Slashdot Mirror


GPS Used To Monitor Continental Drift

metz2000 writes "BBC News is reporting that a team of scientists from Nottingham (UK) are using GPS to measure sea levels and continental drift. The team has around 50 stations across the UK, and use GPS technology to track miniscule changes in altitude and location. This allows the team to gain an understanding of how the UK landmass is likely to change over the coming centuries. They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'."

225 comments

  1. Solution? by ahadley · · Score: 4, Funny

    well this should sort the north/south divide and tilt (apollogies for pun) the house price difference to the north.....

    just my 2 (euro) cents worth

    Alex

    1. Re:Solution? by Kinniken · · Score: 1

      Well, what would be realy interesting is to know if the UK is drifting toward Europe or away from it. Lots of people on the continent would be interested in the answer ;-)

      --
      What do you know about World Politic? Find out in this quiz
    2. Re:Solution? by jeremyp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From the article:

      "GPS measurements have also allowed scientists to show that the UK is drifting about 2-3 cm each year in a north-easterly direction."

      Of course you need to know what the rest of Europe is doing as well. I suspect, if it is on the same techtonic plate as Europe, then Europe is doing the same thing.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    3. Re:Solution? by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 1

      They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'." London is already overcrowded enough without all of the Northeners rolling downhill towards us!

      --
      Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
    4. Re:Solution? by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      IIRC this question was raised when the channel tunnel was under construction, and the answer was that the UK is indeed drifting away from Europe at a rate of a few centimeters per annum. Quite how this works when we share the same tectonic plate that is fairly inactive in the region concerned I have no idea, but I'd suspect that individual plates exhibit a degree of elasticity or deform when pressure is applied to the sides.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:Solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd suspect that individual plates exhibit a degree of elasticity or deform when pressure is applied to the sides.

      You'd be right... how do you think mountains are formed?

    6. Re:Solution? by Carnivorous+Carrot · · Score: 1

      > The team has around 50 stations across the UK,
      > and use GPS technology to track miniscule
      > changes in altitude and location.

      "Whoa! Look at that shift!"

      "Wait a minnit. It's just Fergie just tripped."

      --
      "Has [being a kidnapped teenage girl, raped repeatedly for months] changed you?" - Katie Couric to Elizabeth Smart
    7. Re:Solution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sound you hear north of England is all the Scotts Cheering for the sinking of those darn British!

    8. Re:Solution? by j3ffrey · · Score: 0

      Fergie endorses weight watchers. Her line:
      "Duchess of pork? Not anymore."

  2. Personal use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So can I use this to make sure its really an earthquake and not just some fat guy trying to run to the door for a pizza?

    1. Re:Personal use by pe1rxq · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, unless the fat guy is running really slow and you have a strange kind of earthquakes in your part of the world....
      They are measuring slow changes, not quick seismic vibrations.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:Personal use by jmccay · · Score: 1

      Now to combine our 2 favorite /. poll answers:
      CowboyNeal is fat you insensitive clod...

      --
      At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
  3. Accuracy by ewithrow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Considering a lot of GPS receivers have an error of + or - 10 feet or so, I wonder if they are using very precise equipment, or if having the redundancy of many units makes up for the rough estimates GPS satelites give.

    1. Re:Accuracy by Wibla · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They are probably using the military band of the GPS sattelites, which are considerably more precise than ordinary 'civil' GPS.

    2. Re:Accuracy by d-Orb · · Score: 5, Informative

      I guess that they are using differential GPS, by which the time delay at a known location is compared to the time-delay at the location of interest. This enables for very accurate estimation of where you are.

      On the other hand, at least in California (where they have a GPS network for earthquake monitoring), the network might well be permanent, hence you can do a nice sort of averaging over time. We have found that even with normal GPS, you get nice accuracies over a time period.

    3. Re:Accuracy by rebeka+thomas · · Score: 1, Interesting

      A GPS system working with satellites only has a limited accuracy. Even military ones aren't accurate enough. Using the same technology with ground based satellite analogs gives the accuracy required.

      --
      RST
    4. Re:Accuracy by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are probably not using differential gps as the base stations calculating the difference are on the very landmass they are measuring the movement off....
      They probably use a scheme similar to dgps: They don't have to know their exact location, they have to know their exact location in respect to the other measurement points around the country. Which is relativly easy to do.

      Jeroen

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    5. Re:Accuracy by mlush · · Score: 1
      Considering a lot of GPS receivers have an error of + or - 10 feet or so, I wonder if they are using very precise equipment, or if having the redundancy of many units makes up for the rough estimates GPS satelites give.

      There probably using some form of Differential GPS and taking data over a long baseline. I recall that given a few days worth of data its possible to fix a position to within 2-3cm

    6. Re:Accuracy by egburr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How are you going to use ground-based systems to tell you how far your continent has moved? If you put it on the same continent as the receiver, it will move in perfect relation to the receiver, so the receiver will always show zero movement. If you put it on another continent, does it have the range, especially dealing with earth curvature and line-of-sight issues? It seems to me a satellite system would be much better for this purpose.

      --

      Edward Burr
      Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
    7. Re:Accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Lots of Earth Scientists around the world are using GPS for precise plate motion measurements. It's all differential processing with respect to global reference frames defined by a number of sites and other space-geodetic methods (like VLBI). Check out the graphs from this page for some real numbers. They've been doing this sort of thing for the last 10-20 years now.

    8. Re:Accuracy by asmithumd · · Score: 4, Informative

      Back in the late 80's I had some college rooommates who did this for a living. After moderate earthquakes in southern California, groups of geophysics graduate students would be sent to the channel islands off the coast with huge old clunky GPS receivers. They would align the GPS receiver over a benchmark and camp out for 3 days collecting data. Similar groups would do the same thing all over SoCal. Combining the data makes for a super differential GPS data set. As each receiver is at a known location (well sort of, it is what they are there to determine), each has the accuracy of a single diff. GPS receiver. However, what the scientists cared about was not the aboslute positions of the receivers, but their relative positions. As I recall, 0.5cm resoultion was routinely achieved event back then. I'm sure todays systems are automated, and remotely read out. Today's grad students won't have stories about being buzzed by navy jets or herds of ferrel cats.

    9. Re:Accuracy by hughk · · Score: 3, Informative
      First of all, now that Selective Availability has been disabled, stationary GPS can easily give accuracy down to a couple of metres or better. However, even when SA was enabled, surveyors could always get cm level data out of a GPS simply because they could leave the station sitting and let it average out the passes. If you are building a road, you normally want to fix it down to the cm level, because it is embarrassing when a bridge, for example, doesn't fit. Any major construction project has at least one well known point from which the land survey is based. This point connects the survey coordinate system with a general coordinate system (such as latitude and longitude from WGS84). This used to be done optically but over the last 15 years or so, GPS has been used and has performed well.

      For continental drift, they need mm level data. I guess, they just leave the station for a longer time to get even more passes.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    10. Re:Accuracy by kEnder242 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think its called differential carrier phase gps
      measurements below 1cm can be taken by looking at the wavelengths of the signal

      --
      my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL
    11. Re:Accuracy by hopbine · · Score: 1

      They can not use DGPS, that sends out a correction signal from a known fixed point. In this case they don't have a known fixed point, thats what they are trying to determine. The accuracy is obtained by taking many measurements over time , say 1 month, then averaging them. Its the monthly averages that are changing.

      --
      Semper ubi sub ubi
    12. Re:Accuracy by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      Well, that known location must be drifting too, so I don't think they do that. My guess is they average multiple readings to get a more accurate position, combined with military GPS.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    13. Re:Accuracy by confused+one · · Score: 1

      by adding a number of ground based GPS transmitter stations at known (well-surveyed) points, then doing statistical averaging and analysis of the signals over some time, GPS can be accurate to millimeters. This is how they get the precise values when doing this kind of surveying.

    14. Re:Accuracy by WhiteBandit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nope! Instead it's us sappy undergraduate students who have to do it! That is how I'll be making some money this summer in southern CA. ;)

      I think the logic is that some of the receivers are upwards of $10,000 USD, which is a very expensive toy to just have laying around, so they send groups of us students out with the receivers all day so that we basically babysit them and make sure no one touches them.

      We also have a limited amount of receivers, and a large amount of benchmarks to check, so I believe we check Site 1 this day and Site 2 this day, etc...

    15. Re:Accuracy by transient · · Score: 2, Informative

      This hasn't been true for several years. Selective availability was turned off during the Clinton administration.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    16. Re:Accuracy by transient · · Score: 1

      Not all radio frequencies are line-of-sight. In particular, UHF (I think) follows the curvature of the Earth. LORAN is an older navigation system similar in principle to GPS but with ground-based stations, and it uses signals that follow the curvature of the Earth.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
    17. Re:Accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the only one who gets it right, but your comments just gets lost in the noise.

    18. Re:Accuracy by Yet+Another+Smith · · Score: 3, Informative

      They're doing very high-precision work which doesn't look at the code, but the actual waveform, using static (hours-long) occupations of benchmark monuments. Then custom software is used to work out sub centimeter (often 3-5 mm) locations in post-processing.

      This sort of thing has been done in a number of locations. I've been involved with studies like this in Nevada and Italy.

      It's hardly suprising that Scotland is rising and England is sinking. The phenomenon is known as 'isostatic rebound' and happens any time a substantial load is removed or added to an area. The massive ice-age glaciers over Scandinavia caused that area to sink and the 'low countries' - especially Holland - to rise. Now that the glaciers are gone, Scandinavia is rising again and the Netherlands are sinking into the sea. The same is probably happening on a smaller scale to Great Britain. In the US, the Appalachian Mountains are eroding away, causing them to rise, and the coastal plains and Mississippi delta, where that sediment is being deposited, are sinking.

      This is all a very slow process, millimeters per year, but over time it makes a big difference.

      --
      if ($it != $onething) {$it = $another;}
    19. Re:Accuracy by GoatEnigma · · Score: 1
      Yes, they have very precise equipment. It's beyond DGPS because the base stations are surveyed, levelled and emplaced very securely, enabling them to very accurately take out any errors in satellite positioning, plus they use DGPS which is much more accurate than the normal GPS signal used for consumer purposes.

      The Pacific Geoscience Center in Sidney, B.C. has been working with Washington state for several years in running the Western Canada Deformation Array - the same idea as the one in the UK. You can read about it here: http://www.pgc.nrcan.gc.ca/geodyn/wcda/wcda_ov.htm

    20. Re:Accuracy by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      Doesn't seem to me that redundancy would work, since there are a limited number of satellites and all readings would be subject to similar atmospheric delays.

    21. Re:Accuracy by bbc22405 · · Score: 1

      Considering a lot of GPS receivers have an error of + or - 10 feet or so, I wonder if they are using very precise equipment


      You are thinking of the consumer-grade GPS receivers, which can be had for $100 and fit in your hand. The next step up in the marketplace, for surveyors, gives ~1cm accuracy after a half hour of measurement. These cost $5000-$10000, yet are portable, but maybe are a backpack rather than handheld. The receivers and methods used in the article are obviously even better and more expensive, amay be completely non-portable, and likely require sophisticated post-processing of their raw measurements.

    22. Re:Accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do GPS surveying.

      With post-processed differential GPS, or Real-Time-Kinematic (which requires a good survey of your base antenna location), you can achieve accuracies of 10 cm. This is all with civilian hardware.

    23. Re:Accuracy by onepoint · · Score: 1

      there is GPS that can be used that will give you an error rate of less than 4 millimeters. The military has one that fit's within a suitcase and is used to get accurate pinpoint locations of future targets.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    24. Re:Accuracy by Mooncaller · · Score: 1

      There is actualy a whole bag of tricks related to DGPS that can be used, given the situation, to vastly improve relative position. Geology and cartagraphy are all about reletive position. On top of this, studies such as this one are most interested in average relative motion over long periods of time (e.g. mm/month). And this allows the use of even more tricks. This new project is not doing anything earthshaking. There have been studies like this for at least a decade. By doing a little research, one can find maps of the reative motions of all tectonic components of North America. The figure were all derived using satalite based positioning technology. I think this demonstrates that it can be done.

    25. Re:Accuracy by wass · · Score: 1
      They are most likely doing very long-term integration. The GPS data, while it has an inherent noise, averages out very close to a steady value over very long-term averaging.

      Regarding systematic error, they are also most likely measuring the drift of the continental plates, and would only care about the rate of change of distance (over very long time scales). So a systematic error of +/-10 feet probably doesn't matter too much.

      Scientists used a similar setup at the top of Mt. Everest to determine that the peak grows upwards at a slow rate (about 1 centimeter per year, IIRC)

      --

      make world, not war

    26. Re:Accuracy by mlush · · Score: 1
      there is GPS that can be used that will give you an error rate of less than 4 millimeters. The military has one that fit's within a suitcase and is used to get accurate pinpoint locations of future targets.

      But how do they compensate for the continental drift??

    27. Re:Accuracy by phliar · · Score: 1
      Surveyors don't use "real-time" GPS like navigators do -- they save the raw data from the satellites and do lots of post-processing to get millimetre accuracy (or do I mean precision?). It's called differential GPS:
      Differential correction can reduce the effects of errors that are common to both base and roving receivers. It cannot correct for multi-path or receiver error (measurement noise) because those errors are unique to the roving receiver.

      ...

      The base and roving receivers collect GPS data at the same time from the same satellites. The base station is normally set up to track all satellites in view, insuring that it can communicate with the 4 satellites that the roving receiver uses to compute positions. With real-time differential GPS (DGPS) the corrections are transmitted from the base to the rover via radio link. With post-processed DGPS, the rover and base files are processed on computer by the differential correction software. Corrections are applied to the rover file during processing.

      Incidentally, the FAA's intention for the future of air navigation is also a form of real-time signal correction -- LAAS/WAAS (Local/Wide Area Augmentation System) has a GPS receiver at the airport as the "base" and the airplane is the "rover." The base station calculates corrections for each satellite's signal and sends them to the airplane (possibly via a geostationary satellite), which applies the correction to the received signals (before solving the equations for position -- the corrections must be done before since each satellite has a different error). The accuracy of this system is good enough for "precision approaches" (weather around 100' ceiling and half-mile visibility, i.e. really crappy) an accuracy of inches.
      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    28. Re:Accuracy by joggle · · Score: 2, Informative
      The key differences are the fact that it is a network of receivers working together and that these receivers are not consumer-level. Rather, the receivers use both GPS frequencies to attain their solution. Although the second frequency isn't decoded (it's encrypted), the phase is locked on by the receiver, with the receiver simply counting the number of cyles that are received over time. With two frequencies, delays caused by weather (the troposphere) are essentially eliminated. Also, since this is a network, common errors between the receivers are eliminated, greatly increasing the accuracy (up to sub millimeter over time with phase-locked receivers).

      The receivers themselves aren't generating the solution. Rather, they upload raw data to a central server which calculates the position of the receivers sometime after the data was collected (probably once high-precision satellite orbit data is available--this is generated by satellite tracking from several ground stations around the world, updated every 12-24 hrs I think).

      Even consumer-level receivers will give you a decent solution when several days of data for a fixed point are averaged (about 5-10cm I think), assuming satellite visibility is good.

  4. Damn... by nmg196 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...you tell me this *after* I've just bought a house in Southampton. Bummer. I knew the must be *one* good reason to live in Scotland...

    Nick...

    1. Re:Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't tell anyone about it though, I don't want my house price to go up or the economy to thrive!

    2. Re:Damn... by Mr_Dyqik · · Score: 1

      All these people moving to the South and out of the North are the real reason why the country is tilting.

    3. Re:Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. There are NO good reasons for English people to live in Scotland. We hate you all. Bugger off and sink into the sea.

    4. Re:Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think Scotland is good, think about Sweden or Finland... we go up as much as 10 mm/year.

    5. Re:Damn... by Darby · · Score: 1

      I knew the must be *one* good reason to live in Scotland...


      As if Haggis and deep fried Mars bars weren't enough?

  5. accurate enough by Naikrovek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I didn't realize that GPS was accurate enough for that...

    I think i heard once that there were two types of recievers, one was more error prone, but gave you an updated location every second, the second was very, very accurate, but took over 10 minutes to get a position fix.

    can anyone clue me in here?

    1. Re:accurate enough by marko123 · · Score: 1

      IANAGPSE, but Differential GPS is something that allows the resolution of millimetres by subtracting the errors of a reading from one location with the errors of a reading in another two or more locations to increase the accuracy of measurement. Near Adelaide, Australia, they have been doing this to measure the rate that the local mountain range is moving towards the city (i.e. not very quickly, but measurable using this technique.)

      --
      http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
    2. Re:accurate enough by rtaylor · · Score: 1

      These are fixed stations. So, if it took 1 hour to make an accurate measurement, that would mean they could take 24 of them a day -- which is more than enough I would think.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    3. Re:accurate enough by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1

      I'll give you a hint: No one should need to need to measure continental drift every second. They're not moving apart that fast.

    4. Re:accurate enough by nmg196 · · Score: 1
      There aren't two types so to speak, but there are a number of options available if you need a more accurate fix.

      First of all, all GPSs take a short while (10-300 seconds) to work out where they are when you first turn them on. How long it takes depends on a number of things:
      • How long it is since it was last switched on; More than a few hours and all the satellites will be in a different place, meaning the almanac (the orbital postitions of the satellites) will be out of date.
      • How far away from the previous location it is; again, if you go a few hundred miles when it's switched off, it'll try and lock to the same satellites it previously had a fix on, but if you're in a different place, these will have changed.

      So turning it on for the first time in the last few weeks is bound to take a while - but that's the same for all GPS positions... it just takes time to download the new orbital position information from a satellite it can 'see', before it knows which ones it should be able to see and try and lock on to.

      BUT, to increase the accuracy of GPS, many countries have also implemented a DGPS system (Differential GPS or other similar systems designed for use by aircraft on final approaches). This greatly increases the accuracy of a GPS receiver by letting it receive information from fixed base stations about the error imposed by environmental conditions, satellite mis-alignment or SA (Selective Availablity) and allows the unit to correct for these and maintain it's full accuracy to a very high level (perhaps a few centimeters instead of several feet). This system though, is pretty much useless in the context of the article as the base stations are going to be moving as well.

      What I expect happens in this context is a GPS is left in a fixed position for a very long time and is therefore able to average out it's readings over a long period of time so that the errors are virtually eliminated. Because the land moves so slowly - it doesn't matter if it takes a really long time to get an accurate reading - and reading averaged over the period of several months is going to be really accurate (perhaps to centimeter level, or close to the resolution of the GPS).

      None of this will work however, if the US switches SA back on (Selective Availability) which is an artificially imposed error designed primarily to prevent other nations from having access to a very reliable signal that could be used to build highly accurate GPS guided bombs. However, SA has been turned off for quite a while now and has only been turned on again (I think) during the Iraq conflict for security reasons. Allied military units can easily correct for this error, but other nations won't have the hardware or codes required to decrypt it.

      There are a couple of new GPS systems due to come online soon that are going to be even more accurate than the existing US system. Hopefully this will be available to civilians worldwide and will mean that extra DGPS hardware isn't required for things like navigation close to cliffs and rocks.

      Nick...
    5. Re:accurate enough by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      No one should need to need to measure continental drift every second. They're not moving apart that fast.

      Correction, no one wants to be in the vicinity when they're moving fast enough that measurements every second are important.

      The ground does move substantially and quickly during an earthquake.

      Proper engineering for buildings in zones prone to have earthquakes depends on knowing details of the ground acceleration spectra that are likely to be encountered. Of course, an accelerometer is likely to be a lot more useful in this context than a GPS receiver.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    6. Re:accurate enough by hughk · · Score: 1
      None of this will work however, if the US switches SA back on (Selective Availability)
      Actually SA only masks the signal if you want to get a 'quick fix'. If you are prepared to wait you get fown to the cm level even with SA enabled.

      Militarily, this isn't much use, because mostly you wouldn't want to wait a few hours for the fix to complete, standing in one position.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    7. Re:accurate enough by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      I didn't think there was any guarantee that with SA on, it would always average out to be zero over a certain unit of time? ie, can't they leave SA strayed in one direction for a very long amount of time and therefore mess up the results?

    8. Re:accurate enough by joggle · · Score: 2, Informative
      None of this will work however, if the US switches SA back on (Selective Availability)

      Actually, in a differential GPS situation, S/A has essentially no effect. The only noticable difference is that the signal has been dithered. The errors caused by S/A are completely eliminated by differencing the station with unknown coordinates with the station with fixed, known coordinates. Even if both are unknown, you can still get a very good relative position between the two stations.

      Also, as far as the time it takes to generate a solution depends on a couple of other things. You were discussing how to get a solution using cheap receivers that only calculate the pseudo-ranges to satellites using the code transmitted on the first GPS frequency (the technique used by consumer receivers). In the case of high-precision GPS, the receiver may not even calculate its own position. Rather, after acquisition of at least 4 satellites (the 10-300 seconds you mention), the receiver will transmit its observables to some server which does the position calculations. With more expensive, phase-locking receivers the accuracy greatly improves. In this case, a receiver will lock onto the first (and possibly second) frequencies, counting the number of cylces it receives. Once the server can calculate the correct integer offset to add to this counter (the number of cycles between the receiver and the given satellite), the position is known to within centimeters of its true location. However, the process of calculating these unknown integer cycle offset values for each observed satellite is rather tedious, usually taking at least 15 minutes for a fixed reciever, longer for a moving one (such as one on a buoy).

      The position may be recalculated later once high precision satellite orbit data is available (this is provided by tracking stations around the world every 12-24 hours).

    9. Re:accurate enough by hughk · · Score: 1
      IIRC, SA just diddled with the accuracy of the clock signal. However, the errors would average out over a period of time, in the same way that propagation delays will. A relative of mine was using these devices in the eighties for generating reference points for surveys.

      Rumour has it that SA can be enabled to deny accuracy across specified regions (rumour has it that this was used in the most recent Iraq conflict). However, you could always wait.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  6. what next? by tankdilla · · Score: 0

    Now that they know the country is sinking, do they relocate everyone north for the next century? I imagine it's good to know that the country is sinking, but can they really do anything about it?

    --

    -Look lively. LOOK LIVELY!!! --Mr. Shmallow

    1. Re:what next? by murple · · Score: 2, Funny

      And if they relocate people to the north, will it stop the process?

    2. Re:what next? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Your time-scales are all wrong. Nothing geologically significant (except earthquakes, volcanoes, and meteor strikes, and even then...) happens in a century time scale. You'd need to think in 10's of thousands of years at a minimum.

  7. Population growth and land change by rebeka+thomas · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think you can extrapolate this data into a correlation with population. Look at the warnings from the 1970s about halting population growth in California, especially west of the San Andreas Faultline. There were no changes, and then an earthquake strikes.

    Now the most populated area of the UK is sinking and the rest rising. If you think about it, it is quite logical. The weight of london alone is billions upon billions of tonnes, the building and auto infrastructure, not to mention several million people.

    We are having a much greater effect on the planet than anyone could know.

    --
    RST
    1. Re:Population growth and land change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You *are* joking aren't you?

    2. Re:Population growth and land change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think those warnings came from the same people who were screaming about global cooling and humans causing a new ice age.

    3. Re:Population growth and land change by Mr_Dyqik · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wonder if there might actually be a measurable effect from increased usage of groundwater in heavily populated areas. This kind of thing can cause local subsidance, so I wonder if it can cause a general shift over larger areas.

    4. Re:Population growth and land change by MWelchUK · · Score: 1

      I think that this phenomenon has been put down to global warming.

      During the ice age scotland was covered by a _thick_ layer of ice and the weight of this pushed it down, causing the tectonic plate the UK is a part of to tilt. The lost of all this ice over the last few million years has caused the plate to start pivoting back.

      This combined with the slowly rising sea level is what has caused this effect.

      The weight of the buildings are more than likely negledgable compared to the overall weight of the techtonic plate.

    5. Re:Population growth and land change by Murphy(c) · · Score: 1

      At least you are moded as funy, and a funny troll can't be that bad.

      I'm guessing (as in extrapolating out of my ass) that the reason north UK is rising is because of the tectonic plate it's sitting on.

      If I recall correctly, the Scandinavian plate is slowly rising because the ice cap that covered it during our longer ice ages melted (Ice cap is heavy, and pushed down on the whole plate for a long periode of time). That type of heavy glacier ice cap is called "inlandsis" (well at least in french, don't know the name in english)

      So, I'm guessing that the Northern part of the UK tectonic plate might either be doing the same thing, or that friction from the rising Scandinavian plate forces it raise with it.

      Murphy(c)

    6. Re:Population growth and land change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this is called "Isostatic rebound". Think of the crust as being like ice floating on water. Put weight on a small region of the ice and it will sink a bit. Remove the weight and the ice will rise.

    7. Re:Population growth and land change by surstrmming · · Score: 1
      Now the most populated area of the UK is sinking and the rest rising. If you think about it, it is quite logical. The weight of london alone is billions upon billions of tonnes, the building and auto infrastructure, not to mention several million people.
      Perhaps the the effects of 1 million children jumping on the Giant Jump was underestimated by the researchers...
    8. Re:Population growth and land change by trash+eighty · · Score: 1

      naa actually big cities weigh less than the land they replace, for example Manhattan weighed more when the only buildings on it were original american villages than it does now. all that concrete and steel does weigh a lot but not as much as the earth and rock it replaced weighed.

    9. Re:Population growth and land change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Local subsidence from pumping groundwater and/or petroleum is a known phenomenon, as in the USA in Houston, TX and New Orleans, LA. I thought it was a rather localized effect.

      Perhaps the tipping of the British Isles is instead caused by continuing glacial rebound? The ice burden in the N must have been greater than the S, and melted last? So rather than "tipping", the island is "righting", after being heeled over from a big chunk of ice parked most heavily on Scotland?

  8. Language implications by jocks · · Score: 0

    So, instead of the traditional "Let's go up to London" should we be now using the more technically accurate "Let's go down to London"?

    Is the UK stock market in a permanent state of decline? We have a right to know!

    1. Re:Language implications by drunkahol · · Score: 1

      Well that's all very well for you, but London is always "down" for me since I live in Edinburgh.

      It's a pity we couldn't speed this thing up a bit so I could see house prices changing within my lifetime.

      Dunk

    2. Re:Language implications by CausticWindow · · Score: 1

      Tilting up in the north and down in south won't change this. If it had been the other way around though..

      Unless of course you think that going north on a map is going down for some reason.

      To quote the Kopyright Liberation Front (The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu):

      Bolton, Barnsley, Nelson, Colne, Burnley Bradford, Buxton, Crewe, Warrington, Widnes, Wigan, Leeds, Northwich, Nantwich, Knutsford, Hull, Sale, Salford, Southport, Leigh, Derby, Kearsley Keighley Maghull, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Oldham, Lancs, Grimsby, Glossop, Hebden Bridge, It's Gay Up North

      --
      How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
    3. Re:Language implications by MWelchUK · · Score: 1

      The world is a close aproximation of a sphere, hence it all depends where you take your plane of reference to lie.

      If you take your plane of reference to run through London, everything is down from it.

    4. Re:Language implications by jocks · · Score: 1

      No! The tradition is that regardless of your location within the UK you always travel "up" to the capital city of London. I live much further north than Edinburgh, and therefore by sheer geography alone, I, quite simply, must know what I am talking about. And before we get into an argument about national identity, I don't agree with it either but that is the tradition.

      As for house prices, Edinburgh has gone through an explosive increase in the past few years, mostly due to the Scottish Parliament. You must have bought a house in the past 2-3 years, in which case it will be some time before you see a return on your investement.

    5. Re:Language implications by oojah · · Score: 1

      I have lived north of London all of my nearly 24 years with the exception of eight months and can say quite certainly that I have never heard anybody talk about travelling "up" to London.

      That aside, I was really just looking for an excuse to post a useless comment on the lines of:

      Wahoo! This is the closest slashdot story to me ever. I walk past the University of Nottingham IESSG building every day to get my lunch.

      Yeah, I'm sad. Please don't mod me down for it though :)

      Cheers,

      Roger

      --
      Do you have any better hostages?
    6. Re:Language implications by meadowsp · · Score: 1

      Heresy! The earth is obviously flat.

    7. Re:Language implications by JimPooley · · Score: 1

      Misquote: It's Gay Up North

      Nay lad, that's It's Grim Up North.
      Anyroad. Nowt wrong wi' t'south sinkin'. Get drownded, thee southern bastards!

      --

      "Information wants to be paid"
    8. Re:Language implications by Darby · · Score: 1

      Well that's all very well for you, but London is always "down" for me since I live in Edinburgh.

      Except you're making a very common mistake.
      Not really your fault though. All the mapmakers and such get it wrong as well.
      They always show the planet upside down. I mean look at it. The vast majority of the landmass at the top?!? That's just crazy. It obviously would have slid down to the bottom by now.

  9. Accuracy? by thesysadmin · · Score: 0

    I would like to know how accurate the equipment is. I know that the GPS I have on my parents boat is good for speedometer, odometer, and path traveled; but the altometer sucks.

    1. Re:Accuracy? by k4hg · · Score: 1
      The altitude measurement is indeed worse than the other two dimenensions, because the satellites are all on a single side of the solution. The difference in errors is not that great though, only about 1.6 times. If the earth was transparent to radio signals, the accuracy would be the same in all three dimensions...but you still wouldn't percieve it that way.

      There are more clues to one's altitude than to one's latitude and longitude...you see where sea level is, or see signs denoting altitude as you travel. These are in the same units your GPS displays, and you can compare them and notice the error. If you had access to the same sort of easily interpreted errors in the horizontal plane, you would notice the errors there much more than you do now.

    2. Re:Accuracy? by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Altitude is usually measured in height above mean sea level. Unfortunately mean sea level depends on many things including local gravitational anomalies. A big dense rock underground will make the gravitational field locally stronger which means that even if the surface above the rock is mathematically flat, it will appear to have a dip in it where the rock is.

      For a GPS to give accurate absolute altitude, it needs to have a map of all the local gravitational anomalies on the planet (or at least in the area it is used in).

      OTOH if you are trying to measure changes of height ("Scotland is rising") the absolute zero doesn't matter.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  10. Why does this sound familliar? by rjch · · Score: 2, Funny

    Lifing at one and and sinking at the other? Where have I heard this before?

    Oh yeah, that's right... the Titanic...

    1. Re:Why does this sound familliar? by Doomrat · · Score: 0

      yes teh titantuck sunked too ;lol

  11. Tilt by zbob · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sounds to me like this tilting is just the land settling down after the last ice age. The north of the country used to be covered in ice, while the south was clear. Now that the weight of the ice has gone, the land is just seeking a point of equilibrium.

  12. Make me an offer... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1, Funny

    1/6 Acre house plot, on an island in the north-west of Scotland, in an area that is (hopefully) getting wireless broadband within the next year.

    If you can sort out immigration, USians can apply too - avoid your Iron Curtain before it's too late.

    1. Re:Make me an offer... by jocks · · Score: 1

      What island? I don't want to make an offer and discover that I have bought myself a chunk of Rockall!

    2. Re:Make me an offer... by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      If it's getting wireless broadband I'd assume Lewis, near Stornoway I guess. At least, I'd guess it's not Vatersay. ;)

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    3. Re:Make me an offer... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Skye, actually. Although Lewis (specifically up around Stornoway, in the north end) would be a good place for an IX. There's a hell of a lot of telco stuff out there already.

    4. Re:Make me an offer... by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      Heh...can't believe that wasn't the first place that came to mind, considering I lived there for about 5 years. So where's getting wireless broadband? Up near Portree, or are you just going to tap into Sabhal Mor's line? ;)

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
    5. Re:Make me an offer... by RichardX · · Score: 1

      You do not have the mind or education to envision Nature's Time Cube

      Sorry, offtopic I know, replying to your sig, but...... WTF?!

      I went to the site, and I'm even MORE confused. Please tell me it's a joke?.. whatever it is, it's funny as hell.. "Dumb ass teachers fear Time Cube and will eat dung before debating it" may well become my new sig.

      Can you shed any light on this though?.. it's absolutely fascinating.. the test, the layout, everything.. very reminiscent of having an extremely drunk and angry dwarf shouting incessantly into your face about how his ex-best friend ran off with his wife...

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    6. Re:Make me an offer... by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Heheh, you know it? Neither, btw - Edinbane (if you know where that is, if not nearer Dunvegan than Portree).

    7. Re:Make me an offer... by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately no-one can be told what the Time Cube is...nor can they experience it for themselves. The guy is just nutty, but apparantly he believes in this thing even though he can't explain what it is.

      That site was a lot better back when the blink tag was supported...

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
  13. Altometer on a boat?! by ahadley · · Score: 1

    I may just be being stupid, but since you have the altometer on a boat isnt it always at sea level..... and thus less than useful?!

    just my 2 (euro) cents worth

    Alex

    1. Re:Altometer on a boat?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      However, sea level varies due to tides. Knowing that the water is too shallow for you to cross that sandbar is much nicer then wrecking your yacht...

    2. Re:Altometer on a boat?! by lyonsden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lot of bodies of water are above sea level. The Colorado river starts at 9,010 feet above sea level.

    3. Re:Altometer on a boat?! by thesysadmin · · Score: 0

      True, but I boat in Lake Michigan, and for some reason the GPS Altometer will jump between hundreds of feet in difference. Therefore it is quite inaccutate at altitude.

  14. Tilting is old news by mce · · Score: 2, Informative

    The fact that the northern part of Europe is rising and the southern part is sinking (for a rather broad definition of southern: Holland is sinking too), has been known for a long time. I was told in highschool (think before 1983) that this is due do the northern part having been pushed downwards during ice age(s) due to the massive weight ot the ice. When the ice last retreated, the current tilting movement was initiated.

    1. Re:Tilting is old news by ptomblin · · Score: 1

      Yes, I too remember this tilting being in my text books in the late 1970s.

      --
      The next Cmdr Taco duplicate will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
    2. Re:Tilting is old news by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      It's not just isostatic rebound. There's this thing in southern Europe called the ALPS. They stick up high, and so are being eroded. Most of the resultant debris is being shifted to the north and dumped in the Rhine delta. (To a geologist, the Rhine delta stretches from central Belgium to the middle of the North Sea; if it weren't for a temporary abberation of sea level, the Humber would be a minor tributary of the lower Rhine.) That's a lot of weight, which has depressed the London-Brabant massif a kilometer below it's pre-Rhine level, and in pockets in the North Sea the sediment load is up to two km thick.
      This has been going on for a fair while - about 40 million years. It isn't going to change soon.

      And yes, tilting is OLD news. ISTR that the first data confirming it started coming out of the joint efforts of the Admiralty and the Ordnance Survey as they established their series of benchmarks (strict sense), triangulation points, tide gauges and assorted yadda. That was back in the first half of the 19th century. Since then improvements in precision of measurement has failed to overtake the precision from a tape measure, a tide gauge, and a long time series.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  15. Spaceborne SAR by d-Orb · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Slightly OT, but just to mention that imaging microwave radar (as those mounted in the ENVISAT or ERS satellites, for example) is also being used to monitor small changes in elevation, using a technique based on interferometric SAR (which is behind the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission.

    The benefit of using a satellite orbiting around the Earth is that you don't need to deploy all the "base stations". If you want to find out more, google for "differential interferometry" or somesuch :-)

    1. Re:Spaceborne SAR by Mooncaller · · Score: 1
      This technique is the volcanologists new best friend.

      Volc. A: "The new report just came in. It seems the lava dome is rising about 4cm/day. s**!"

      Volc. B: "Lets get the flock outa here NOW!"

      Volc. A: "Ok, but I need to get my laptop first."

  16. and amazingly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    during the iraq war the uk moved 100m to the west

  17. The important question... by pubjames · · Score: 1

    This allows the team to gain an understanding of how the UK landmass is likely to change over the coming centuries.

    So, is the UK drifting west across the Atlantic, as some of paranoid us Brits fear?

    1. Re:The important question... by jeremyp · · Score: 2, Informative

      From the article:

      GPS measurements have also allowed scientists to show that the UK is drifting about 2-3 cm each year in a north-easterly direction.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  18. space technology applications by non · · Score: 1

    the first thing i thought of was a piece in wired about microsatellites to track terrestrial phenomenon. the real world, that outside of the military, has plenty of uses for new technology as soon as its readily available and not too expensive. there was another article in wired about using satellite technology to track trucks. both of these applications use space technology, and neither of them can be replaced simply with gps, but they illustrate the types of applications that such technology enables. anything that requires precise geographical measurements over time is now possible, as long as you can get a grant for the equipment.

    --
    ...vividly encapsulates that post-Watergate/pre-punk/coked-up moment when you could trust no one, least of all yourself.
  19. silly by d_strand · · Score: 1

    this brings a whole new meaning to:

    "Rule, Britannia, Britannia rules the sea!"

    ... or was it 'waves'?

  20. Wonderful! by w.p.richardson · · Score: 1, Insightful
    More pseudo-science to support whatever the latest fad theory du jour is!

    Global warming! Phew, it's hot!

    Global freeezing! Brrr, it's cold!

    Recreational boating decreases the sea level!

    etc.

    These devices are not accurate enough for this. Continental drift occurs on the order of feet per eon. I can almost hear the hysteria: "Researchers predict the Atlantic Ocean will be empty by 2012", soon to be followed by "Oops, disregard that last report - Mount Kilamanjaro will be an island in 2015!"

    What a waste of time.

    --

    Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!

    1. Re:Wonderful! by sandgroper · · Score: 2, Insightful
      These devices are not accurate enough for this.


      On the contrary, while the receivers that you spend a hundred bucks on are indeed not accurate enough, GPS based geodesy is a raging success. They use very expensive receivers with multiple frequencies and occupy sites for hours at a time to get the kinds of numbers needed for geodetic measurements. Been going on for years. The major inaccuracies have to do with index-of-refraction effects in the atmosphere (hence the need for multi-frequency instruments).

    2. Re:Wonderful! by djward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Continental drift occurs on the order of feet per eon."

      Actually, rates range up to 20 cm/year in some places. In this case, I thing they were saying 2-3 cm/yr. This is very measureable by continuous GPS from permanent stations; see a lot of these other comments for why.

      These GPS networks have been used with great success over the past 15 years or so in places like Japan, California, and New Zealand, to name a few. Nice to see it getting put in in other places

    3. Re:Wonderful! by GeoGreg · · Score: 1
      Errm, you might want to know what you are talking about before you post something like this. I don't know what fad du jour you think this supports, but the residents of southern England have noticed encroachment of the sea (caused by the tilting described in this article) for several centuries now.

      You are also absolutely wrong that GPS cannot be used to measure the rate of continental drift. The North American and European plates are separating at a rate of a few (3-5) cm/yr. I'm not sure what "feet per eon" means (5 cm/yr is 1 foot in 6 years, which seems short for an eon). But, as other posters have noted, GPS has been used since the 80s to make very precise geodetic measurements. I'm in geophysics; while I've not done this work myself, I am familiar with it. It's definitely good science.

  21. For those interested... by heli0 · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
    1. Re:For those interested... by sharkdba · · Score: 1

      Still... I can understand measuring the continental drift over time, since various portions of land are moving relatively to each other. But "tilting"? Could it be that instead of the GB island tilting, the GPS angle of attack (so to speak) changed slightly making the appearance of the island tilt?

      So f.ex: if I look at a distant object, and the object moves I can detect that. But if I move left or right, I will look at the object from slightly different angle. If I didn't know that I moved, I would think that the object "tilted" one way or the other.

      And besides, don't you have to measure it for a long period of time (at least a couple of decades, if not centuries) to even notice this kind of movement? If the land "moved" fast enough to measure over a period of one year, that would be certainly a worrisome event for people living there.

      --
      The purpose of life is to find the purpose of life.
  22. Old hat... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This kind of work has been going on since the late '80s. Does this really qualify as "news" for nerds???

    1. Re:Old hat... by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Some people are slow, and have to be reminded often...

  23. Accuracy by ljavelin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From "Navigation Satellites & GPS v2.2.3 / 01 dec 02 / gvgoebel@earthlink.net /"


    Geophysicists have been exploiting GPS since the mid-1980s, using it to measure continental drift and the movement of the Earth's surface in geologically active regions. They have been able to obtain accurate surface measurements to within a few millimeters through a procedure known as "carrier tracking", which is even more accurate than differential GPS. Carrier tracking actually senses the phase of the carrier signals on which the location code sequences are broadcast. It is, not surprisingly, a tricky and subtle procedure, and not applicable for general use.

  24. Silly question... by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    Ok, i understand the basic idea behind GPS. Satalites in orbit where basic geometry is used based on the subtle diffrence in the time it takes a signal to get to a device, well i'm assuming this.

    Could be useful for tracking moving things like land masses and ocean levels.

    Question: If our land masses are moving, and water moves, what ever do we actually calibrate the satalights with in the first place?

    The only thing that comes to mind is the axis of the earth. Would someone wiser then I in this area elaberate, i'm somewhat curious.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    1. Re:Silly question... by jeremyp · · Score: 2, Informative

      This link has the best introduction to mapping and GPS I have ever read.

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    2. Re:Silly question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      IIRC, when the GPS satellites first went live (I don't the year), it was claimed that they showed that Mt Everest was many feet lower than it really was. It was later determined that the original surveys, conducted by an obsessive Victorian Brit (Sir George Everest) in 1841, were pretty accurate after all, and that the original GPS reading was wrong, possibly due to the poor early calibration.


      GPS got its revenge in 1999, when the height of Everest was adjusted upward by 7 ft as a result of a more accurate GPS-based survey.

    3. Re:Silly question... by mbone · · Score: 1

      Not so silly. They are actually calibrated against themselves.

      Satellite (GPS & SLR) and VLBI measurements are all used to determine the relative movements of different points on the Earth (where the lasers or receivers are). The reference frame is then constructed from these point to point measurements using a "no-net rotation" constraint - any rotation of all of the stations is assumed to be a rotation of the Earth.

      It is not perfect, but it is the best we've got.

      This is coordinated by the IERS, the International Earth Rotation Service, in Paris.

      Sea level changes are dominated by thermal effects such as global warming (very roughly, a centimeter per degree C), so it is not a good reference. The axis of the Earth moves too (AKA Polar Motion) at the 10 meter level so it is no good for this either.

      Vertical motions are referenced against the center of mass of the Earth, which the satellite based techniques can "see".

  25. Old news by twem2 · · Score: 1

    Its been known for a long time that the north is rising and the south sinking. We were taught that in Geography about 7 or 8 years ago.
    Its due to the glaciers having melted in the north.

    1. Re:Old news by Adversive · · Score: 1

      And here is irrefutable proof why the South won't rise again...

      --
      Adversive
      My cat's breath smells like cat food.
    2. Re:Old news by KliX · · Score: 1

      Ah! England pivoting over good 'ole Sheffield steel.. *BANG* Shit!? What's that noise!??

      *The sound of the UK sinking into the sea*

  26. South is sinking? by muffen · · Score: 2, Funny

    .. I thought it couldn't sink any further.
    I always new there was something fishy in the south side of britain. Ah well.. atleast now they have showed that it will hit rock bottom soon :)

    Whats the point of having excellent karma if not to spend it every once in a while?

    1. Re:South is sinking? by bankman · · Score: 1

      This is the kind of interpretation that can only come from a Geordie. Too much beer and shagging in the streets of Newcastle must have a lasting effect on the mind. Come to think of it, I miss it quite a lot :)

      --
      I feel so sig.
    2. Re:South is sinking? by AndrewHowe · · Score: 1

      I've only driven through Newcastle but I went out on the town in South Shields, and I know what you mean.
      It's pretty much "Fancy a fuck?" "Oh go on then".

  27. Forces of nature by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 1
    The results of their research makes no sense before the measurements have been conducted and analyzed over a long period of time.

    The "tilting" is just an observation of the variying stretch of an equatorial bulge, due to centrifugal force. Also, the rotational axis wobbles between 21.5 and 24.5 degrees and the GPS precision varies slightly due to moment of inertia.

    Scientists from Nottingham... Not quite.

    1. Re:Forces of nature by confused+one · · Score: 1
      You forgot that the motion of the magma below the crust causes it to rise and fall in small increments over time...

      One would like to believe they take such things into account... One would like to believe common sense is applied to everything as well, but... I know too many scientists.

    2. Re:Forces of nature by jabbadabbadoo · · Score: 1

      Well, I seriously doubt magma motion is affecting the british islands ;-)

    3. Re:Forces of nature by GeoGreg · · Score: 1

      Ummm... no. The mechanism here is isostatic rebound (take away the glaciers, and the crust adjusts to compensate). This is a well-known phenomenon in northern Europe. This article just describes some of the latest measurements.

  28. It's all about integration time by smcdow · · Score: 1
    Sub-millimeter accuracy can be achieved with very long integration time of GPS data.

    Your hand-help GPS reports a fix once a second or so -- so the integration time of the GPS data is approx one second.

    If you program your GPS receiver to integrate GPS data over, say 24 hours instead of one second, then you get very high accuracy. Your GPS has to remain perfectly stationary during the integration.

    Hand helds don't have an option for setting integration time. You need fancy, expensive receivers for that. Or, you can roll your own, which isn't as hard as it sounds.

    --
    In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
    1. Re:It's all about integration time by expro · · Score: 1

      Hand helds don't have an option for setting integration time. You need fancy, expensive receivers for that. Or, you can roll your own, which isn't as hard as it sounds.

      How is this different from what every Garmin I have ever used does when you tell it to take time to use averaging to get a more-accurate position, which it does until interrupted?

  29. Some history... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'"

    GREAT DISCOVERY *sarcasm*

    Since the late pleistocene the big icesheets on top of Northern Europe disappeared by global climat change from glacial to interglacial (cfr. Iversen model). As a concequence of this loss of mass on top of these plates they began to bounce back up. Imagine taking a piece of drifting wood, push it down. If you lift your finger it will rise up again. The same principal goes for continental plates and is called isostatic uplift.

    So, since the beginning of the holocene and end of the pleistocene countries now known as Sweden, Norway began to rise and Belgium and the Netherlands for example began to sink, because the y once were uplifted by the weight on the northern part of europe.

    It seems normal that these consequences aren't just limited to european main land but also influence the UK. In fact Scotland has had a big icecap during the last iceage so the isostatic uplift of Scotland and the drowning, if you may call it that, of the south of the UK isn't exactly new.

    They may claim having measured it, but they certainly may not claim the discovery of these changes because that's veeeeeery old news.

    1. Re:Some history... by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

      This has been known since at least the 18th century when a Swedish clergyman reported to the Swedish Academy of Sciences that "the sea was disappering slowly".

      The phenomenon in central Sweden was then and still is apparent, with an approximate uplift of 2 cm per year; in 50 years that is an uplift of one meter! This has an obvious effects for the boat traffic and harbours along the very shallow coast line of that region; the Norwegian side has steep slopes. Old coast line maps soon become outdated, borders between neighbors become fuddled, etc.

      However, the clergyman was ridiculed in part because other, foreign scientists in France, England, and elsewhere had not noted the issue nor could confirm it, it was all considered a scam. The fact that allusions to The Bible's flooding began to pop up and the first reporter was a countryside clergyman did not help the issue.

      The matter was a local controversy until about a hundred years ago.

  30. Earth calling moderators! by trikberg · · Score: 1

    Who moderated this as Interesting? Please connect brain before moderating. Moderating as Funny I can maybe accept, but Interesting?

    The stuff humans account for is miniscule compared to everything else. Think of it in terms of height; human constructions are is in the range of tens of meters, not particularly dense and quite spread out, while the ground below consists of kilometers of rock. It will make no difference whatsoever, at least not by pure weight. Erosion and other effects could be significant.

    --
    This post is free (as in cheese in a mousetrap).
  31. London's sinking? by henrygb · · Score: 1

    In the medium term, the greater risk seems to be from rising groundwater, presumably resulting in London floating off down the Thames.

  32. It depends by k0de · · Score: 2, Interesting

    GPS accuracy is somewhat consistent among manufacturers, and is generally more accurate the more you pay for the equipment. However, there is always a margin for error. For example, Wilson's GPS Accuracy page states that vertical accuracy depends on "latitude (errors for vertical accuracy rapidly increase with latitudes greater than 65 degrees), receiver/antenna, local geometry/multipath and satellite geometry (VDOP)"

    The real question is are the Nottingham group using high grade and control tested equipment and have they properly accounted for discrepency. Stating that Scotland is rising two millimeters a year is quite the claim.

    --
    I'm wrong and so are you.
    1. Re:It depends by BigBadBri · · Score: 1
      errors for vertical accuracy rapidly increase with latitudes greater than 65 degrees

      Since Cape Wrath (the northenmost point of the mainland) is only at around 58 degrees north, it'll be a wee while before our north-easterly drift takes us into the realms of 65 degrees and increasing errors.

      How trolls get modded up to interesting is beyond me.

      --
      oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
  33. OH NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We better start wearing live-vests 24 hours
    a day, because when the UK capsizes...

    1. Re:OH NO! by kjba · · Score: 1

      Just make sure you live near the coast so you can flip to the other side when that happens.

  34. I knew it! by archetypeone · · Score: 0

    There are too many people in London.

  35. Booze Cruise by Cackmobile · · Score: 1

    Sweet maybe in a few millenia we will be able to drive right across to France for that cheap booze and cigarettes.

    --
    -- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
  36. Proof that Northerners are Rubbish! by Mike+Mentalist · · Score: 0

    > They have discovered that the British Isles are
    > tilting, with the north of the country gaining
    > altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'

    This is further proof to Northerners that they are all envious of us Southern shandy drinkers.
    First they use the roads to move to London en masse, and now they are trying to swap the whole COUNTRY around by upending it and putting the likes of Liverpool and Manchester in the South!
    Talk about 'mass migration'...

    --
    I put my books on Amazon, Smashwords, Demonoid, ISOHunt and Pirate Bay. Search for 'Michael Cargill'
  37. In related news .... by Surak · · Score: 3, Funny

    ..some scientists studying the "sinking" effect have noted CowboyNeal's recent move to Southampton.

  38. Solution! by Oakey · · Score: 1

    What us English need is an ingenious businessman to come up with a plan to turn the Country around, then we just start building in the 'new south' and it evens everything out.

    --
    "Dre don't get as high as me.... I'm Cheech and Chong" - Snoop Dogg
    1. Re:Solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much better solution: have various American fast food establishments exported to the north of England - especially McDonalds and Krispy Kreme. Eat for Britain!

  39. Some of this is not new by Slamtilt · · Score: 2, Informative

    The tilt, at least, has been known for a quite a while; I remember joking with a friend from London that London might be horrible, but if we just waited a few million years the problem would be solved (we were in Scotland). That was back in the late eighties.

  40. Altometer sucks on boat by StefMeister · · Score: 1
    I know that the GPS I have on my parents boat is good for speedometer, odometer, and path traveled; but the altometer sucks.

    yeah, it seems to be stuck on 0 all the time.

    (yeah, yeah, I know water is not always at sea level, it's a joke)
    --
    "Son, in a sporting event, it's not whether you win or lose, it's how drunk you get" - Homer J. Simpson
  41. Implications for Taiwan. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, now that they are on the verge of proving that England is adrift, sinking on one side, etc. Then I see the solution to the Taiwan vs. Mainland China item! Somehow, (and I'm sure those clever Taiwanese will figure out how), all this might just mean that we can "float" Taiwan off away from the Mainland, perhaps as far east as California, and solve the Taiwan problem for good! Imagine: Taiwan right off the California coast! Once that is done, a replica of the Golden Gate Bridge can be made, to connect the two land masses, so there will be no need for a Statehood referendum for the new land of Calitaiwan!. I *knew* GPS would have a valuable use one day!

  42. bye bye London by sdack · · Score: 1

    The problem will actually accelerate exponentially, since the south is over populated already and this news will only add to it.

  43. Environmental Geology... by rosewood · · Score: 1

    First, pardon all typos and mispellings -- its 7am and Im about to go to my second to last environmental geology classes. Its a presession class that goes for 9 days, 8a-12:30.

    Anyways, we covered plate tectonics and this movement stuff and its very interesting.

    If you need some kind of science class and you had your chem and phys in highschool and want to try something different, your university probably offers environmental geology and its an absolutely amazing class. Ive had a really easy time with it and learned quite a bit in the last 7 days.

    The part about drift that I had never heard before was that pangea was not the first super continent and these plates move damn fast. eventually a new super continent will be formed just like the 4-5? that came before.

    Also, those cool hotspots (Hawaii, Iceland, Yellowstone, and more) are going to be the key to geting a nuclear bomb to the earth's core if it ever stops moving ...

    1. Re:Environmental Geology... by ptr2void · · Score: 1

      Also, those cool hotspots (Hawaii, Iceland, Yellowstone, and more) are going to be the key to geting a nuclear bomb to the earth's core if it ever stops moving ...

      What did you smoke?

    2. Re:Environmental Geology... by confused+one · · Score: 1

      I hope that this was either a remedial class; or, you didn't pay for it... They're feeding you psuedo science kid, learn to recognize it or you'll be working at McD's for the rest of your life.

    3. Re:Environmental Geology... by rosewood · · Score: 1

      Im sure your computer science degree is just 100% cool beans.

      Hey, eat a dick and burn in hell, mm kay?

  44. The real reason is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... that they measured this while John Prescott was in Parliament that day instead of being at home in Hull...

  45. hehehe by daveatwork · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    your all probably not interested, but i went to the University of Nottingham, and looking at the pictures, you can see the area where I 'christened' the IESSG building, which is just 100m from my old hall ;-)

    tee hee

  46. They discovered the south was sinking ? by kumnaa · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is hardly news, I was taught about this 10 years ago at school.

  47. Isostacy... by tjwhaynes · · Score: 1
    ... is the technical term for the way that the continental plates sit on top of the oceanic plates as though they were corks in a bucket of water (only much heavier and slower).

    I was taught (only a couple of decades ago, honest!) that this sort of rebound after the ice age was supposed to be going on - in fact it was (if I remember correctly) one of the justifications for the Thames flood barrier. However, no-one (at school anyway) ever let on how this rebound was measured. It's nice to know that modern technology allows for easier monitoring of this sort of measurement. That said, does anyone know whether measurements of this sort had been done before and if so, what were the techniques?

    Cheers,
    Toby Haynes

    --
    Anything I post is strictly my own thoughts and doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the opinions of IBM.
    1. Re:Isostacy... by GeoGreg · · Score: 1
      Previous to GPS, the measurements were carried out using very careful surveying techniques. Much more time consuming and more prone to error than good GPS measurements.

      Gravity measurements may have had a role as well, as a piece of crust out of isostatic equilibrium will show gravitational anomalies.

      Current models of isostatic compensation are based on theories developed by Airy in the 19th century to explain data collected by British surveys of the Himalayas.

  48. Preliminary results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just hope for their sake that extrapolation of preliminary results doesn't show that UK will eventually join the mainland. Whoops, there go the research funds.

  49. Relativity by spakka · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the article:

    GPS measurements have also allowed scientists to show that the UK is drifting about 2-3 cm each year in a north-easterly direction.

    I disagree. The UK is only drifting north. Since we have no east or west pole, the east-west component of the velocity can only be stated relative to some other plate. We could just as well assert that the UK is stationary in the east-west direction, and the other plate is moving west.

    1. Re:Relativity by jhines0042 · · Score: 1

      How very British of you to declare yourself the center of the (East-West) world. ;-)

      Besides, shouldn't it be that the UK is just trying to get to the next day ever that much faster? Are we going to adjust the clocks now to account for the fact that the sun rises in Greenwich a few microseconds earlier?

      --
      42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
    2. Re:Relativity by FroBugg · · Score: 1

      We may not have an actual east or west pole, but we sure do have a certain good benchmark for judging. As long as the rotational speed of the Earth remains constant, and we have accurate timekeeping, and can correct for the various minor cycles and wobbles of everything, we can use the relative angles of the sun and the Earth's surface to keep longitudinal measurements consistent regardless of tectonic movement.

    3. Re:Relativity by JumpW · · Score: 1

      Well, I suppose you could define a stationary horizontal position as a point where the sun rises at a certain time each day. Then you could say that a plate is in fact "moving east" if the sun is rising earlier (by very small fractions of a second) each day.

    4. Re:Relativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      You could, but today it's done in a more fair way. They compute the average movement of all the earth's plates and call this a change in the rotation speed. From there, you can figure out who much each plate move relative to the others.

      In case people don't know, these kind of GPS measurements have been going on for years.

    5. Re:Relativity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Places in New Zealand have been caught moving 50cm in a month. The whole country tends to move NE at about 1/2 meter a year. Norway and Sweeden tend to move away from the UK about twice the rate that the UK is moving.

    6. Re:Relativity by JM_the_Great · · Score: 1

      The earth's rotation is not staying constant, though. In fact, it is slowing down.

      --

      --Justin Mitchell
      "2nd Place is a fancy word for losing" --Bender (Futurama)
  50. It's all relative... by mactov · · Score: 1

    Wow, and the Queen thought she'd had an "annus horribilis" a few years ago!!

    --
    OK, now what?
  51. No discovery here by tagishsimon · · Score: 2, Informative
    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'."

    This was already common enough knowledge for those interested in the subject ... the south east & east anglia are sinking, the north west rising.

  52. Chicken Little Anyone? by Daniel+Boisvert · · Score: 2, Funny

    The sky is falling! The sky is falling!!!

    Oh--wait--the ground is rising...

    umm--nevermind :)

  53. Old news by simoncrute · · Score: 2, Informative

    This seems like very old news to me.
    I seem to recall being told this in the early 1980s at school.

    Apperently it's the "rebound" effect. In the last ice age all the ice caused Scotland and Northern England to sink under it's weight.

    Since it all melted it's been slowly rising.

    I can't remember why southern England is sinking though. Maybe there's a pivet somewhere through Shefield or something ?

  54. integrate thousands of measurements by peter303 · · Score: 1

    One way to improve accuracy is to integrate thousands of measurements made over several hours. Then measure over a network of stations to reduce error. Also there are stricks like using the carrier signal for further precision.

  55. This is not new by kitty_goth · · Score: 2, Informative

    I remember an in-depth discussion of the tilting effect on the Open University in the late '80s.

  56. doing this since the start of GPS @1990 by peter303 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Geologists have been measuring micro-motions of the earth since GPS started in the early 1990s. There are thousands of talks on the subject here .

  57. Meanwhile... by Ethelred+Unraed · · Score: 1
    Scientists have noted that the tectonic plates under the Pacific Northwest of the USA have been sinking dramatically, because Redmond is going straight to hell.

    Cheers,

    Ethelred

    --
    Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.
  58. Innlandsis -- ice sheet by Ashtead · · Score: 1
    The word "inlandsis", which is used in French and Spanish, most likely comes from Scandinavia. The Norwegian spelling would be "innlandsis", which simply means "ice over land" or "inland ice". This word is a techical term in Norwegian as well.

    I have seen the English terms "ice sheet" and "continental glacier" for this.

    --
    SIGBUS @ NO-07.308
  59. Selective Availibility by Scoria · · Score: 1

    That isn't continental drift. It is selective availibility!

    --
    Do you like German cars?
    1. Re:Selective Availibility by Scoria · · Score: 1

      s/availibility/availability/g;

      --
      Do you like German cars?
  60. This just in by HopeUnknown · · Score: 1
    Breaking news from the year 4,352,186:

    GPS has just confirmed that we have, in fact, collided with France. More at 11, after our continuing coverage of the war between Linuxia and Microsoftistan.

  61. A little lesson in geography by easter1916 · · Score: 1
    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'."
    Given that the British Isles are comprised of the UK (which is Great Britain and Northern Ireland) and the Republic of Ireland, a separate country, shouldn't that read "with the north of the countries 'sinking'"?
  62. discovered? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'.

    They didn't discover this. The fact that the north is rising and the south sinking has been known for quite some time-- certainly longer than the GPS constellation has been up. I have a book here somewhere (can't find anything here!) that was written in the late sixties that mentions it as established fact, then positing the theory that ice age glaciers "pushed down" the island and it's "springing back". It shows a picture of some 400+ year old castle in the north that was originally built with its moat-gates open to the ocean but is now some 100 feet above sea level! Doesn't take GPS to tell you the island is tilting.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  63. Now that they know where they are going... by rickmccl · · Score: 1

    they can hoist a giant sail from the center of the isle and commence to steer! Let's park it in the Mediterranean for a while! :-D j/k, of course...

  64. And in recent news... by mustangsal66 · · Score: 1

    The UK has asked anyone over 90kg to move to the north. Starting Nov 1, any 90+kg person found in the south will be fined.

    20 Euro to be paid to fat people who move north.

    A free trampoline will be issued to the relocated to help with the tilt.

    --
    Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed "nucular" accelerator on his back.
    Sig changed for readability by G.W.
    1. Re:And in recent news... by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      You realise that the UK doesn't use the Euro don't you?

  65. We're doing this in California by stan7826 · · Score: 1

    There is a group here at the USGS Pasadena Office that is doing this. You can read about the project at http://www.scign.org

    1. Re:We're doing this in California by e · · Score: 1
      Keeping the Pasadena theme, I think it would be apt to mention that this is also exactly what the IGS group at JPL does. You can click on the tracking network link to see a map of where all of the IGS sites are located. There's some fascinating data in there.

      e;

  66. Re:Accuracy (High Accuracy Available!) by ThingOne · · Score: 1

    Most geological surveyers can use gps equipment with post processing of data allowing you to find your location within a millimeter or two. Its pretty common within the US as well. Look at http://cors.ngs.noaa.gov to find other projects going on in the US. They are also using GPS to watch the Gulf coast sink. Your little hand held GPS receivers are limited to wide error because of processing power and the type of GPS signal they use.

  67. How about the GPS precision? by leeet · · Score: 1

    Wasn't it like 3 feet and then improved to 1 feet? I doubt that even if they have 1cm precision, this won't be precise enough for them..?

    --
    -- Leeeter than leet
  68. This isn't exactly new by kirkb · · Score: 1

    FWIW, they've been doing this sort of thing in western Canada since 1991.

    www.pgc.nrcan.gc.ca/geodyn/docs/wcda_bc/content.ht m

    My first real programming job was at the Pacific Geoscience center (a decade ago), maintining the unix programs and scripts that downloaded seismic data from these remote GPS stations.

    --
    Slashdot: come for the pedantry, stay for the condescension.
  69. That would explain it, then by Epsillon · · Score: 2, Funny

    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'

    That explains the difference in house prices up North and down South. I wonder when they'll start advertising southern homes as "temporary accomodation"? :o)

    --
    Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  70. Doesn't take a genius to figure it out by min0r_threat · · Score: 1

    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'

    Well of course the South of the country is sinking. It's densly populated. More people mean more houses, more cars, more infrastructure, more tea shops, more cake shops selling sweet meats and pleasant fancies . . . . which all lead to more weight. It's what many non-scientists call "the see-saw effect".

    Does this also mean Scotland's Highlands will be gaining altittude, and we'll have to change all maps and road signs to say "Higherlands"?

    --
    ~~~~~~~~~ "I must create my own system, or be enslav'd by another man's." William Blake, Jerusalem.
  71. Other GPS work. by MROD · · Score: 1

    I'm sure people would like to know that the use of GPS for geodesy has been going on for many years.

    The way that it is done is not to use the same sort of measurement used by handheld GPS receivers but to use the phase of the signal coming from the satellite.

    If you monitor the gps network for a long enough period using these techniques you can get down to the millimetre level of accuracy horizontally. The longer you monitor the better the accuracy you can get.

    A group working here, at Oxford University, has been doing such work in Greece and the South Island of New Zealand and is now part of a national centre of excellence, called COMET.

    This page should give you a better idea about what they're doing.

    --

    Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
  72. Umm, I thought motion was relative by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    They have discovered that the British Isles are tilting, with the north of the country gaining altitude and the south of the country 'sinking'.

    Either that, or the GPS satellite positions are tilting!

  73. Re:Accuracy (High Accuracy Available!) by airyk · · Score: 1

    I was wondering how long it would talk for someone to mention NGS and CORS (I work for NGS)

  74. Privacy by athakur999 · · Score: 1

    As a continent, I find this to be a grave violation of my privacy. Can I at least opt out of this tracking?

    --
    "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
  75. Plate Boundary Observatory. by kfstark · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought I would include some links to similar projects:

    SCIGN -- Southern California Integrated GPS Network
    http://www.scign.org/
    This GPS array has 250 active stations throughout SoCal continuously monitoring crustal deformation. SCIGN was started after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake and has helped the determination of the velocity field in Southern California produced by SCEC.

    An interactive map of station locations can be found at:
    http://pasadena.wr.usgs.gov/scign/Analysis/

    SCEC -- Southern California Earthquake Center
    http://www.scec.org
    This is the umbrella organization for EQ research in Southern California and is the parent organization of SCIGN.

    PBO/Earthscope -- Plate Boundary Observatory
    http://www.unavco.org
    One of the most exciting new developments in GPS. Recently the US Congress approved the Earthscope initiative which includes 3 separate parts. The GPS portion is the PBO which will include 875 new stations from the Mexican border through Washington and Alaska. This massive array will be built over the next 5 years.

    There are also several other regional deformation arrays include the Basin Range network, The Bary Area network, and a cluster of sites around Parkfield, CA.

    Equipment:

    The GPS equipment used at these sites are commercially available dual frequency geodetic quality receivers which can recover the military code without needing the military keys. The receivers are capable of good precision when operated alone and are capable of sub-millimeter precision when used in a continuously operating network.

    This type of processing requires extremely accurate satellite orbits provided by the International GPS Service (http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/).

    These large GPS arrays have been deployed throughout the world where there is a seismic hazard. Japan is one of the predominant countries with large GPS networks in place.

    We encourage you to look at the various websites and learn about these projects and the science that they produce.

    --Keith
    SCIGN Network Coordinator

  76. what was that song .. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Roe Britinia, Britania rules the waves?

    Lex Luthor, eat your heart out.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  77. YeahYeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already knew the tilt thing, got taught it back when I was at school, in Geography, 'spose we can measure it better now...
    Still, this isn't gonna help the rediculous price of property in the south (and the well cheap in the north)

  78. Where have you been? by porkrind · · Score: 1

    I was writing my senior thesis on using GPS to track land movements way back in 1994-95. This is not news. My paper was about tracking seismic buildup in the New Madrid Seismic Zone.

  79. Not geographic... by RichardX · · Score: 1

    On further investigation scientists have discovered that the tilting and sinking of the British isles is directly related to the movements of John Prescott.

    An attempt was made to request that Mr Prescott go on a diet, but unfortunately the delegate picked to make the request was never seen again, presumed eaten. Scientists are now designing a special protective suit, and hope to make another attempt early next year.

    (note, nothing against John P personally, I just needed an unpleasant fat person ,and he sprung first to mind.. I'm sure with a bit of thought I could've found someone funnier/more suitable, but this is /., since when have posters ever applied thought? :P)

    --
    Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
  80. Southern California version by trillian42 · · Score: 1

    Here's the link to the Southern California version of GPS monitoring (Southern California Integrated GPS Network -- SCIGN). It's run by the Southern California Earthquake Center and used to predict where earthquakes have high probabilities of occurring.

    http://www.scign.org/

  81. Too many people in London by Nathaniel · · Score: 1

    The problem is all the people and property being dragged to the south portion of England. They need to move a few large cities to the north end to balance things out better. ;-}

  82. Standing up in the Boat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, here's a little advise about the sinking and rising of the U K. It's really like a boat, you know, and all I can say is, "Don't stand up in the Boat." Before you know it, the thing will flip over, and spill everyone, and all their belongings, into the water. By the way, I'm the one who posted the "Calitaiwan" item this morning, and now I can't find it. Anyway, due to the GPS revelations, I suggested that the Island of Tawain could be somehow floated off the coast of California, and become Calitaiwan.
    Main purpose here is to solve the China-Taiwan dispute once and for all, by moving the entire island to the coast of California. I suspect that someone is removing such posts, as this really is a grand idea, much like the 100 mpg carburetor that the "Auto Industry" has purchased from the inventor of the thing and locked it away so it cannot be used. Those of you who have read this post before it can be deleted, you will *know* where the Urban legend of the GPS - Calitaiwan plan actually came from!

  83. Gasp! by sandgroper · · Score: 1

    Accurate information actually modded up on slashdot. Film at eleven.