

You don't need to insult him but yes you are right.

>>33981

That doesn't make any sense.

>>34021

I'm not trying to insult him, but a fool is a fool. If I were being foolish, I'd rather be told than be humored. Maybe that's just me.

>>34025

GPS Sucks it is a shame that kids these days and ppl in general do not know there directions and always are relying on the gps…

I never use a gps for anything and I have never been lost anywhere ever period shouts out the akhs that don't need the gps