7781GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick 2024 Scribd Download

Full download ebook at ebookname.
com
GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick
https://ebookname.com/product/gps-satellite-surveying-3rd-
edition-edition-leick/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWLOAD NOW
Download more ebook from https://ebookname.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
GPS for Land Surveyors 3rd Edition Jan Van Sickle
https://ebookname.com/product/gps-for-land-surveyors-3rd-edition-
jan-van-sickle/
Engineering Surveying Fifth Edition W. Schofield
https://ebookname.com/product/engineering-surveying-fifth-
edition-w-schofield/
A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology Dr

Gwendo Leick
https://ebookname.com/product/a-dictionary-of-ancient-near-
eastern-mythology-dr-gwendo-leick/
Plane and Geodetic Surveying 2nd Edition Johnson
https://ebookname.com/product/plane-and-geodetic-surveying-2nd-
edition-johnson/
GPS for land surveyors 4rd edition Edition Van Sickle
https://ebookname.com/product/gps-for-land-surveyors-4rd-edition-
edition-van-sickle/
Intelligent Positioning GIS GPS Unification 1st Edition

George Taylor
https://ebookname.com/product/intelligent-positioning-gis-gps-
unification-1st-edition-george-taylor/
Plane and Geodetic Surveying 1st Edition Aylmer Johnson
https://ebookname.com/product/plane-and-geodetic-surveying-1st-
edition-aylmer-johnson/
Satellite Communications 2nd Ed 2nd Edition Timothy

Pratt
https://ebookname.com/product/satellite-communications-2nd-
ed-2nd-edition-timothy-pratt/
Satellite to Ground Radiowave Propagation 2nd Edition

J.E. Allnutt
https://ebookname.com/product/satellite-to-ground-radiowave-
propagation-2nd-edition-j-e-allnutt/
1
2 GPS SATELLITE
3
4
5
SURVEYING
6
7
Third Edition
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 [-3
ALFRED LEICK
15
16
17 Lin
18 —
19 * 34
20 ——
21 No
22 * PgE
23
24
25 [-3
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 This book is printed on acid-free paper.
8
9 Copyright © 2004 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.
10 Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey

11 Published simultaneously in Canada
12
13 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form
14 or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as [-4]
permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior
15 written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee
16 to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400,
17 fax (978) 750-4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission Lin
18 should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street,
Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, e-mail: [email protected].
—
19 * 62
20 Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts ——
21 in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or Nor
22 completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of * PgE
23 merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales
representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable
24
for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor
25 author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited [-4]
26 to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
27
28 For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our
Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at
29
(317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002.
30
31 Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may
32 not be available in electronic books. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at
33 www.wiley.com.
34
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data:
35
36 Leick, Alfred.
GPS satellite surveying / Alfred Leick.—3rd ed.
37
p. cm.
38 Includes bibliographical references and index.
39 ISBN 0-471-05930-7 (cloth)
40 1. Artificial satellites in surveying. 2. Global Positioning System. I. Title.
41 TA595.5.L45 2004
526.9'82—dc21 2003049651
42
43 Printed in the United States of America
44
45 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
1 CHAPTER 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 [Fi
13
14 [1]
15
16
INTRODUCTION
17 Lin
18 —
19 0.0
20 ——
21 A new and exciting era of positioning on land, on the sea, and in space began with Sho
22 the launch of the first global positioning system (GPS) satellite on February 22, 1978. PgE
23 The primary purpose of the satellite system was to meet the needs of the military and
24 national security, in regards to positioning and timing, on a 24-hour per day basis all
25 around the world and under all weather conditions. Very soon, however, the potential [1]
26 benefits of GPS for civilian applications became apparent, with that number rapidly
27 increasing and no end in sight twenty plus years later.
28 The satellites transmit at frequencies L1 (1575.42 MHz) and L2 (1227.6 MHz)
29 modulated with two types of codes and the navigation message. The codes are the
30 civilian C/A-code and the encrypted military P(Y)-codes. At present the L1 carrier
31 is modulated with both types of codes, whereas L2 is modulated with a P-code only.
32 Modernized GPS will transmit a second civil code on L2 and a third civil code on a
33 new carrier L5 (1176.45 MHz).
34 There are two types of observables of interest to users. One of them is the pseu-
35 dorange, which equals the distance between the satellite and the receiver plus small
36 corrective terms due to receiver and satellite clock errors, the impact of the ionosphere
37 and troposphere on signal propagation, and multipath. Given the geometric positions
38 of the satellites as a function of time, i.e., satellite ephemeris, four pseudoranges are
39 in principle sufficient to compute the location of the receiver and its clock correction.
40 Pseudoranges are a measure of the travel time of the codes, C/A or P(Y). The sec-
41 ond observable, the carrier phase, is the difference between the received phase and
42 the phase of the receiver oscillator at the epoch of measurement. Receivers are pro-
43 grammed to make phase observations at the same equally spaced epochs. In addition,
44 receivers keep track of the number of complete cycles received since the beginning
45
1
2 INTRODUCTION
1 of a measurement. Thus, the actual output is the accumulated phase observable at

2 pre-set epochs.
3 Government policies (SPS, 2001) currently define a standard positioning service
4 (SPS) based on the C/A-code observations and a precise positioning service (PPS)
5 based on P(Y)-code observations. SPS and PPS address “classical satellite” navi-
6 gation methods where one receiver observes several satellites in order to determine
7 its geocentric position, using the broadcast ephemeris. Typically, a position is com-
8 puted for every epoch of observation. The advantages of relative positioning have
9 long been recognized as a way to satisfy the high accuracy requirements of geodesy,
10 surveying, and other geosciences. In relative positioning, also called differential po-
11 sitioning, the relative location between co-observing receivers is determined. In this
12 case many common errors cancel, or their impact is significantly reduced. During the
13 pioneering years of GPS, there appeared to be a clear distinction between applications
14 in navigation and surveying. This distinction, if ever real, has rapidly disappeared. [2],
15 Whereas navigation solutions used to incorporate primarily pseudorange observa-
16 tions, surveying solutions have always been based on the millimeter-accurate carrier
17 phase observations. Modern approaches combine both types of observables in an op- Lin
18 timal manner. This leads to a unified GPS positioning theory for both surveying and —
19 navigation. The availability of precise, postprocessed ephemerides—even predicted 0.0
20 precise ephemerides—allows for single-point positioning that is better than specified ——
21 for SPS or even PPS. Powerful processing algorithms reduce the time required for Lon
22 data collection, so as to render even the distinction between static (both receivers are PgE
23 static) and kinematic (at least one receiver moves) techniques unnecessary.
24 The achievable accuracy very much depends on many factors that will be detailed
25 throughout this book. In order to emphasize the characteristic difference between [2],
26 geocentric and relative position accuracy, let us simply state that geocentric position
27 accuracy ranges from meters to decimeters, whereas the relative position accuracy is
28 at the centimeters to millimeters level. The secrets that make GPS such a powerful
29 positioning device can be readily explained. At the center is the ability to measure
30 carrier phases to about 1/100 of a cycle, which equals about 2 mm in linear distance.
31 The high frequencies (L1 and L2) penetrate the ionosphere relatively well. Because
32 the time delay caused by the ionosphere is inversely proportional to the square of the
33 frequency, carrier phase observations at both frequencies can be used to model and,
34 thus, eliminate most ionospheric effects. Dual-frequency observations are particularly
35 useful when the station separation is large and when shortening the observation time is
36 important. There has been significant progress in the design of stable clocks and their
37 miniaturization, providing precise timing at the satellite. The GPS satellite orbits are
38 stable because at such high satellite altitudes only the major gravitational forces affect
39 their motion. There are no atmospheric drag effects acting on satellites. The impact of
40 the sun and the moon on the orbits is significant but can be computed accurately. The
41 remaining worrisome physical aspects are solar radiation pressure on the satellites,
42 as well as the tropospheric delay and multipath effects on signal propagation. On
43 the algorithmic side, much is gained by using linear combinations of the basic phase
44 observables. For example, unwanted parameters are eliminated and certain effects
45 need not be modeled. Let the receivers k and m observe satellite p at the same time.
The difference between these two phase observations is called a single-difference
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 3
1 observable. It can be readily shown that single differences are largely independent of
2 satellite frequency offset and linear drift. Next, assume that two single differences are
3 available, one referring to satellite p and one to satellite q. The difference between
4 these two single differences, called the double-difference observable, is largely inde-
5 pendent of receiver clock errors. Finally, taking the difference of two double differ-
6 ences that refer to different epochs yields the triple-difference observable. This last
7 type of observation is useful for initial processing and screening of the data.
8 Single-, double-, or triple-difference processing yields the relative location be-
9 tween the co-observing receivers and is usually referred to as the vector between the
10 stations. Because the satellites are at a finite distance from the earth, there is also
11 a “geocentric positioning component” to these observables which is, as a matter of
12 fact, a function of the baseline length. In practice, the absolute location of the baseline
13 must be sufficiently known in order not to degrade the relative positioning capability.
14 This topic will be discussed later. By itself, one accurate vector between stations is [3]
15 generally not of much use, at least in surveying. Of course, one can add the vector to
16 the geocentric position of the “known” station and formally compute the geocentric
17 position of the new station. The problem with this procedure is that the uncertainty of Lin
18 the “known” station is transferred in full to the new station. Also, despite all of modern —
19 technology, the vectors themselves can still be in error. Possibilities of misidentify- 0.0
20 ing ground marks, centering errors, misreading antenna heights, etc., can never be ——
21 completely avoided. Like other observations, the GPS vector observations are most Lon
22 effectively controlled by a least-squares network adjustment consisting of a set of PgE
23 redundant vectors. Such network solutions make it possible to assess the quality of
24 the observations, validate the correctness of statistical data, and detect (and possi-
25 bly remove) existing blunders. Therefore, the primary result of a GPS survey is a [3]
26 polyhedron of stations whose accurate relative locations have been controlled by a
27 least-squares adjustment.
28
29
30 1.1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
31
32 A summary of GPS development and performance to date is detailed in Table 1.1.
33 Because the scope of GPS research and application development is so broad and
34 conducted by researchers all over the globe, it is impossible to give a comprehensive
35 listing. Table 1.1, therefore, merely demonstrates the extraordinarily rapid develop-
36 ment of the GPS positioning system.
37 GPS made its debut in surveying and geodesy with a big bang. During the summer
38 of 1982, the testing of the Macrometer receiver, developed by C. C. Counselman at
39 M.I.T., verified a GPS surveying accuracy of 1–2 parts per million (ppm) of the station
40 separation. Baselines were measured repeatedly using several hours of observations
41 to study this new surveying technique and to gain initial experience with GPS. Dur-
42 ing 1983 a thirty (plus)-station first-order network densification in the Eifel region
43 of Germany was observed (Bock et al., 1985). This project was a joint effort by the
44 State Surveying Office of North Rhein-Westfalia, a private U.S. firm, and scientists
45 from M.I.T. In early 1984, the geodetic network densification of Montgomery County
(Pennsylvania) was completed. The sole guidance of this project rested with a private
4 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
1 TABLE 1.1 GPS Development and Performance at a Glance

2 1978 Launch of first GPS satellite
3
4 1982 Prototype Macrometer testing at M.I.T.
5 Geodetic network densification (Eifel, Germany)
6 1983
President Reagan offers GPS to the world “free of charge”
7
Geodetic network densification (Montgomery County, Pennsylvania)
8 1984 Engineering survey at Stanford
9 Remondi’s dissertation
10
11 Precise geoid undulation differences for Eifel network
Codeless dual band observations
12
1985 Kinematic GPS surveying
13 Antenna swap for ambiguity initialization
14 First international symposium on precise positioning with GPS
[4],
15
16 Challenger accident (January 28)
1986
10 cm aircraft positioning Lin
17
18 1987 JPL baseline repeatability tests to 0.2–0.04 ppm —
19 Launch of first Block II satellite 5.3
20 OTF solution ——
21 1989 Wide area differential GPS (WADGPS) concepts Nor
22 U.S. Coast Guard GPS Information Center (GPSIC) PgE
23
1990 GEOID90 for NAD83 datum
24
25 NGS ephemeris service [4],
1991
26 GIG 91 experiment (January 22–February 13)
27 IGS campaign (June 21–September 23)
28 Initial solutions to deal with antispoofing (AS)
29 1992 Narrow correlator spacing C/A-code receiver
30 Attitude determination system
31 Real-time kinematic GPS
32 ACSM ad hoc committee on accuracy standards
33 Orange County GIS/cadastral densification
34 1993 Initial operational capability (IOC) on December 8
35 1–2 ppb baseline repeatability
36 LAMBDA
37 IGS service beginning January 1
38 Antispoofing implementation (January 31)
39 RTCM recommendations on differential GPS (Version 2.1)
40 1994 National Spatial Reference System Committee (NGS)
41 Multiple (single-frequency) receiver experiments for OTF
42 Proposal to monitor the earth’s atmosphere with GPS (occultations)
43 Full operational capability (FOC) on July 17
44 1995
Precise point positioning (PPP) at JPL
45
1 TABLE 1.1 (Continued)

2 1996 Presidential Decision Directive, first U.S. GPS policy
3
4 Vice president announces second GPS civil signal at 1227.60 MHz
1998
5 JPL’s automated GPS data analysis service via Internet
6 Vice president announces GPS modernization initiative and third civil GPS signal
7 1999 at 1176.45 MHz
8 IGDG (Internet-based global differential GPS) at JPL
9 Selective availability set to zero
10 2000
GPS JPO begins modifications to IIR-M and IIF satellites
11
12
13
14 GPS surveying firm (Collins and Leick, 1985). Also in 1984, GPS was used at Stan- [5]
15 ford University for a high-precision GPS engineering survey to support construction
16 for extending the Stanford Linear Accelerator (SLAC). Terrestrial observations (an-
17 gles and distances) were combined with GPS vectors. The Stanford project yielded Lin
18 a truly millimeter-accurate GPS network, thus demonstrating, among other things, —
19 the high quality of the Macrometer antenna. This accuracy could be verified through 0.5
20 comparison with the alignment laser at the accelerator, which reproduces a straight ——
21 line within one-tenth of a millimeter (Ruland and Leick, 1985). Therefore, by the No
22 middle of 1984, 1–2 ppm GPS surveying had been demonstrated beyond any doubt. PgE
23 No visibility was required between the stations. Data processing could be done on
24 a microcomputer. Hands-on experience was sufficient to acquire most of the skills
25 needed to process the data—i.e., first-order geodetic network densification suddenly [5]
26 became within the capability of individual surveyors.
27 President Reagan offered GPS free of charge for civilian aircraft navigation in
28 1983 once the system became fully operational. This announcement was made after
29 the Soviet downing of the Korean Air flight 007 over the Korea Eastern Sea. This
30 announcement can be viewed as the beginning of sharing arrangements of GPS for
31 military and civilian users.
32 Engelis et al. (1985) computed accurate geoid undulation differences for the Eifel
33 network, demonstrating how GPS results can be combined with orthometric heights,
34 as well as what it takes to carry out such combinations accurately. New receivers
35 became available—e.g., the dual-frequency P-code receiver TI-4100 from Texas
36 Instruments—which was developed with the support of several federal agencies. Ladd
37 et al. (1985) reported on a survey using codeless dual-frequency receivers and claimed
38 1 ppm in all three components of a vector in as little as 15 minutes of observation time.
39 Thus, the move toward rapid static surveying had begun. Around 1985, kinematic
40 GPS became available (Remondi, 1985). Kinematic GPS refers to ambiguity-fixed
41 solutions that yield centimeter (and better) relative accuracy for a moving antenna.
42 The only constraint on the path of the moving antenna is visibility of the same four
43 (at least) satellites at both receivers. Remondi introduced the antenna swapping tech-
44 nique for the rapid initialization of ambiguities. Antenna swapping made kinematic
45 positioning in surveying more efficient.
1 The deployment of GPS satellites came to a sudden halt due to the tragic January
2 28, 1986 Challenger accident. Several years passed until the Delta II launch vehicle
3 was modified to carry GPS satellites. However, the theoretical developments contin-
4 ued at full speed. They were certainly facilitated by the publication of Remondi’s
5 (1984) dissertation, the very successful First International Symposium on Precise
6 Positioning with the Global Positioning System (Goad, 1985), and a specialty con-
7 ference on GPS held by the American Society of Civil Engineers in Nashville in 1988.
8 Kinematic GPS was used for decimeter positioning of airplanes relative to re-
9 ceivers on the ground (Mader, 1986; Krabill and Martin, 1987). The goal of these tests
10 was to reduce the need for traditional and expensive ground control in photogram-
11 metry. These early successes not only made it clear that precise airplane positioning
12 would play a major role in photogrammetry, but they also highlighted the interest in
13 positioning other remote sensing devices in airplanes and spacecraft.
14 Lichten and Border (1987) report repeatability of 2–5 parts in 108 in all three com- [6],
15 ponents for static baselines. Note that 1 part in 108 corresponds to 1 mm in 100 km.
16 Such highly accurate solutions require satellite positions of about 1 m and better. Be-
17 cause such accurate orbits were not yet available at the time, researchers were forced Lin
18 to estimate improved GPS orbits simultaneously with baseline estimation. The need —
19 for a precise orbital service became apparent. Other limitations, such as the uncer- 0.0
20 tainty in the tropospheric delay over long baselines, also became apparent and created ——
21 an interest in exploring water vapor radiometers to measure the wet part of the tro- Lon
22 posphere along the path of the satellite transmissions. The geophysical community PgE
23 requires high baseline accuracy for obvious reasons; e.g., slow-moving crustal mo-
24 tions can be detected earlier with more accurate baseline observations. However, the
25 GPS positioning capability of a few parts in 108 was also noticed by surveyors for [6],
26 its potential to change well-established methods of spatial referencing and geodetic
27 network design.
28 Perhaps the year 1989 could be labeled the year when “modern GPS” position-
29 ing began in earnest. This was the year when the first production satellite, Block
30 II, was launched. Seeber and Wübbena (1989) discussed a kinematic technique that
31 used carrier phases and resolved the ambiguity “on-the-way.” This technique is to-
32 day usually called “on-the-fly” (OTF) ambiguity resolution (fixing), meaning there
33 is no static initialization required to resolve the ambiguities. The technique works
34 for postprocessing and real-time applications. OTF is one of the modern techniques
35 that applies to both navigation and surveying. The navigation community began in
36 1989 to take advantage of relative positioning, in order to eliminate errors common
37 to co-observing receivers, and to make attempts to extend the distance in relative
38 positioning. Brown (1989) referred to it as extended differential GPS, but it is more
39 frequently referred to as wide area differential GPS (WADGPS). Many efforts were
40 made to standardize real-time differential GPS procedures, resulting in several pub-
41 lications by the Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services. The U.S. Coast
42 Guard established the GPS Information Center (GPSIC) to serve nonmilitary user
43 needs for GPS information.
44 The introduction of the geoid model GEOID90 in reference to the NAD83 datum
45 represented a major advancement for combining GPS (ellipsoidal) and orthometric
height differences. The most recent version is GEOID99.
1 During 1991 and 1992, the geodetic community embarked on major efforts to
2 explore the limits of GPS on a global scale. The efforts began with the GIG91 cam-
3 paign and continued the following year with the International GPS Service (IGS)
4 campaign. GIG91 (GPS experiment for International Earth Rotation Service [IERS]
5 and Geodynamics) resulted in very accurate polar motion coordinates and earth rota-
6 tion parameters. Geocentric coordinates were obtained that agreed with those derived
7 from satellite laser ranging within 10 to 15 cm, and ambiguities could be fixed on a
8 global scale providing daily repeatability of about 1 part in 109 . Such results are
9 possible because of the truly global distribution of the tracking stations. The primary
10 purpose of the IGS campaign was to prove that the scientific community is able to
11 produce high-accuracy orbits on an operational basis. The campaign was successful
12 beyond all expectations, confirming that the concept of IGS is possible. The IGS
13 service formally began January 1, 1994.
14 For many years, users worried about what impact antispoofing (AS) would have [7]
15 on the practical uses of GPS. AS implies switching from the known P-code to the
16 encrypted Y-code, expressed by the notation P(Y)-code. The purpose of AS is to make
17 Lin
the P-codes available only to authorized (military) users. The anxiety about AS was
18 considerably relieved when Hatch et al. (1992) reported on the code-aided squaring —
19 technique to be used when AS is active. Most manufacturers developed proprietary 12
20 ——
solutions for dealing with AS. When AS was actually implemented on January 31,
21 Lon
1994, it presented no insurmountable hindrance to the continued use of GPS and,
22 PgE
particularly, the use of modern techniques such as OTF. GPS users became even less
23
dependent on AS with the introduction of accurate narrow correlator spacing C/A-
24
code receivers (van Dierendonck et al., 1992), since the C/A-code is not subject to
25 [7]
AS measures. By providing a second civil code on L2, and eventually a third one
26
on L5, and adding new military codes, GPS modernization will make the P(Y)-
27
28 code encryption a nonissue for civilian applications, and at the same time, provide
29 enhanced performance to civilian and military users.
30 A major milestone in the development of GPS was achieved on December 8, 1993,
31 when the initial operational capability (IOC) was declared when twenty-four satellites
32 (Blocks I, II, IIA) became successfully operational. The implication of IOC was
33 that commercial, national, and international civil users could henceforth rely on the
34 availability of the SPS. Full operational capability (FOC) would be declared July 17,
35 1995, when twenty-four satellites of the type Blocks II and IIA became operational.
36 Teunissen (1993) introduced the least-squares ambiguity decorrelation adjustment
37 (LAMBDA), which is now widely used.
38 The determination of attitude/orientation using GPS has drawn attention for quite
39 some time. Qin et al. (1992) report on a commercial product for attitude determi-
40 nation. Talbot (1993) reports on a real-time kinematic centimeter-accuracy survey-
41 ing system. Lachapelle et al. (1994) experiment with multiple (single-frequency)
42 receiver configurations, in order to accelerate the on-the-fly ambiguity resolution
43 by means of imposing length constraints and conditions between the ambiguities.
44 While much attention was given to monitoring the ionosphere with dual-frequency
45 and single-frequency code or carrier phase observations, Kursinski (1994) discusses
the applicability of radio occultation techniques to use GPS in a general earth’s at-
1 mospheric monitoring system (which could provide high vertical-resolution profiles

2 of atmospheric temperature across the globe).
3 The surveying community promptly responded to the opportunities and challenges
4 that came with GPS. The American Congress on Surveying and Mapping (ACSM)
5 tasked an ad hoc committee in 1993 to study the accuracy standards to be used in
6 the era of GPS. The committee addressed questions concerning relative and absolute
7 accuracy standards. The National Geodetic Survey (NGS) enlisted the advice of
8 experts regarding the shape and content of the geodetic reference frame; these efforts
9 eventually resulted in the continuously operating reference stations (CORS). Orange
10 County (California) established 2000 plus stations to support geographic information
11 systems (GIS) and cadastral activities. There are many other examples.
12 Zumberge et al. (1998a,b) report single-point positioning at the couple of centime-
13 ters level for static receivers and at the subdecimeter level for moving receivers. This
14 technique became available at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) around 1995. The [8],
15 technique that requires dual-frequency observations, a precise ephemeris, and precise
16 clock corrections is referred to as precise point positioning (PPP). These remarkable
17 results were achieved with postprocessed ephemerides at a time when selective avail- Lin
18 ability (SA) was still active. Since 1998 JPL has offered automated data processing —
19 and analysis for PPP on the Internet (Zumberge, 1998). Users submit the observa- 0.0
20 tion file over the Internet and retrieve the results via FTP soon thereafter. Since 1999 ——
21 JPL has operated an Internet-based dual-frequency global differential GPS system Nor
22 (IGDG). This system determines satellite orbits, satellite clock corrections, and earth PgE
23 orientation parameters in real-time and makes corrections available via the Internet
24 for real time positioning. A website at JPL demonstrates real-time kinematic posi-
25 tioning at the subdecimeter of a receiver located at JPL’s facilities in Pasadena. [8],
26 Finally, during 1998 and 1999, major decisions were announced regarding the
27 modernization of GPS. In 2000, SA was set to zero as per Presidential Directive.
28 When active, SA entails an intentional falsification of the satellite clock (SA-dither)
29 and of the broadcast satellite ephemeris (SA-epsilon); when active it is effectively an
30 intentional denial to civilian users of the full capability of GPS.
31
32
33 1.2 GEODETIC ASPECTS
34
35 The three-dimensional (3D) geodetic model is definitely the preferred model for ad-
36 justing three-dimensional GPS vector observations and combining them with classi-
37 cal terrestrial observations such as slant distance, horizontal angle, azimuth, vertical
38 angle, and, with some restrictions, leveled height differences. The three-dimensional
39 model is applicable with equal ease to the following: small surveys the size of a par-
40 cel or smaller, large surveys covering whole regions and nations, three-dimensional
41 surveys for measuring and monitoring engineering structures, and the “pseudo three-
42 dimensional” surveys typical of classical geodetic networks or in “plane surveying.”
43 Application of simple concepts from the theory of adjustments, such as “weighted
44 parameters” and “significance of parameters,” make it possible to use the three-
45 dimensional model in all of these applications in a uniform manner. Perhaps the most
GEODETIC ASPECTS 9
1 important point in favor of the three-dimensional model is that the geodesic line on
2 the ellipsoid is not needed at all. Anyone who has studied the mathematics related to
3 geodesics will certainly appreciate this simplification of surveying theory.
4 The 3D geodetic model requires that the observations are reduced for polar mo-
5 tion and deflection of the vertical. It is well known that the theodolite senses the
6 local plumb line and, thus, measures with respect to the local vertical and the local
7 astronomic horizon. It is further known that astronomic observations depend on the
8 position of the instantaneous pole of rotation. The goal is to reduce angular obser-
9 vations measured with the theodolite to the ellipsoidal normal (deflection of vertical
10 reduction) and to reduce the astronomic quantities to the conventional terrestrial pole
11 (CTP). Having said this, I would like to comfort worried surveyors by reminding
12 them that the most popular observations do not depend critically on polar motion and
13 deflection of the vertical; e.g., horizontal angles depend very little on the deflection
14 of the vertical (because horizontal angles are the difference between two azimuths, [9]
15 the largest deflection term cancels). The GPS vector observations (which refer to a
16 crust-fixed coordinate system, whose third axis coincides with the CTP) and distances
17 measured with the electronic distance meter (EDM) do not depend on either polar Lin
18 motion or deflection of the vertical. Furthermore, modern surveyors are unlikely to —
19 make astronomic observations in view of GPS surveying capability. 10
20 In surveying applications, there will typically be no need to improve on the de- ——
21 flection of the vertical already available from, e.g., the NGS. Besides, surveyors can No
22 PgE
23
24
25 reduction [9]
mapping plane conformal to
26 to mapping plane
27 mapping
ellipsoid model plane
28
29
30
31 ellipsoid ellipsoidal reduction
32 to surface to
3D model ellipsoid
33
34
35
36 polar motion
deflection and
37 of the 3D geodetic
model deflection
38 vertical correction
39
40
41
42 controlled original
43 observations observations
44
45
Figure 1.1 Geodetic models.
1 conveniently introduce their own local ellipsoid that is tangent to the equipotential
2 surface at the center of the survey area. The deflections of the vertical with respect to
3 the local ellipsoid are then zero for all practical purposes within the small geograph-
4 ical region of interest. The adjustment and the quality control of the observations
5 can be carried out in this system. The controlled observations can be deposited in a
6 database.
7 The approach followed in this book is shown in Figure 1.1. The scheme starts
8 with observations, which are reduced for polar motion and deflection of the vertical
9 (if applicable), adjusted in the three-dimensional model, and then corrected (with the
10 opposite sign) for deflection of the vertical. The results are quality-controlled obser-
11 vations that refer to the local plumb line and the conventional terrestrial coordinate
12 system. The two remaining loops in Figure 1.1 are actually redundant when viewed [La
13 from a “narrow geodetic” perspective, but they are still of much interest to surveyors
14 because of conformal mappings such as the state plane coordinate (SPC) system. In [10
15 this book, the expressions for the ellipsoidal surface model and the conformal map-
16 ping model are only summarized.
17 Aspects of GPS satellite surveying can be found in several excellent publica- Lin
18 tions, i.e., Hoffmann-Wellenhof et al. (2001), Kaplan (1996), Misra and Enge (2001), —
19 Parkinson et al. (1996), Seeber (2003), and Strang and Borre (1997). Navigation, 28
20 published by the Institute of Navigation, and GPS Solutions, published by Springer ——
21 Verlag, are journals that focus on GPS. Nor
22 PgE
23
24
25 [10
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
1 CHAPTER 2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 [Fi
13
14 [11
15
16
GEODETIC REFERENCE SYSTEMS
17 Lin
18 —
19 0.0
20 ——
21 It becomes increasingly important to focus on the definition of reference frames as Sho
22 accuracy of geodetic space techniques increases. There are three types of frames we PgE
23 are concerned with—the earth-fixed (international terrestrial reference frame, ITRF)
24 frame, the space-fixed (international celestial reference frame, ICRF) frame, and the
25 geodetic datum. Of course, we also need to be able to transform between the frames. [11
26 To satisfy the needs of scientists for a clear definition of coordinates, as well as to
27 explore fully the phenomenal increase in accuracy of geodetic space techniques,
28 the definition and maintenance of these reference frames in connection with the
29 deformable earth has become a science in itself. Current solutions have evolved over
30 many years, with contributions from the best scientific minds. The literature is rich
31 in contributions that document the interdisciplinary spectrum and depth needed to
32 arrive at solutions.
33 The International Earth Rotation Service (IERS) is responsible for establishing and
34 maintaining the ITRF and ICRF frames, whereas typically a national geodetic agency
35 is responsible for establishing and maintaining the datum. The IERS relies on the
36 cooperation of many research groups and national agencies to accomplish its tasks.
37 The International Astronomical Union (IAU) and the International Union of Geodesy
38 and Geophysics (IUGG) established the service in 1988. The IERS maintains a central
39 bureau that is responsible for the general management of the IERS and is governed by
40 a directing board. The conventions underlying the ITRF and the ICRF are published in
41 McCarthy (1996). They are currently completing revision and will become available
42 as IERS Conventions 2000. The old and new conventions are posted at the IERS
43 (2002). McCarthy (1996) is the principal reference for this chapter. For additional
44 details, please consult the many references listed in that publication.
45
11
12 GEODETIC REFERENCE SYSTEMS
1 Accurate positioning within the ITRF and ICRF frames requires application of
2 a number of complex mathematical expressions to account for phenomena, such as
3 polar motion, plate tectonic movements, solid earth tides, and ocean loading dis-
4 placements, as well as precession and nutations. The respective software for these
5 corrections is available, generally on the web. Because the names of computer di-
6 rectories often change, we do not list the full URLs at which the specific software
7 resides. Instead, it is recommended that the reader simply navigate to key agencies
8 and research groups and follow the link to the appropriate levels and directories. A
9 recommended starting point is IERS (2002). Other important sites are of the Interna-
10 tional GPS Service (IGS), IGS (2002), the U.S. Naval Observatory, USNO (2002),
11 and the National Geodetic Survey, NGS (2002). Because the software is readily avail-
12 able at these sites, we only list mathematical expressions to the extent needed for a
13 conceptual presentation of the topics. However, users striving to achieve complete
14 clarity in definition and the ultimate in positional accuracy must make sure that the [12
15 software components are mutually consistent and be aware of reductions that might
16 already have been applied to observations.
17 Most scientists prefer to work with geocentric Cartesian coordinates. In many Lin
18 cases, however, it is easier to interpret results in terms of ellipsoidal coordinates such —
19 as geodetic latitude, longitude, and height. It then becomes important to specify the 0.0
20 location of the origin of the ellipsoid and its orientation. Ideally, one would like to see ——
21 the origin coincide with the center of mass and the axes coincide with the directions of Nor
22 the ITRF. The location and orientation of the ellipsoid, as well as its size and shape, PgE
23 are part of the definition of a datum. Below we discuss the details for converting
24 between Cartesian coordinates and geodetic latitude, longitude, and height.
25 GPS observations such as pseudoranges and carrier phases depend only indirectly [12
26 on gravity. For example, once the orbit of the satellites has been computed and the
27 ephemeris is available, there is no need to further consider gravity. To make the use
28 of GPS even easier, the GPS ephemeris is typically provided in a well-defined earth-
29 centered earth-fixed (ECEF) coordinate system to which the user can directly relate.
30 In contrast, astronomic latitude, longitude, and azimuth determinations with a theodo-
31 lite using star observations refer to the instantaneous rotation axis, the instantaneous
32 terrestrial equator of the earth, and the local astronomic horizon (the plane perpendic-
33 ular to the local plumb line). For applications where accuracy matters, it is typically
34 the responsibility of the user to apply the necessary reductions or corrections to ob-
35 tain positions in an ECEF coordinate system. Even vertical and horizontal angles as
36 measured by surveyors with a theodolite or total station refer to the plumb line and
37 the local astronomic horizon. Another type of observation that depends on the plumb
38 line is leveling. To deal with types of observations that depend on the direction of
39 gravity (plumb line, horizon), we introduce the geoid.
40 The goal is to reduce observations that depend on the direction of gravity and to
41 model observations that refer to the ellipsoid. This is accomplished by applying geoid
42 undulations and deflection of the vertical correction. These “connecting elements”
43 are part of the definition of the datum. For a modern datum these elements are
44 readily available, typically on the web (for an example, see NGS, 2002). The reduced
45 observations are the model observation of the 3D geodetic model.
CONVENTIONAL TERRESTRIAL REFERENCE SYSTEM 13
1 2.1 CONVENTIONAL TERRESTRIAL REFERENCE SYSTEM

2
3 A conventional terrestrial reference system (CTRS) must allow the products of vari-
4 ous geodetic space techniques, such as coordinates and orientation parameters of the
5 deformable earth, to be combined into a unified data set. Such a reference system
6 should (a) be geocentric (whole earth, including oceans and atmosphere), (b) incor-
7 porate corrections or procedures stemming from the relativistic theory of gravitation,
8 (c) maintain consistency in orientation with earlier definitions, and (d) have no resid-
9 ual global rotation with respect to the crust as viewed over time. This section deals
10 with the major phenomena such as polar motion, plate tectonic motions, solid earth
11 tides, and ocean loading that cause variations of coordinates in a terrestrial reference
12 frame. To appreciate the demand placed on a modern reference system, consider the
13 following statement: “GPS data are used to compute daily estimates of the earth’s
14 center of mass and scale. Recent center of mass estimates have daily repeatability at [13
15 the level of 1 cm in x, 1 cm in y, and 1.5 cm in z. Seasonal variations in the center
16 of mass occur at the 3–4 mm level, due primarily to global water mass redistribution.
17 Recent scale estimates repeat daily at the level of 0.3 parts per billion” (Heflin, JPL, Lin
18 private communication). —
19 0.0
20 ——
2.1.1 Polar Motion
21 No
22 The intersection of the earth’s instantaneous rotation axis and the crust moves with PgE
23 time. This motion is called polar motion. Figure 2.1 shows polar motion for the time
24 2001–2003. This motion is somewhat periodic. There is a major constituent of about
25 434 days, called the Chandler period. The amplitude varies but does not seem to [13
26 exceed 10 m. Several of the polar motion features can be explained satisfactorily
27 from a geophysical model of the earth; however, the fine structures in polar motion
28 are still subject to research.
29 To avoid variations in latitude and longitude of about 10 m due to polar motion,
30 we need to define a conventional terrestrial pole (CTP) that is fixed to the crust.
31 Originally, this pole was defined as the center of figure of polar motion for the
32 years 1900–1905. This definition required several refinements as the observation
33 techniques improved. The instantaneous rotation axis can be referenced to the CTP
34 by the polar motion coordinates (xp , yp ). The origin of the polar motion coordinate
35 system is at the CTP, the x axis is along the conventional zero meridian, and the y
36 axis is positive along the 270° meridian. The center of figure of today’s polar motion
37 does not contain the CTP. There appears to be “polar wander” (gradual shifting of the
38 center of figure away from the CTP).
39 The CTP represents the direction of the third axis of the conventional terrestrial
40 reference system. The definition of the CTRS becomes increasingly complicated be-
41 cause of plate tectonic motions that cause observable station drifts and other temporal
42 variations in the coordinates of a “crust-fixed” coordinate system. As the plates move,
43 the fixed station coordinates become inconsistent with each other. The solution is to
44 define the reference frame by a consistent set of coordinates and their velocities of
45 a global network of stations at a specific epoch. The center of mass of the earth is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 [14
15
16
17 Lin
18 —
19 0.0
20 ——
21 Nor
22 PgE
Figure 2.1 Polar motion, 2001–2003. The solid line represents the mean pole displacement,
23 1900–2000. (Courtesy of the International Earth Orientation Service [IERS], Paris Obser-
24 vatory.)
25 [14
26
27 the natural choice for the origin of the CTRS because satellite dynamics are sensi-
28 tive to the center of mass (whole earth plus oceans and atmosphere). A particular
29 realization of a CTRS is the ITRF. The IERS maintains the ITRF using extrater-
30 restrial data from various sources, such as GPS, very long baseline interferometry
31 (VLBI), satellite laser ranging (SLR), and Doppler orbitography and radioposition-
32 ing integrated on satellite (DORIS). GPS is a viable tool for defining a global ref-
33 erence frame either alone or in combination with the other systems (Heflin et al.,
34 2002). Because the motions of the deformable earth are so complex, there is a need
35 to identify the sites that are part of the solution and, because of evolving data reduc-
36 tion techniques, the IERS publishes updated ITRF solutions. These are designated by
37 adding the year; e.g., ITRF96, ITRF97, and ITRF00. Transformation parameters for
38 the family of ITRFs have been estimated and are available from the IERS. Details on
39 ITRF transformations are found in Soler and Marshall (2002) and the literature listed
40 therein.
41 An ITRF-type of reference frame is also called an ECEF frame. We denote an
42 ECEF frame by (x) and the coordinate triplet by (x, y, z). The z axis as defined by
43 the IERS is the origin of the polar motion coordinate system. The x and y axes define
44 the terrestrial equatorial plane. In order to maintain continuity with older realizations,
45 the x axis lies in what may be loosely called the Greenwich meridian.
1 Historically speaking, the International Latitude Service (ILS) was created in

2 1895, shortly after polar motion had been verified observationally. It was the first
3 international group using globally distributed stations to monitor the reference frame.
4 This group evolved into the International Polar Motion Service (IPMS) in 1962. The
5 IERS was established in 1988 as a single international authority that henceforth uses
6 modern geodetic space techniques to establish and maintain the reference frames.
7 GPS increasingly contributes to the definition and maintenance of the terrestrial ref-
8 erence frame, largely due to the excellent cooperation of international research groups
9 and agencies with the IGS. The IGS began routine operation in 1994, providing GPS
10 orbits, tracking data, and offering other data products in support of geodetic and geo-
11 physical research.
12
13
2.1.2 Tectonic Plate Motion [15
14
15 The tectonic plate rotations can be approximated by spherical geophysical models
16 such as NNR-NUVELL1A (DeMets et al., 1994). This model is an improved version
17 of the original NUVEL-1 (Argus and Gordon, 1991). Table 2.1 lists the Cartesian Lin
18 angular velocity components for each of the thirteen major plates. At the edges of —
19 some of these plates, the motions can be as much as 5 cm per year. Denoting the * 17
20 vector of rotation velocities by Ω = [Ωx Ωy Ωz ]T and specifying the matrix R as ——
21   No
22 0 −Ωz Ωy PgE
 
23 R(Ω) ≡  Ωz 0 −Ωx  (2.1)
24
−Ωy Ωx 0
25 [15
26
27
28
TABLE 2.1 The NNR-NUVEL1A Kinematic Plate Model
29

30 Plate Name Ωx (mas/y) Ωy (mas/y) Ωz (mas/y) Ω (mas/y)
31
32 Africa 0.1837 −0.6392 0.8090 1.047283
Antarctica −0.1693 −0.3508 0.7644 0.857922
33
Arabia 1.3789 −0.1075 1.3943 1.963923
34 Australia 1.6169 1.0569 1.2957 2.325992
35 Caribbean −0.0367 −0.6982 0.3261 0.771473
36 Cocos −2.1503 −4.4563 2.2534 5.436930
37 Eurasia −0.2023 −0.4940 0.6503 0.841339
38 India 1.3758 0.0082 1.4005 1.407265
39 Nazca −0.3160 −1.7691 1.9820 2.675424
40 North America 0.0532 −0.7423 −0.0316 0.744874
41 Pacific −0.3115 0.9983 −2.0564 2.307036
42 South America −0.2141 −0.3125 −0.1794 0.419141
43 Philippines 2.0812 −1.4768 −1.9946 3.238944
44 Sources: McCarthy, 1996, p. 14, and Soler and Marshall (2002).
45 Note: The units were changed to milliarc seconds per year for easier visualization.
1 the transformation between two epochs is accomplished by (McCarthy, 1996, p. 16)

2
3 x(t) = I + 4.84813681 ∗ 10−9 R(Ω) (t − t0 ) x(t0 ) (2.2)
4
5 Expression (2.2) propagates the position vector x from epoch t0 to epoch t within
6 the same reference frame. The NNR-NUVELL1A model can be applied to reference
7 station coordinates to update them as closely as possible to the actual epoch of
8 observations. For consistency, the reference frame for all fiducial points should be the
9 one implicit in the precise ephemeris used. The resulting coordinates would then refer
10 to the reference system of the precise ephemeris and the epoch of the observations.
11 Long-term station motions can readily be appreciated from Figures 2.2 and 2.3.
12 Because the definition of the frame ultimately involves stations that move with
13 the crust, one must take the time dependency of transformation parameters into
14 consideration when transforming between frames. For example, the parameters listed [16
15 in Table 2.2 refer to the IGS realization of the ITRF, which is expressed by the
16 designation IGS(ITRFxx). The epoch for these transformation parameters happens to
17 Lin
18 —
19 0.9
20 NALL ——
THU1
21 Nor
22 TROM
KELY PgE
KIRU
23 METS FAIR
WHIT YELL REYK
ZWEN
24 CHUR
ONSA MDVO
HERS IRKT PENT
25 MADR POL2
ALBH ALGO STJO [16
TAEJ NLIB WEST
KIT3 USUD
26 ANKR TSKB
NOTO LHAS BRMU
27 MAS1 BAHR TAIS KOKB MDO1RCM5
IISC GUAM MKEA CRO1
28 KWJ1 MOIN KOUR
GALA
29 ASC1
MALI BOGT
FORT
SEY1DGAR COCO AREQ
30 PAMA
EISL BRAZ
HART
YAR1
31 PERT TID2 AUCK LPGS
SANT
32 HOB2 CHAT
KERG
33 MAC1
5 cm/yr
34 Heflin et al., 2002.3 CAS1 OHIG
35 DAV1
36
MCM4
37 http://sideshow.jpl.nasa.gov/mbh/series.html
38
39
40 Figure 2.2 Observed motions of globally distributed stations. Velocities for each site
41 were determined from more than eleven years of GPS data. Results are shown in the ITRF00
42 reference frame with no-net rotation of the crust. Rigid plate motion is clearly visible and
43 describes roughly 80% of the observed motion. The remaining 20% is nonrigid motion in plate
44 boundary zones associated with seismic and volcanic activity. The most visible plate boundary
45 zone on the map is southern California. (Courtesy of Mike Heflin, JPL.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 [17
15
16
17 Lin
18 —
19 -1
20 ——
21 No
22 PgE
23
24
25 [17
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40 Figure 2.3 Observed motion of station ALGO. The GPS data are used to compute daily
41 estimates of latitude, longitude, and height at each site. Velocity estimates are derived from
42 the time series and typically improve with the time span T in years according to 3.6 mm/T,
43 4.5 mm/T, and 9.1 mm/T for the north, east, and vertical components, respectively. Recent
44 comparisons of the GPS velocities with ITRF00 show agreement at the level of 0.7 mm/yr for
45 north and east, and 1.5 mm/yr for the vertical. (Courtesy of Mike Heflin, JPL.)
1 TABLE 2.2 Example of Fourteen-Parameter Transformation between Geocentric

2 Frames
3 Tx (m) Ty (m) Tz (m) εx (mas) εy (mas) εz (mas) s (ppb)
4
0.0047 0.0028 −0.0256 −0.030 −0.003 −0.140 1.48
5
±0.0005 ±0.0006 ±0.0008 ±0.025 ±0.021 ±0.021 ±0.09
6
7
Ṫx (m/y) Ṫy (m/y) Ṫz (m/y) ε̇x (mas/y) ε̇y (mas/y) ε̇z (mas/y) ṡ (ppb/y)
8
9 −0.0004 −0.0008 −0.0016 0.003 −0.001 −0.030 0.03
10 ±0.0003 ±0.0003 ±0.0004 ±0.012 ±0.011 ±0.011 ±0.05
11 Note: Transformation from IGS(ITRF00) to IGS(ITRF97) at epoch tk = 2001.5 (Ferland, 2002, p. 26).
12 Anticlockwise rotations are positive (mas = milliarc seconds, ppb = part per billion).
13
14 [18
15 be 2001.5 (the fraction of the year is given to one decimal). Soler and Marshall (2002)
16 derive the following fourteen-parameter transformation for transforming ITRFyy to
17 ITRFzz Lin
18 —
19 xt,ITRFzz = ttk + 1 + stk I − R ε tk xt,ITRFyy 6.0
20 (2.3) ——
+ (t − tk ) ṫ + − 1 + stk R(ε̇) + ṡ I − R ε tk xt,ITRFyy
21 Cus
22 PgE
The xt,ITRFyy positions on the right side of (2.3) can be computed from
23
24
xt,IRTFyy = xt0 ,IRTFyy + (t − t0 ) vt0 ,IRTFyy (2.4)
25 [18
26
In terms of notation, tk is the epoch at which the transformation parameters are given,
27
t0 is the epoch of the initial frame IRTFyy, and t is the epoch of the final transformed
28
frame ITRFzz (t could be the actual time of the GPS observations). The vector tk
29
contains the Cartesian coordinates of the origin of ITRFyy in the frame ITRFzz, i.e.,
30
it is the shift between the two frames. ε = [εx εy εz ]T denotes three differential
31
counterclockwise rotations around the x, y, and z axes of the ITRFyy frame, to
32
establish parallelism with the ITRFzz frame. The symbol s denotes the differential
33
scale change. When applying (2.3), the units must be conformable. The simplified
34
form of Equation (2.3) assumes that the velocities vtk = vt0 are in the same frame.
35
The transformation parameters are available from the IERS or research institutions
36
that maintain their own realization of the ITRF. Respective software is also readily
37
available on the web, e.g., Kouba (2001).
38
39
40 2.1.3 Solid Earth Tides
41
42 Tides are caused by the temporal variation of the gravitational attraction of the sun
43 and the moon on the earth due to orbital motion. While the ocean tides are very much
44 influenced by the coastal outlines and the shape of the near-coastal ocean floor, the
45 solid earth tides are accurately computable from relatively simple earth models. Their
CONVENTIONAL CELESTIAL REFERENCE SYSTEM 19
1 periodicities can be directly derived from the motion of the celestial bodies, similar
2 to nutation (see below). The solid earth tides generate periodic site displacements
3 of stations that depend on latitude. The tidal variation can be as much as 30 cm in
4 the vertical and 5 cm in the horizontal. McCarthy (1996, p. 61) lists the following
5 expression:
6

7
3
GMj rE 4 3 2 1
8 ∆x = 3 h2 e rj · e − + 3l2 rj · e rj − rj · e e (2.5)
j =2
GME rj 2 2
9
10
In this expression, GME is the gravitational constant of the earth, GMj is the one for
11
the moon (subscript j = 2) and the sun (j = 3), e is the unit vector of the station
12
in the geocentric coordinate system (x), and r denotes the unit vector of the celestial
13
body. h2 and l2 are the nominal degree 2 Love and Shida numbers that describe elastic [19
14
properties of the earth model. Equation (2.5) gives the solid earth tides accurate to at
15
least 5 mm. For additional expressions concerning higher-order terms or expressions
16
for the permanent tide, see McCarthy (1996). Lin
17
18 —
19 2.1.4 Ocean Loading 3.5
20 ——
21 Ocean loading refers to the deformation of the sea floor and coastal land that results
Cu
22 from the redistribution of ocean water that takes place during the ocean tide. The
earth’s crust yields under the weight of the tidal water. McCarthy (1996, p. 53) lists PgE
23
24 the following expression for the site displacement components ∆c (where the c refers
25 to the radial, west, and south component) at a particular site at time t, [19
26
27 ∆c = fj Acj cos ωj t + χj + uj − Φcj (2.6)
j
28
29
The summation over j represents eleven tidal waves traditionally designated as semi-
30
diurnal M2 , S2 , N2 , K2 , diurnal K1 , O1 , P1 , and long-periodic Mf , Mm , Ssa . The
31
symbols ωj and χj denote the angular velocities and the astronomic arguments at
32
33 time t = 0h . The fundamental arguments χj reflect the position of the sun and the
34 moon (see nutations below). fj and uj depend on the longitude of the lunar node.
35 The station-specific amplitudes Acj and phases Φcj can be computed using ocean
36 tide models and coastal outline data. The IERS makes these values available for most
37 ITRF reference stations. Typically the M2 loading deformations are largest, but they
38 do not exceed 5 cm in the vertical and 2 cm in the horizontal.
39
40
41 2.2 CONVENTIONAL CELESTIAL REFERENCE SYSTEM
42
43 Dynamical equations of motion are solved in this inertial frame. The equator, ecliptic,
44 and pole of the rotation of the earth historically defined the celestial reference frame.
45 Two-dimensional coordinates of a large number of stars realized it. Present-day ICRF
1 is defined by coordinates of a smaller set of essentially stationary quasars whose

2 positions are accurately known.
3 We denote the directions of the instantaneous rotation axis by the celestial ephe-
4 meris pole (CEP) and the normal of the ecliptic by the north ecliptic pole (NEP). The
5 angle between both directions, or the obliquity, is about 23.5°, which, by virtue of
6 geometry, is also the angle between the instantaneous equator and the ecliptic. As
7 shown in Figure 2.4, the rotation axis can be viewed as moving on a mantle of a cone
8 whose axis coincides with the ecliptic normal.
9 Mathematically, the motion is split into a smooth long-periodic motion called lu-
10 nisolar precession and short-periodic motions called nutations. Precession and nuta-
11 tion therefore refer to the motion of the earth’s instantaneous rotation axis in space. It
12 takes about 26,000 years for the rotation axis to complete one motion around the cone.
13 The nutations can be viewed as ripples on the circular cone. The longest nutation is
14 18.6 years and has the largest amplitude of about 20 . The cause of precession and [20
15 nutation is the ever-changing gravitational attraction of the sun, the moon, and the
16 planets on the earth. Newton’s law of gravitation states that the gravitational force
17 between two bodies is proportional to their masses and is inversely proportional to Lin
18 the square of their separation. Because of the earth’s and the moon’s orbital motions, —
19 the separation between the sun, the moon, and the earth changes continuously. Since 0.9
20 these changes are periodic, the resulting precession and nutations are periodic in time ——
21 as well, reflecting the periodic orbital motions. The only exception is a small plan- Sho
22 etary precession stemming from a motion of the ecliptic. Because of Newton’s law PgE
23 of gravitation, the distribution of the earth’s mass also critically impacts precession
24 and nutation. Important features are the flattening of the earth, the noncoincidence of
25 the equatorial plane with the ecliptic, and the noncoincidence of the orbital plane of [20
26 the moon with the ecliptic. Nonrigidity effects of the earth on the nutations can be
27 observed with today’s high-precision measurement systems. A spherical earth with
28 homogeneous density distribution would neither precess nor nutate.
29
30
31
32
33 NEP CEP
ε = 23.5
o
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42 Figure 2.4 Lunisolar precession and nutation. The spatial
43 motion of the CEP is parameterized in terms of precession and
44 nutation.
45
1 Because the rotation axis moves in space, the coordinates of stars or extragalac-
2 tic radio sources change with time due to the motion of the coordinate system. A
3 conventional celestial reference frame (CCRF) has been defined for the fundamental
4 epoch
5
6 J2000.0 ≡ January 1, 2000, 12h TT (2.7)
7
8 The letter “J” in J2000.0 indicates “Julian.” In a separate section below, we treat the
9 subject of time in greater detail. Let it suffice here to simply state that TT represents
10 terrestrial time (McCarthy, 1996, p. 83), which is realized by the international atomic
11 time (TAI) as
12
13 TT TAI + 32s .184 (2.8)
14 [21
15 We denote the respective coordinate system, called the mean celestial coordinate
16 system at epoch J2000.0, by (X̄). The Z̄ axis coincides with the mean pole. This
17 is the direction of a fictitious rotation axis that has been corrected for nutation, i.e., Lin
18 the fictitious rotation axis that is “driven” by precession only. The mean celestial —
19 equatorial plane is the plane perpendicular to the direction of Z̄. The X̄ axis lies 0.0
20 in the equatorial plane and points toward the vernal equinox (intersection of mean ——
21 celestial equatorial plane and ecliptic). In reality, the precise definition of the first Sho
22 axis takes earlier definitions into consideration that were based on fundamental star PgE
23 catalogues in order to maintain consistency.
24 Because the CCRF is defined for the epoch J2000.0, the directions of the axis
25 are stable in space per definition. The practical realization of the celestial frame, and [21
26 therefore the directions of the coordinate axes, is based on a set of celestial radio
27 source coordinates. The IERS selects the celestial radio sources and specifies the ob-
28 servation techniques and analysis procedures. The outcome of this coordinated effort
29 is the ICRF. Extragalactic radio sources, such as quasars, whose signals can be ob-
30 served with VLBI, play a key role in the establishment and maintenance of the ICRF.
31 Consider two widely separated VLBI antennas on the surface of the earth observing
32 the signals from a quasar. Because of the large distance to quasars, their direction is
33 the same to observers regardless of where the observer is on the earth’s surface, as
34 well as where the earth is on its orbit around the sun. The VLBI observations allow
35 one to relate the orientation of the baseline, and therefore the orientation of the earth,
36 to the inertial directions to the quasars.
37 Any variation in the earth’s daily rotation around the instantaneous rotation axis, in
38 polar motion, or any deficiencies in the adopted mathematical model of nutations, can
39 be detected. Today, many quasars and a global network of VLBI antennas are used to
40 measure and monitor these variations. The current ICRF solution includes more than
41 600 extragalactic radio sources. The details of VLBI are not discussed here, but they
42 are available in the specialized literature. VLBI techniques are very similar to those
43 used in GPS. In fact, the early developments in accurate GPS baseline determination
44 very much benefited from existing knowledge of and experience with VLBI.
45
1 2.2.1 Transforming between ITRF and ICRF

2
The transformation from the ITRF coordinate system (x) to the ICRF coordinate
3
system (X̄) at epoch t is (McCarthy, 1996, p. 21; Mueller, 1969, p. 65):
4
5
6 X̄ = R̄(t) R(t) R(t)x (2.9)

7
8 where
9
10 R̄(t) = P(t)N(t) (2.10)
11
12 R(t) = R3 (−GAST) (2.11)

13
14 R(t) = R1 (yp )R2 (xp ) (2.12) [22

15
P(t) = R3 (ζ)R2 (−θ)R3 (z) (2.13)
16
17 N(t) = R1 (−ε)R3 (∆ψ)R1 (ε + ∆ε) (2.14) Lin
18 —
19 with 7.2
20 ——
21 ζ = 2306 .2181t + 0 .30188t 2 + 0 .017998t 3 (2.15) Nor
22 PgE
23 z = 2306 .2181t + 1 .09468t 2 + 0 .018203t 3 (2.16)
24
25 θ = 2004 .3109t − 0 .42665t 2 − 0 .041833t 3 (2.17) [22
26
27 ∆ψ = −17 .1996 sin(Ω) + 0 .2062 sin(2Ω)
28 (2.18)
29 − 1 .3187 sin(2F − 2D + 2Ω) + · · · + dψ
30
31 ∆ε = 9 .2025 cos(Ω) − 0 .0895 cos(2Ω)
32 (2.19)
+ 0 .5736 cos(2F − 2D + 2Ω) + · · · + dε
33
34
35 ε = 84381 .448 − 46 .8150t − 0 .00059t 2 + 0 .001813t 3 (2.20)
36
37 where t is the time since J2000.0, expressed in Julian centuries of 36,525 days. The
38 arguments of the trigonometric terms in (2.18) and (2.19) are integer multiples of
39 the fundamental periodic elements l, l , F , D, and Ω, resulting in nutation periods
40 that vary from 18.6 years to about 5 days. Of particular interest is Ω, which appears
41 as an argument in the first term of these equations. The largest nutation, which
42 also has the longest period (18.6 years), is a function of Ω, which represents the
43 rotation of the lunar orbital plane around the ecliptic pole. The complete set of
44 nutations contains more than 100 entries. The amplitudes of the nutations are based
45 on geophysical models of the earth. Currently, the IAU 2000 precession and nutation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 Figure 2.5 Celestial pole offset for 1999 with respect to the IAU 1980 Nutation Model.
13 (Data from 1999 IERS Annual Report.)
14 [23
15
model is replacing the IAU 1980 theory of nutations. Because any model is imperfect
16
and imperfections become noticeable as the observation accuracy increases, the so-
17 Lin
called celestial pole offsets dψ and dε have been added to (2.18) and (2.19). These
18 —
offsets are determined and reported by the IERS. An example is seen in Figure 2.5.
19 1.3
The element Ω also describes the 18.6-year tidal period. Because tides and nutation
20 ——
are caused by the same gravitational attraction, it is actually possible to transform the
21 No
mathematical series of nutations into the corresponding series of tides. Therefore,
22
Expression (2.5) could be developed into a series of sine and cosine terms with the * PgE
23
fundamental periodic elements as arguments. These elements are
24
25 l = Mean Anomaly of the Moon [23
26 (2.21)
27 = 134°.96340251 + 1717915923 .2178t + 31 .8792t 2 + 0 .051635t 3 + · · ·
28
29 l = Mean Anomaly of the Sun
30 (2.22)
31 = 357°.52910918 + 12596581 .0481t − 0 .5532t 2 − 0 .000136t 3 + · · ·
32
33 F =L−Ω
34 (2.23)
= 93°.27209062 + 1739527262 .8478t − 12 .7512t 2 − 0 .001037t 3 + · · ·
35
36
D = Mean Elongation of the Moon from the Sun
37 (2.24)
38 = 297°.85019547 + 1602961601 .2090t − 6 .3706t 2 + 0 .006593t 3 + · · ·
39
40 Ω = Mean Longitude of the Ascending Node of the Moon
41 (2.25)
42 = 125°.04455501 − 6962890 .2665t + 7 .4722t 2 + 0 .007702t 3 + · · ·
43
44 L is mean longitude of the moon. In these equations, the time t is measured in Julian
45 centuries of 36,525 days since J2000.0,
1 t = (TT − J2000.0)[days] /36,525 (2.26)

2
3 The Julian date (JD) of the fundamental epoch is
4
5 JD(J2000.0) = 2,451,545.0TT (2.27)
6
It follows that t can be computed as
7
8 JD + TT[h] /24 − 2,451,545.0
9 t= (2.28)
36,525
10
11 The Julian date is a convenient counter for mean solar days. Conversion of any
12 Gregorian calendar date (Y = year, M = month, D = day) to JD is accomplished
13 by (van Flandern and Pulkkinen, 1979)
14 [24
15 JD = 367 × Y − 7 × [Y + (M + 9)/12]/4 + 275 × M/9 + D + 1,721,014 (2.29)
16
17 for Greenwich noon. This expression is valid for dates since March 1900. The ex- Lin
18 pression is read as a Fortran-type statement; division by integers implies truncation —
19 of the quotients of integers (no decimals are carried). Note that D is an integer. 2.9
20 In order to compute the Greenwich apparent sidereal time (GAST) needed in ——
21 (2.11), we must have the universal time (UT1) for the epoch of observation. The latter Nor
22 time is obtained from UTC (coordinate universal time) of the epoch of observation
* PgE
23 and the UT1-UTC correction. UTC and UT1 will be discussed below. Suffice to say
24 that the correction UT1-UTC is a byproduct of the observations; in other words, it is
25 available from IERS publications. GAST is best computed in three steps. First, we [24
26 compute Greenwich mean sidereal time (GMST) at the epoch 0h UT1,
27
28 GMST0h UT1 = 6h 41m 50s .54841 + 8640184s .812866Tu + 0s .093104Tu2
29 (2.30)
− 6s .2 × 10−6 Tu3
30
31 where Tu = du /36525 and du is the number of days elapsed since January 1, 2000,
32 12h UT1 (taking on values ±0.5, ±1.5, etc.). In the second step, we add the difference
33 in sidereal time that corresponds to UT1 hours of mean time,
34
35 GMST = GMST0h UT1 + r[(UT1 − UTC) + UTC] (2.31)
36
37 r = 1.002737909350795 + 5.9006 × 10−11 Tu − 5.9 × 10−15 Tu2 (2.32)
38
39 In step 3, we apply the nutation to convert the mean sidereal time to apparent sidereal
40 time,
41
42 GAST = GMST + ∆ψ cos ε + 0 .00264 sin Ω + 0 .000063 sin 2Ω (2.33)
43
44 The true celestial coordinate system (X), whose third axis coincides with instan-
45 taneous rotation axis and X and Y axes span true celestial equator, follows from
1 X = R3 (−GAST)R1 (yp )R2 (xp )x (2.34)

2

3 The intermediary coordinate system (x),
4

5 x = R1 (yp )R2 (xp )x (2.35)
6
7
is not completely crust-fixed, because the third axis moves with polar motion. (x) is
8 sometimes referred to as the instantaneous terrestrial coordinate system.
9 Using (X), the apparent right ascension and declination are computed from the
10 expression
11
12 Y
13 α = tan−1 (2.36)
X
14 [25
15 −1 Z
δ = tan √ (2.37)
16 X2 + Y 2
17 Lin
18 with 0° ≤ α < 360°. Applying (2.36) and (2.37) to (x) gives the spherical longitude λ —
19 and latitude φ, respectively. Whereas the zero right ascension is at the vernal equinox 14
20 and zero longitude is at the reference meridian, both increase counterclockwise when ——
21 viewed from the third axis. No
22 PgE
23
24 2.2.2 Time Systems
25 [25
26 The GAST relates the terrestrial and celestial reference frames, as far as the earth’s
27 daily rotation is concerned, as is seen from (2.34). Twenty-four hours of GAST
28 represents the time for two consecutive transits of the same meridian over the vernal
29 equinox (the direction of the X axis). Unfortunately, these “twenty-four” hours are
30 not suitable to define a constant time interval. As seen from (2.33), GAST depends
31 on the nutation in longitude, ∆ψ, which in turn is a function of time according to
32 (2.18). The vernal equinox reference direction moves along the celestial equator by
33 the time-varying amount ∆ψ cos ε. In addition, the earth’s daily rotation rate slows
34 down or speeds up. This rate variation can affect the length of day by about 1 ms,
35 corresponding to a length of 4.5 m on the equator.
36 Let us assume that a geodetic space technique is available for which the mathe-
37 matical function between observations and parameters is known,
38
39 = f X, x, GAST, xp , yp (2.38)
40
41 While we do not go into the details of such solutions, one can readily imagine different
42 types of solutions depending on which parameters are unknown and the type of
43 observations available. For simplicity, let X (space object) and x (observing station)
44 be known. Then, given sufficient observational strength, it is conceptually possible to
45 solve (2.38) for GAST, and polar motion xp , and yp , given . We could then compute
1 GMST from (2.33) and substitute it in (2.31). Finally, assuming that the observations
2 were taken at known UTC epochs, Expression (2.31) can be solved for the correction
3
4 ∆UT1 = UT1 − UTC (2.39)
5
6 UTC is related to TAI as established by atomic clocks. Briefly, at the 13th General
7 Conference of Weights and Measures (CGPM) in Paris in 1967, the definition of
8 the atomic second, also called the international system (SI) second, was defined as
9 the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the state-
10 energy transition between two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium-133
11 atom. This definition made the atomic second agree with the length of the ephemeris
12 time (ET) second, to the extent that measurement allowed. ET was the most stable
13 time available around 1960 but is no longer in use. ET was derived from orbital
14 positions of the earth around the sun. Its second was defined as a fraction of the [26
15 year 1900. Because of the complicated gravitational interactions between the earth
16 and the moon, potential loss of energy due to tidal frictions, etc., the realization
17 of ET was difficult. Its stability eventually did not meet the demands of emerging Lin
18 measurement capabilities. It served as an interim time system. Prior to ET, time was —
19 defined in terms of the earth rotation, the so-called earth rotational time scales such 0.0
20 as GMST. The rotational time scales were even less constant because of the earth’s ——
21 rotational variations. It takes a good cesium clock 20 to 30 million years to gain or Nor
22 lose one second. Under the same environmental conditions, atomic transitions are PgE
23 identical from atom to atom and do not change their properties. Clocks based on
24 such transitions should generate the same time. Bergquist et al. (2001) offer up-to-
25 date insight on modern atomic clocks. [26
26 TAI is based on the SI second; its epoch is such that ET − TAI = 32s .184 on
27 January 1, 1977. TAI is related to state transitions of atoms and not to the rotation
28 of the earth. Even though atoms are suitable to define an extremely constant time
29 scale, it could in principle happen that in the distant future we would have noon, i.e.,
30 lunchtime at midnight TAI. The hybrid time scale UTC avoids a possible divergence
31 by using the SI second but changing the epoch labeling such that
32
33 |∆UT1| < 0s .9 (2.40)
34
35 UTC is the time that is broadcast on TV, on radio, and by other time services.
36 To visualize the mean universal time (UT1), consider a mean (mathematical) earth
37 traveling in the ecliptic in a circular orbit at constant angular rate. Let this mean
38 earth begin its motion at the time when the true earth is in the direction of the vernal
39 equinox. At each consecutive annual rotation, the mean earth and the true earth should
40 arrive at the vernal equinox at the same time. One often adopts the view as seen
41 from the center of the earth. In that case, one speaks about a mean sun moving around
42 the earth at a constant rate. Twenty-four hours of UT1, i.e., a mean solar day, equals
43 the time it takes for two consecutive transits of the sun over a meridian of the mean
44 earth, or equivalently, two consecutive transits of the mean sun when viewed from the
45 earth-fixed reference frame. If we consider the actual earth or sun, as opposed to their
1 mean motions, we speak of true solar time. Astronomers call the difference between
2 mean time and true time the equation of time. Geometrically, it represents the angle
3 between the true earth and the mean earth as viewed from the sun. Simple graphics
4 shows that the mean solar day is longer than the sidereal day by about 24h /365 ≈ 4m .
5 The accurate ratio of universal day over sidereal day is given in (2.32). The condition
6 (2.40) underscores the compromising role of UTC. The precise time and frequency
7 users get the most uniform and accurate time available, and yet the epoch closely
8 adjusts to the rotational behavior of the earth.
9 Let’s consider Equation (2.31) once again. If the earth were to rotate with constant
10 speed, and if the SI second would be absolutely equal to the theoretical value of the
11 ET (or UT1) second, then the difference UT1−UTC in (2.31) would be constant. Any
12 variation in this difference is therefore attributable to variations in the earth’s rotation
13 and the definition of the SI second. UTC is adjusted in steps of a full second (leap
14 second) if the difference (2.40) exceeds the specified limit. Adjustments are made on [27
15 either June 30 or December 31, if a change is warranted. The IERS determines the
16 need for a leap second and announces any forthcoming step adjustment. Figure 2.6
17 shows the history of leap second adjustments. The trend seen in Figure 2.6 could be re- Lin
18 moved by changing the definition of the SI second, i.e., adopting a different number of —
19 energy state transitions. However, changing the definition of a fundamental constant 0.0
20 has many implications (Mohr and Taylor, 2001). Figure 2.7 shows the total variation ——
21 of UT1 − UTC. This includes the seasonal variations (annual and semiannual), as No
22 well as variations due to zonal tides. Similarly to the effect on the nutations and solid * PgE
23 earth tides, the solar and lunar gravitational attractions cause periodic variations in
24
25 [27
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 Figure 2.6 Leap second adjustments. (Data from IERS (2002).)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 Figure 2.7 UT1-UTC variation during 1999. (Data from 1999 IERS Annual Report.)
13
14 [28
15 the earth’s rotation. These forced variations are computable. The currently adopted
16 model includes terms with periods up to thirty-five days.
17 The five corrections, UT1 − UTC, polar motion xp , and yp , and the celestial pole Lin
18 offsets dψ and dε, are required to transform the terrestrial reference frame to the —
19 celestial one and vice versa. The IERS monitors and publishes these values. They 0.9
20 are the earth orientation parameters (EOP). Modern space techniques allow these ——
21 parameters to be determined with centimeter accuracy. Sho
22 Various laboratories and agencies operate several atomic clocks and produce their PgE
23 own independent atomic time. For example, the time scale of the U.S. Naval Observa-
24 tory is called UTC(USNO), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology
25 (NIST) produces UTC(NIST). The IERS, which uses input from 200 plus clocks from [28
26 sixty plus different laboratories scattered around the world, computes TAI. UTC and
27 TAI differ by the integer leap seconds. TAI is not adjusted, but UTC is adjusted for
28 leap seconds.
29 The GPS satellites follow GPS time (GPST). This time scale is steered to be within
30 one microsecond of UTC(USNO). The initial epoch of GPST is 0h UTC January 6,
31 1980. Since that epoch, GPST has not been adjusted to account for leap seconds. It
32 follows that GPST − TAI = −19s , i.e., equal to the offset of TAI and UTC at the
33 initial GPST epoch. Each satellite carries several atomic clocks, including the spare
34 clock. These clocks establish the space vehicle time. The control center synchronizes
35 the clocks of the various space vehicles to GPST.
36 The Julian day date (JD) used in (2.29) is but a convenient continuous counter
37 of mean solar days from the beginning of the year 4713 b.c. By tradition, the Julian
38 day date begins at Greenwich noon, i.e., 12h UT1. As such, the JD has nothing to
39 do with the Julian calendar, which was created by Julius Caesar. It provided for
40 the leap year rule that declared a leap year of 366 days if the year’s numerical
41 designation is divisible by 4. This rule was later supplemented in the Gregorian
42 calendar by specifying that the centuries that are not divisible by 400 are not leap
43 years. Accordingly, the year 2000 was a leap year but the year 2100 will not be. The
44 Gregorian calendar reform also included that the day following October 4 (Julian
45
DATUM 29
1 calendar), 1582, was labeled October 15 (Gregorian calendar). The proceedings of

2 the conference to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the Gregorian calendar
3 (Coyne et al., 1983) give background information on the Gregorian calendar. The
4 astronomic justification for the leap year rules stems from the fact that the tropical
5 year consists of 365d .24219879 mean solar days. The tropical year equals the time it
6 take the mean (fictitious) sun to make two consecutive passages over the mean vernal
7 equinox.
8
9
10 2.3 DATUM
11
12 The complete definition of a geodetic datum includes the size and shape of the ellip-
13 soid, its location and orientation, and its relation to the geoid by means of geoid un-
14 dulations and deflection of the vertical. The datum currently used in the United States [29
15 is NAD83, which was developed by the NGS (NGS, 2002). In the discussion below
16 we briefly introduce the geoid and the ellipsoid. A discussion of geoid undulations
17 and deflection of the vertical follows, with emphasis on how to use these elements to Lin
18 reduce observations to the ellipsoidal normal and the geodetic horizon. Finally, the 3D
—
19 geodetic model is introduced as a general and unified model that not only deals with
observations in all three dimensions, but is also mathematically the simplest of all.
-4
20 ——
21 Sho
22 2.3.1 Geoid * PgE
23
24 The geoid is a fundamental physical reference surface to which all observations refer
25 if they depend on gravity. Because its shape is a result of the mass distribution inside [29
26 the earth, the geoid is not only of interest to the measurement specialist but also to
27 scientists who study the interior of the earth. Consider two point masses m1 and m2
28 separated by a distance s. According to Newton’s law of gravitation, they attract each
29 other with the force
30 k 2 m1 m2
31 F = (2.41)
s2
32
33 where k 2 is the universal gravitational constant. The attraction between the point
34 masses is symmetric and opposite in direction. As a matter of convenience, we
35 consider one mass to be the “attracting” mass and the other to be the “attracted” mass.
36 Furthermore, we assign to the attracted mass the unit mass (m2 = 1) and denote the
37 attracting mass with m. The force equation then becomes
38
39 k2 m
40 F = (2.42)
s2
41
42 and we speak about the force between an attracting mass and a unit mass being at-
43 tracted. Introducing an arbitrary coordinate system, as seen in Figure 2.8, we decom-
44 pose the force vector into Cartesian components. Thus,
45
1 P(x,y,z)
z
2 -F
3 z-
4
y
5

6
7 y-
8
9
10 P() x -
11
12
13 x
14 [30
Figure 2.8 Components of the gravity vector.
15
16
17   Lin
x−ξ
18   —
     s 
19 Fx cos α   0.8
20     k2 m 

y−η
 ——
F =  Fy  = −F  cos β  = − 2  (2.43)
21 s  s   Nor
22 Fz cos γ  z−ζ 
  * PgE
23 s
24
25 [30
where
26
27
s= (x − ξ)2 + (y − η)2 + (z − ζ)2 (2.44)
28
29
The negative sign in the decomposition indicates the convention that the force vector
30
points from the attracted mass toward the attracting mass. The coordinates (x, y, z)
31
identify the location of the attracted mass in the specified coordinate system, and
32
(ξ, η, ζ) denote the location of the attracting mass. The expression
33
34 k2 m
35 V = (2.45)
s
36
37 is called the potential of gravitation. It is a measure of the amount of work required to
38 transport the unit mass from its initial position, a distance s from the attracting mass,
39 to infinity. Integrating the force equation (2.42) gives
40 ∞ ∞ 2
41 k m k 2 m ∞ k2 m
V = F ds = ds = − = (2.46)
42 s s s 2 s s s
43
44 In vector notation, the potential of gravitation V and the gravitational force vector F
45 are related by
DATUM 31

1 ∂V ∂ 1 k 2 m ∂s k2 m x − ξ
2 Fx = = k2 m =− 2 =− 2 (2.47)
∂x ∂x s s ∂x s s
3
4 Similar expressions can be written for Fy and Fz . Thus, the gradient V is
5
T
6 ∂V ∂V ∂V T
7 grad V ≡ = Fx Fy Fz (2.48)
∂x ∂y ∂z
8
9 From (2.45) it is apparent that the gravitational potential is a function only of the
10 separation of the masses and is independent of any coordinate system used to de-
11 scribe the position of the attracting mass and the direction of the force vector F. The
12 gravitational potential, however, completely characterizes the gravitational force at
13 any point by use of (2.48).
14 Because the potential is a scalar, the potential at a point is the sum of the individual [31
15 potentials,
16
k 2 mi Lin
17 V = Vi = (2.49)
18 si —
19 1.
20 Considering a solid body M rather than individual masses, a volume integral replaces ——
21 the discrete summation over the body, No
22
dm ρ dv * PgE
23 V (x, y, z) = k 2 = k2 (2.50)
24 M s v s
25 where ρ denotes a density that varies throughout the body and v denotes the mass [31
26 volume.
27 When deriving (2.50), we assumed that the body is at rest. In the case of the earth,
28 we must consider the earth’s rotation. Let the vector f denote the centrifugal force
29 acting on the unit mass. If the angular velocity of the earth’s rotation is ω, then the
30 centrifugal force vector can be written
31
32 T
f = ω2 p = ω2 x ω2 y 0 (2.51)
33
34
The centrifugal force acts parallel to the equatorial plane and is directed away from
35
the axis of rotation. The vector p is the distance from the rotation axis. Using the
36
definition of the potential and having the z axis coincide with the rotation axis, we
37
obtain the centrifugal potential:
38
39 1 2 2
40 Φ= ω x + y2 (2.52)
2
41
42 Equation (2.52) can be verified by taking the gradient to get (2.51). Note again that
43 the centrifugal potential is a function only of the distance from the rotation axis and
44 is not affected by a particular coordinate system definition. The potential of gravity
45 W is the sum of the gravitational and centrifugal potentials:

1 ρ dv 1
2 W (x, y, z) = V + Φ = k 2 + ω2 x 2 + y 2 (2.53)
v s 2
3
4 The gravity force vector g is the gradient of the gravity potential,
5 T
6 ∂W ∂W ∂W
g(x, y, z) = grad W = (2.54)
7 ∂x ∂y ∂z
8
9 and represents the total force acting at a point as a result of the gravitational and cen-
10 trifugal forces. The magnitude g = g is called gravity. It is traditionally measured
11 in units of gals where 1 gal = 1 cm/sec2 . The gravity increases as one moves from the
12 equator to the poles because of the decrease in centrifugal force. Approximate values
13 for gravity are gequator ∼
= 978 gal and gpoles ∼
= 983 gal. The units of gravity are those
14 of acceleration, implying the equivalence of force per unit mass and acceleration. Be- [32
15 cause of this, the gravity vector g is often termed gravity acceleration. The direction
16 of g at a point and the direction of the plumb line or the vertical are the same.
17 Surfaces on which W (x, y, z) is a constant are called equipotential surfaces, or Lin
18 level surfaces. These surfaces can principally be determined by evaluating (2.53) —
19 if the density distribution and angular velocity are known. Of course, the density 1.4
20 distribution of the earth is not precisely known. Physical geodesy deals with theories ——
21 that allow estimation of the equipotential surface without explicit knowledge of the Lon
22 density distribution. The geoid is defined to be a specific equipotential surface having PgE
23 gravity potential
24
25 W (x, y, z) = W0 (2.55) [32
26
27 In practice this equipotential surface is chosen such that on the average it coincides
28 with the global ocean surface. This is a purely arbitrary specification chosen for ease
29 of the physical interpretation. The geoid is per definition an equipotential surface, not
30 some ideal ocean surface.
31 There is an important relationship between the direction of the gravity force and
32 equipotential surfaces, demonstrated by Figure 2.9. The total differential of the grav-
33 ity potential at a point is
34
∂W ∂W ∂W
35 dW = dx + dy + dz
36 ∂x ∂y ∂z (2.56)
37 T
= grad W · dx = g · dx
38
39 The quantity dW is the change in potential between two differentially separated
40 points P (x, y, z) and P (x + dx, y + dy, z + dz). If the vector, dx is chosen such
41 that P and P occupy the same equipotential surface, then dW = 0 and
42
43 g · dx = 0 (2.57)
44
45 Expression (2.57) implies that the direction of the gravity force vector at a point is
normal or perpendicular to the equipotential surface passing through the point.
DATUM 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 [33
15
16
17 Lin
18 —
Figure 2.9 Equipotential surfaces and the gravity force vector.
19 -2
20 ——
The shapes of equipotential surfaces, which are related to the mass distribution
21 Lon
within the earth through (2.53), have no simple analytic expressions. The plumb
22 PgE
lines are normal to the equipotential surfaces and are space curves with finite radii
23
of curvature and torsion. The distance along a plumb line from the geoid to a point
24
is called the orthometric height, H . The orthometric height is often misidentified as
25 [33
the “height above sea level.” Possibly, confusion stems from the specification that the
26
geoid closely approximates the global ocean surface.
27
Consider a differential line element dx along the plumb line, dx = dH . By
28
noting that H is reckoned positive upward and g points downward, we can rewrite
29
(2.56) as
30
31 dW = g · dx
32 (2.58)
= g dH cos(g, dx) = g dH cos(180°) = −g dH
33
34 This expression relates the change in potential to a change in the orthometric height.
35 This equation is central in the development of the theory of geometric leveling.
36 Writing (2.58) as
37
dW
38 g=− (2.59)
39 dH
40 it is obvious that the gravity g cannot be constant on the same equipotential surface
41 because the equipotential surfaces are neither regular nor concentric with respect to
42 the center of mass of the earth. This is illustrated in Figure 2.10, which shows two
43 differentially separate equipotential surfaces. It is observed that
44
dW dW
45 g1 = − = g2 = − (2.60)
dH1 dH2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Figure 2.10 Gravity on the equipotential surface.
10
11
12
13
14 The astronomic latitude, longitude, and azimuth refer to the plumb line at the [34
15 observing station. Figure 2.11 shows an equipotential surface through a surface point
16 P and the instantaneous rotation axis and equator. The astronomic normal at point
17 P , also called the local vertical, is identical to the direction of the gravity force at Lin
18 that point, which in turn is tangent to the plumb line. The astronomic latitude Φ at
—
19 P is the angle subtended on the instantaneous equator by the astronomic normal.
The astronomic normal and the parallel line to the instantaneous rotation axis span
0.1
20 ——
21 the astronomic meridian plane at point P . Note that the instantaneous rotation axis Nor
22 and the astronomic normal may or may not intersect. The astronomic longitude Λ
PgE
23 is the angle subtended in the instantaneous equatorial plane between this astronomic
24 meridian and a reference meridian, nominally the Greenwich meridian.
25 The geopotential number C is simply the algebraic difference between the poten- [34
26 tials at the geoid and point P ,
27
28 C = W0 − W (2.61)
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 Figure 2.11 Astronomic latitude.
DATUM 35
1 From (2.58) it follows that

2 H
3 W = W0 − g dH (2.62)
4 0
5
6 or
7 H
8 C = W0 − W = g dH (2.63)
9 0
10 or
11
W C
12 dW dC
13 H =− = (2.64)
W0 g 0 g
14 [35
15 Equation (2.63) shows how combining gravity observations and leveling yields po-
16 tential differences. The increment dH is obtained from spirit leveling, and the gravity
17 g is measured along the leveling path. Consider a leveling loop as an example. Be- Lin
18 cause one returns to the same point when leveling a loop, i.e., one returns to the same —
19 equipotential surface, (2.63) implies that the integral (or the sum) of the products g dH 4.9
20 adds up to zero. Because g varies along the loop, the sum over the leveled differences ——
21 dH does not necessarily add up to zero. No
22 The difference between the orthometric heights and the leveled heights is called the PgE
23 orthometric correction. Expressions for computing the orthometric correction from
24 gravity are available in the specialized geodetic literature. An excellent introduction
25 to height systems is Heiskanen and Moritz (1967, Chapter 4). Guidelines for accurate [35
26 leveling are available from the NGS (Schomaker and Berry, 1981).
27
28
29 2.3.2 Ellipsoid of Revolution
30
The ellipsoid of revolution, called here simply the ellipsoid, is a relatively simple
31
mathematical figure that closely approximates the actual geoid. When using an ellip-
32
soid for geodetic purposes, we need to specify its shape, location, and orientation with
33
respect to the earth. The size and shape of the ellipsoid is defined by two parameters:
34
the semimajor axis a and the flattening f . The flattening is related to the semiminor
35
axis b by
36
37 a−b
38 f = (2.65)
a
39
40 Appendix B contains the details of the mathematics of the ellipsoid and common val-
41 ues for a and b. The orientation and location of the ellipsoid often depends on when
42 and how it was established. In the presatellite era, the goal often was to establish a
43 local ellipsoid that best fitted the geoid in a well-defined region, i.e., the border of
44 a nation-state. The third axis, of course, always pointed toward the North Pole and
45 the first axis in the direction of the Greenwich meridian. Using local ellipsoids as
1 a reference does have the advantage that some of the reductions (geoid undulation,
2 deflection of the vertical) can possibly be neglected, which is an important considera-
3 tion when the geoid is not known accurately. With today’s advanced geodetic satellite
4 techniques, in particular GPS, and accurate knowledge of the geoid, one prefers so-
5 called global ellipsoids that fit the geoid globally (whose center of figure is at the
6 center of mass, and whose axes coincide with the directions of the ITRF). The rela-
7 tionship between the Cartesian coordinates (x) = (x, y, z) and the geodetic coordi-
8 nates (ϕ) = (ϕ, λ, h) is according to B.9 to B.11,
9
10 x = (N + h) cos ϕ cos λ (2.66)
11
12 y = (N + h) cos ϕ sin λ (2.67)
13 z = [N (1 − e2 ) + h] sin ϕ (2.68)
14 [36
15 where the auxiliary quantities N and e are
16
17 a Lin
N= (2.69)
18 1− e2 2
sin ϕ —
19 6.0
20 ——
e2 = 2f − f 2 (2.70)
21 Lon
22 PgE
The transformation from (x) to (ϕ) is given in Appendix B. It is typically performed
23
iteratively.
24
25 The expression (2.3) can be applied to transform between a local datum and a [36
26 geocentric datum provided the transformation parameters are known. It is best to
27 contact the responsible agency for the latest set of parameters because the transforma-
28 tion parameters are continuously updated, particularly for older datums. For example,
29 the large collection that includes probably all known datums is available through the
30 National Imagery and Mapping Agency, NIMA (2002). The NGS makes the trans-
31 formation software regarding the NAD83 available at NGS (2002). Both agencies
32 provide software that in some cases considers the geodetic network distortions and
33 crustal motions to achieve a more accurate transformation. A difficulty in using (2.3)
34 is that in the past, one dealt with a horizontal and vertical datum separately and that
35 the respective connecting elements, the geoid undulations, might not be available.
36
37
2.3.3 Geoid Undulations and Deflections of the Vertical
38
39 One approach to estimate the geoid undulation is by measuring gravity or gravity
40 gradients at the surface of the earth. At least in principle, any observable that is a
41 function of the gravity field is suitable for determining the geoid. Low-earth orbiting
42 satellites (LEOs) have successfully been used to determine the large structure of the
43 geoid. Satellite-to-satellite tracking is being used to determine the temporal variations
44 of the gravity field, and thus the geoid. The reader may want to check the results
45 of the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission launched in
early 2002.
DATUM 37
1 The gravity field or functions of the gravity field are typically expressed in terms of
2 spherical harmonic expansions. For example, the expression for the geoid undulation
3 N is (Lemoine et al., 1998, pp. 5–11),
4
GM a n
∞ n
5 N= C̄nm cos mλ + S̄nm sin mλ P̄nm (cos θ) (2.71)
6 γr n=2 r m=0
7
8 In this equation the following notation is used:
9
10 N Geoid undulation. There should not be cause for confusion using
11 the same symbol for the geoid undulation (2.71) and the radius of
12 curvature of the prime vertical (2.69); both notations are traditional in
13 the geodetic literature.
14 ϕ, λ Latitude and longitude of station where the undulation is computed. [37
15 C̄nm , S̄nm Normalized spherical harmonic coefficients (geopotential coefficients),
16 of degree n and order m. A set degree and order 360 is currently
17 published by the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC, 2002). In this Lin
18 notation, C̄nm denotes the difference between the spherical harmonics —
19 of the geopotential and the normal gravity field harmonics. 3.8
20 ——
P̄nm (cos θ) Associated Legendre functions. θ = 90 − ϕ is the colatitude.
21 Lon
22 r Geocentric distance of the station.
* PgE
23 GM Product of the gravitational constant and the mass of the earth. GM
24 is identical to k 2 M used elsewhere in this book. Unfortunately, the
25 symbolism is not unique in the literature. We retain the symbols [37
26 typically used within the respective context.
27 γ Normal gravity. Details are given below.
28
a Semimajor axis of the ellipsoid.
29
30 Geoid undulation computed from an expression like (2.71) refers to a geocentric
31 ellipsoid with semimajor axis a. The coefficients C̄nm are computationally adjusted
32 to the specific flattening of the reference ellipsoid. The summation starts with n = 2.
33 Figure 2.12 shows a map of a global geoid.
34 There is a simple mathematical relationship between the geoid undulation and the
35 deflection of the vertical. The deflections of the vertical are related to the undulations
36
as follows (Heiskanen and Moritz, 1967, p. 112):
37
38 1 ∂N
ξ=− (2.72)
39 r ∂θ
40 1 ∂N
41 η=− (2.73)
r sin θ ∂λ
42
Differentiating (2.71) gives
43
GM a n
44 ∞ n
d P̄nm (cos θ)
45 ξ=− C̄nm cos mλ + S̄nm sin mλ (2.74)
γr 2 n=2 r m=0 dθ
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
38
0° 30° 60° 90° 120° 150° 180° 210° 240° 270° 300° 330° 360°
20 90°
0 10
10
-10
-10 -10
60°
-20
-4
0
10
60
-30
10
-20
0
-50 20
20
-40
30
-30 0
30°
-30
-20
-50
-40
30
-30
0
0
-9 40
-40
-40
60 0°
-1
0
-8
50 0
-50
0
-70 70
-6 0
10
-1
30
30
10
-30°
20
-10
10 -20
40
30 -30 -30 -60°
20 -40 20
-50
-60
0
-20
-90°
0° 30° 60° 90° 120° 150° 180° 210° 240° 270° 300° 330° 360°
Figure 2.12 Geoid undulations of the EGM96 gravity field model computed relative to the GRS80 ellipsoid. The units are in meters. (Courtesy of
German Geodetic Research Institute [DGFI], Munich.) [38
[38
Lin
Nor
* PgE
—
1.8
——
DATUM 39
GM a n
1 ∞ n
2 η=− 2 m −C̄nm sin mλ + S̄nm cos mλ P̄nm (cos θ) (2.75)

γr sin θ n=2 r m=0
3
4
Geoid and deflection of the vertical maps specifically adjusted to the NAD83 datum
5
can be viewed at NGS (2002). NGS also provides software for convenient computa-
6
tion of these gravity functions.
7
The ellipsoid of revolution provides a simple model for the geometric shape of the
8
9 earth. It is the reference for geometric computations in two and three dimensions.
10 Assigning a gravitational field that approximates the actual gravitational field of
11 the earth extends the functionality of the ellipsoid. Merely a few specifications are
12 needed to fix the gravity and potential of the ellipsoid of revolution. We need an
13 appropriate mass for the ellipsoid and assume that the ellipsoid rotates with the earth.
14 Furthermore, by means of mathematical conditions, the surface of the ellipsoid is [39
15 defined to be an equipotential surface of its own gravity field. Therefore, the plumb
16 lines of this gravity field intersect the ellipsoid perpendicularly. Because of this
17 property, this gravity field is called the normal gravity field, and the ellipsoid itself is Lin
18 sometimes referred to as the level ellipsoid.
—
19 It can be shown that the normal gravity potential U is completely specified by four
* 19
20 defining constants, which are symbolically expressed by ——
21 No
22 U = f (a, J2 , GM, ω) (2.76)
* PgE
23
24 In addition to a and GM, which have already been introduced above, we need the
25 dynamical form factor J2 and the angular velocity of the earth ω. The dynamic [39
26 form factor is a function of the principal moments of inertia of the earth (polar
27 and equatorial moment of inertia) and is functionally related to the flattening of
28 the ellipsoid. One important definition of the four constants in (2.76) comprises the
29 Geodetic Reference System of 1980 (GRS80). The defining constants are listed in
30 Table 2.3. A full documentation on this reference system is available in Moritz (1984).
31 The normal gravitational potential does not depend on the longitude and is given
32 by a series of zonal spherical harmonics
33
34
35
36
TABLE 2.3 Constants for GRS80
37
38 Defining Constants Derived Constants
39 a = 6378138 m b = 6356752.3141 m
40
GM = 3986005 × 108 m3 /s2 1/f = 298.257222101
41
42 J2 = 108263 × 10−8 m = 0.00344978600308
43 ω = 7292115 × 10−11 rad/s γe = 9.7803267715 m/s2
44
γp = 9.8321863685 m/s2
45

1 GM ∞ a 2n
2 V = 1− J2n P2n (cos θ) (2.77)
r r
3 n=1
4
5 Note that the subscript 2n is to be read “2 times n.” P2n denotes Legendre polyno-
6 mials. The coefficients J2n are a function of J2 that can be readily computed. Sev-
7 eral useful expressions can be derived from (2.77). For example, the normal gravity,
8 defined as the magnitude of the gradient of the normal gravity field (normal gravita-
9 tional potential plus centrifugal potential), is given by Somigliana’s closed formula
10 (Heiskanen and Moritz, 1967, p. 70):
11
aγe cos2 ϕ + bγp sin2 ϕ
12 γ= (2.78)
13 a 2 cos2 ϕ + b2 sin2 ϕ
14 [40
15 The normal gravity at height h above the ellipsoid is given by (Heiskanen and Moritz,
16 1967, p. 70)
17 Lin
2γe 5 3γ
18 γh − γ = − 1 + f + m + −3f + m sin ϕ h + 2e h22
(2.79) —
19 a 2 a
6.2
20 ——
21 Equations (2.78) and (2.79) are often useful approximations of the actual gravity. The
Nor
22 value for the auxiliary quantity m in (2.79) is given in Table 2.3. The normal gravity
values for the poles and the equator, γp and γe are also listed in Table 2.3. PgE
23
24
25 2.3.4 Reductions to the Ellipsoid [40
26
27 The relationship between the ellipsoidal height h, the orthometric height H , and the
28 geoid undulation is
29
h=H +N (2.80)
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 Figure 2.13 Orthometric versus ellipsoidal heights.
DATUM 41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14 [41
15
16
17 Lin
18 —
19 0.9
20 ——
21 No
22 PgE
23 Figure 2.14 Astronomic and ellipsoidal normal on a topocentric sphere of direction.
24 The astronomic normal is perpendicular to the equipotential surface at P1 . The ellipsoidal
25 normal passes through P1 . [41
26
27 where N is the geoid undulation with respect to the specific ellipsoid. See Figure
28 2.13.
29 Parallelism of the semiminor axis of the ellipsoid and the direction of the CTP
30 leads to important relationships between the reduced astronomic quantities (ΦCTP ,
31 ΛCTP , ACTP ) and the corresponding ellipsoidal or geodetic quantities (ϕ, λ, α). The
32 geometric relationships are shown in Figures 2.14 and 2.15. The following symbols
33 are used:
34
35 Za Astronomic zenith (= intersection of local vertical with the sphere
36 direction)
37 CTP Position of the conventional terrestrial pole
38 Ze Ellipsoidal zenith (= intersection of the ellipsoidal normal through
39 P1 with the sphere of direction)
40 T Target point to which the azimuth is measured
41 ACTP Reduced astronomic azimuth
42 ΦCTP , ΛCTP Reduced astronomic latitude and longitude
43 ϑ Observed zenith angle
44 ϕ, λ Ellipsoidal (geodetic) latitude and longitude
45 α Ellipsoidal (geodetic) azimuth between two normal planes
1 ϑ Ellipsoidal (geodetic) zenith angle

2 θ Total deflection of the vertical (not colatitude)
3 ε Deflection of the vertical in the direction of azimuth
4 ξ, η Deflection of the vertical components along the meridian and the
5 prime vertical
6
7 By applying spherical trigonometry to the various triangles in Figure 2.15, we can
8 eventually derive the following relations:
9
10 ACTP − α = (ΛCTP − λ) sin ϕ + (ξ sin α − η cos α) cot ϑ (2.81)
11
12 ξ = ΦCTP − ϕ (2.82)
13
η = (ΛCTP − λ) cos ϕ (2.83)
14 [42

15 ϑ = ϑ + ξ cos α + η sin α (2.84)
16
17 The derivations of these classical equations can be found in most of the geode- Lin
18 tic literature, e.g., Heiskanen and Moritz (1967, p. 186). They are also given in —
19 Leick (2002). Equation (2.81) is the Laplace equation. It relates the reduced as- 0.8
20 tronomic azimuth and the geodetic azimuth of the normal section containing the ——
21 target point. Equations (2.82) and (2.83) define the deflection of the vertical com- Sho
22 ponents. The deflection of the vertical is simply the angle between the directions PgE
23 of the plumb line and the ellipsoidal normal at the same point. By convention, the
24 deflection of the vertical is decomposed into two components, one lying in the merid-
25 ian and one lying in the prime vertical, or orthogonal to the meridian. The deflec- [42
26 tion components depend directly on the shape of the geoid in the region. Because
27 the deflections of the vertical are merely another manifestation of the irregularity of
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44 Figure 2.15 Deflection of the vertical components.
45
DATUM 43
1 the gravity field or the geoid, they are mathematically related to the geoid undula-
2 tion. Equation (2.84) relates the ellipsoidal and observed zenith angle (refraction not
3 considered).
4 Equations (2.81) to (2.83) can be used to correct the reduced astronomic latitude,
5 longitude, and azimuth and thus to obtain the ellipsoidal latitude, longitude, and az-
6 imuth. It is important to note that the reduction of a horizontal angle due to deflection
7 of the vertical is obtained from the difference of (2.81) as applied to both legs of the
8 angle. If the zenith angle to the endpoints of both legs is close to 90°, then the correc-
9 tions are small and can possibly be neglected. Historically, Equation (2.81) was used
10 as a condition between the reduced astronomic azimuth and the computed geodetic
11 azimuth to control systematic errors. This can best be accomplished now with GPS.
12 However, if surveyors were to check the orientation of a GPS vector with the as-
13 tronomic azimuth from the sun or polaris, they must expect a discrepancy indicated
14 by (2.81). [43
15 Equations (2.81) to (2.83) also show how to specify a local ellipsoid that is tangent
16 to the geoid at some centrally located station called the initial point, and whose
17 semiminor axis is still parallel to the CTP. If we specify that at the initial point the Lin
18 reduced astronomic latitude, longitude, and azimuth equal the ellipsoidal latitude, —
19 longitude, and azimuth, respectively, then we ensure parallelism of the semimajor axis 1.0
20 and the direction of the CTP; the geoid normal and the ellipsoidal normal coincide ——
21 at that initial point. If, in addition, we set the undulation to zero, then the ellipsoid Sho
22 touches the geoid tangentially at the initial point. Thus the local ellipsoid will have PgE
23 at the initial point:
24
25 ϕ = ΦCTP (2.85) [43
26
27 λ = ΛCTP (2.86)
28 α = ACTP (2.87)
29
30 N =0 (2.88)
31
32 Other possibilities for specifying a local ellipsoid exist.
33 The local ellipsoid can serve as a convenient computation reference for least-
34 squares adjustments of networks typically encountered in local and regional surveys.
35 In these cases, it is not at all necessary to determine the size and shape of a best-fitting
36 local ellipsoid. It is sufficient to adopt the size and shape of any of the currently valid
37 geocentric ellipsoids. Because the deflections of the vertical will be small in the region
38 around the initial point, they can often be neglected completely. This is especially true
39 for the reduction of angles. The local ellipsoid is even more useful than it appears
40 at first sight. So long as typical observations, such as horizontal directions, angles,
41 and slant distances, are adjusted, the accurate position of the initial point in (2.85)
42 and (2.86) is not needed. In fact, if the (local) undulation variation is negligible, the
43 coordinate values for the position of the initial point are arbitrary. The same is true
44 for the azimuth condition (2.87). These simplifications make it attractive to use an
45
1 ellipsoid as a reference for the adjustment of even the smallest survey, thus providing
2 a unified adjustment approach for surveys of large and small areas.
3
4
2.3.5 The 3D Geodetic Model
5
6 Once the angular observations have been corrected for the deflection of the vertical, it
7 is a simple matter to develop the mathematics for the 3D geodetic model. The reduced
8 observations, i.e., the observables of the 3D geodetic model, are the geodetic azimuth
9 α, the geodetic horizontal angle δ, the geodetic vertical angle β (or the geodetic zenith
10 angle ϑ), and the slant distance s. Geometrically speaking, these observables refer to
11 the geodetic horizon and the ellipsoidal normal. The reduced horizontal angle is an
12 angle between two normal planes, defined by the target points and the ellipsoidal
13 normal at the observing stations. The geodetic vertical angle is the angle between the
14 geodetic horizon and the line of sight to the targets. [44
15 We assume that the vertical angle has been corrected for atmospheric refraction.
16 The model can be readily extended to include refraction parameters if needed. Thanks
17 to the availability of GPS, we no longer depend on vertical angle observations to Lin
18 support the vertical dimension, except possibly for applications that call for first- —
19 order leveling accuracy. The primary purpose of vertical angles in most cases is to 1.1
20 support the vertical dimension when adjusting slant distances (because slant distances ——
21 contribute primarily horizontal information, at least in flat terrain). Nor
22 Figure 2.16 shows the local geodetic coordinate system (w) = (n, e, u), which PgE
23 plays a central role in the development of the mathematical model. The axes n and e
24 span the local geodetic horizon (plane perpendicular to the ellipsoidal normal through
25 the point P1 on the surface of the earth). The n axis points north, the e axis points east, [44
26 and the u axis coincides with the ellipsoidal normal (with the positive end outward
27 of the ellipsoid). The spatial orientation of the local geodetic coordinate system is
28 completely specified by the geodetic latitude ϕ and the geodetic longitude λ. Recall
29 that the z axis coincides with the direction of the CTP.
30
31
32 z
33
34 n
u
35
36 e
tangent
37 h
38 P1(ϕ,λ,h)
39
40
41 y
ϕ
42
43 λ
44 Figure 2.16 The local geodetic coor- x
45 dinate system.
DATUM 45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 Figure 2.17 3D model observations.
10
11
12 Figure 2.17 shows the geodetic azimuth and vertical angle (or zenith angle) be-
13 tween points P1 and P2 in relation to the local geodetic coordinate system. One should
14 keep in mind that the symbol h still denotes the geodetic height of a point above the [45
15 ellipsoid, whereas the u coordinate refers to the height of the second station P2 above
16 the local geodetic horizon of P1 . It follows that
17 Lin
18 n = s cos β cos α (2.89) —
19 0.0
20 e = s cos β sin α (2.90)
——
21 u = s sin β (2.91) No
22 PgE
23 The inverses of (2.89) to (2.91) are
24
e
25 α = tan−1 (2.92) [45
26 n
27 u
28 β = 90° − ϑ = sin−1 (2.93)
29 s
30
31 s= n2 + e2 + u2 (2.94)
32
33 The relationship between the local geodetic coordinate system and the geocentric
34 Cartesian system (x) is illustrated in Figure 2.16:
35    
n ∆x
36    
37  −e  = R2 (ϕ − 90°) R3 (λ − 180°)  ∆y  (2.95)
38 u ∆z
39
40 where R2 and R3 denote the rotation matrices given in Appendix A, and
41    
42 ∆x x2 − x1
43    
∆X ≡  ∆y  =  y2 − y1  (2.96)
44
∆z z2 − z1
45
1 Subscripts will be used when needed to clarify the use of symbols. For example,
2 the differencing operation ∆ in (2.95) implies ∆x ≡ ∆x12 = x2 − x1 . The same
3 convention is followed for other differences. A more complete notation for the local
4 geodetic coordinates is (n1 , e1 , u1 ) instead of (n, e, u), to emphasize that these com-
5 ponents refer to the geodetic horizon at P1 . Similarly, a more unambiguous notation
6 is (α12 , β12 , ϑ12 ) instead of just (α, β, ϑ) or even (α1 , β1 , ϑ1 ), to emphasize that these
7 observables are taken at station P1 with foresight P2 . For slant distance, the subscripts
8 do not matter because s = s1 = s12 = s21 .
9 Changing the sign of e in (2.95) and combining the rotation matrices R2 and R3
10 one obtains
11
12 w = R(ϕ, λ) ∆x (2.97)
13
with [46
14
 
15 − sin ϕ cos λ − sin ϕ sin λ cos ϕ
16  
R= − sin λ cos λ 0  (2.98)
17 Lin
18 cos ϕ cos λ cos ϕ sin λ sin ϕ
—
19 -0.
20 Substituting (2.97) and (2.98) into (2.92) to (2.94) gives expressions for the geodetic
——
21 observables as functions of the geocentric Cartesian coordinate differences and the
Nor
22 geodetic position of P1 :
PgE
23
24 −1 − sin λ1 ∆x + cos λ1 ∆y
α1 = tan (2.99)
25 − sin ϕ1 cos λ1 ∆x − sin ϕ1 sin λ1 ∆y + cos ϕ1 ∆z [46
26
27
−1 cos ϕ1 cos λ1 ∆x + cos ϕ1 sin λ1 ∆y + sin ϕ1 ∆z
28 β1 = sin (2.100)
29 ∆x 2 + ∆y 2 + ∆z2
30
31
s= ∆x 2 + ∆y 2 + ∆z2 (2.101)
32
33
Equations (2.99) to (2.101) are the backbone of the 3D geodetic model. Other
34
observations such as horizontal angles, heights, and height differences—even GPS
35
vectors—can be readily implemented. Equation (2.100) assumes that the vertical an-
36
gle has been corrected for refraction. One should take note of the fact how little math-
37
ematics is required to derive these equations. Differential geometry is not required,
38
and neither is the geodesic line.
39
40 2.3.5.1 Partial Derivatives Because (2.99) to (2.101) expressed the geodetic
41 observables explicitly as a function of the coordinates, the observation equation ad-
42 justment model a = f(xa ) can be readily used. The 3D nonlinear model has the
43 general form
44
45 α1 = α (x1 , y1 , z1 , x2 , y2 , z2 ) (2.102)
DATUM 47
1 β1 = β (x1 , y1 , z1 , x2 , y2 , z2 ) (2.103)
2
3 s = s (x1 , y1 , z1 , x2 , y2 , z2 ) (2.104)
4
5 The observables and parameters are {α1 , β1 , s} and {x1 , y1 , z1 , x2 , y2 , z2 }, respec-
6 tively. To find the elements of the design matrix, we require the total partial derivatives
7 with respect to the parameters. The general form is
8  
dx1
9  
10  dy1 
      
11 dα1 g11 g12 g13 g14 g15 g16   dz1 
 dx1
12       
 dβ1  =  g21 g22 g23 : g24 g25 g26   · · ·  = [G1 : G2 ]  · · · 
13  
ds g31 g32 g33 g34 g35 g36   dx2 
 dx2
14   [47
15  2
dy
16 dz2 (2.105)
17 Lin
18 with dxi = [dxi dyi dzi ] . The partial derivatives are listed in Table 2.4. This
T —
19 particular form of the partial derivatives follows from those of Wolf (1963), after 0.3
20 some additional algebraic manipulations. ——
21 No
22 * PgE
23 TABLE 2.4 Partial Derivatives with Respect to Cartesian Coordinates
24
25 ∂α1 − sin ϕ1 cos λ1 sin α1 + sin λ1 cos α1 [47
g11 = = −g14 = (a)
26 ∂x1 s cos β1
27 ∂α1 − sin ϕ1 sin λ1 sin α1 − cos λ1 cos α1
28 g12 = = −g15 = (b)
∂y1 s cos β1
29
∂α1 cos ϕ1 sin α1
30 g13 = = −g16 = (c)
∂z1 s cos β1
31
32 ∂β1 −s cos ϕ1 cos λ1 + sin β1 ∆x
g21 = = −g24 = (d)
33 ∂x1 s 2 cos β1
34 ∂β1 −s cos ϕ1 sin λ1 + sin β1 ∆x
35 g22 = = −g25 = (e)
∂y1 s 2 cos β1
36
∂β1 −s sin ϕ1 + sin β1 ∆z
37 g23 = = −g26 = (f)
∂z1 s 2 cos β1
38
39 ∂s −∆x
g31 = = −g34 = (g)
40 ∂x1 s
41 ∂s −∆y
g32 = = −g35 = (h)
42 ∂y1 s
43 ∂s −∆z
44 g33 = = −g36 = (i)
∂z1 s
45
1 2.3.5.2 Reparameterization Often the geodetic latitude, longitude, and height

2 are preferred as parameters instead of the Cartesian components of (x). One reason
3 for such a reparameterization is that humans can visualize changes more readily in
4 latitude, longitude, and height than changes in geocentric coordinates. The required
5 transformation is given by (B.16).
6   
7 −(M + h) cos λ sin ϕ −(N + h) cos ϕ sin λ cos ϕ cos λ dϕ
8   
dx =  −(M + h) sin λ sin ϕ (N + h) cos ϕ cos λ cos ϕ sin λ   dλ 
9
(M + h) cos ϕ 0 sin ϕ dh
10
11  
dϕ
12  
13 = J  dλ  (2.106)
14 dh [48
15
16 The expressions for the radius of curvatures Mand N are given in (B.7) and (B.6).
17 The matrix J must be evaluated for the geodetic latitude and longitude of the point Lin
18 under consideration; thus, J1 (ϕ1 , λ1 , h1 ) and J2 (ϕ2 , λ2 , h2 ) denote the transformation —
19 matrices for points P1 and P2 , respectively. Substituting (2.106) into (2.105), we 6.1
20 obtain the parameterization in terms of geodetic latitude, longitude, and height: ——
21   Sho
22 dϕ1 PgE
 
23  dλ1 
   
24 dα1  dh 
 1
25     [48
 dβ1  = [G1 J1 : G2 J2 ]  · · ·  (2.107)
26  
ds  dϕ 
27  2
 dλ 
28  2
29 dh2
30
31 To achieve a parameterization that is even easier to interpret, we transform the
32 differential changes in geodetic latitude and longitude parameters (dϕ, dλ) into cor-
33 responding changes (dn, de) in the local geodetic horizon. Keeping the geometric
34 interpretation of the radii of curvatures M and N as detailed in Appendix B one can
35
further deduce that
36
37     
M +h 0 0 dϕ dϕ
38     
39 dw =  0 (N + h) cos ϕ 0   dλ  = H(ϕ, h)  dλ  (2.108)
40 0 0 1 dh dh
41
42 The components dw = [dn de du]T intuitively related to the “horizontal” and
43 “vertical” and because the units are in length, the standard deviations of the param-
44 eters can be readily visualized. The matrix H is evaluated for the station under con-
45
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
been sternly and almost unanimously suppressed by the party. It
succeeded only to a slight degree in cases where it was promoted by
the agents of the German police for their own evil ends.
A most wholesome effect of the adverse experience of the Social
Democratic party was that it sifted from their ranks all who were not
thoroughly in earnest in the cause of the working man. It is a grave
misfortune of new movements like socialism that it attracts from the
middle and upper classes all manner of faddists and crotchety
enthusiasts and adventurers, vapid and futile talkers, acrid and
morbid pessimists, who join the movement, not from real love of the
cause, but because it gives them an opportunity to scheme and
harangue, and to lash out at the vices of the existing society. From
this dangerous class the German Social Democratic party was saved
by the anti-socialist legislation at a time when socialism was
becoming fashionable.
It is a most significant feature in the development of the German
Social Democracy that it has attained to its present advanced
position without the help of any leader of commanding talent. It has
had many loyal chiefs. For over fifty years, during which exile,
privation, discouragement, prosecution, and imprisonment were
followed by a season of comparative triumph, Liebknecht was at all
times the consistent and unflinching champion of the revolutionary
cause. Bebel’s service for the working man now extends to about
forty years, and has been not less consistent and courageous. Many
others, such as Hasenclever, Auer, and Vollmar, have served with
ability for many years. But none of those named can be considered
men of remarkable gifts. Bernstein and Kautsky, who may be
described as the leading theorists of the party in recent years, have
shown wide knowledge, judgment, and clearness of vision, but they
would be the last to lay claim to the endowments that give Marx and
Lassalle their high place in the history of the working class. These
things being so, we must regard the German Social Democracy as a
movement which owes its rise no doubt to the initiative of two men
of original force, but which in its development finds its basis in the
minds and hearts of the proletariat of the Fatherland.
In the absence of other guidance the Social Democratic party has
been a centre and a rallying-point to the German workmen. While all
else was uncertain, dark, and hostile, the party could be relied upon
to give friendly and disinterested counsel. The strikes which from
time to time broke out among the German workmen received the
most careful advice and consideration from the Social-Democratic
leaders, and those leaders soon found that the strikes were the most
impressive object-lessons in arousing the class-consciousness of the
workmen. Whole masses of the working men went over to the Social
Democracy under the severe practical teaching of the strike.
The cause of the German Social Democracy has therefore called
forth the most entire devotion among all ranks of its members.
When Liebknecht and Bebel were condemned to two years’
imprisonment in a fortress after the great trial at Leipzig, in 1872,
they were glad, they said, to do their two years because of the
splendid opportunity it had given them for socialistic propaganda in
the face of Germany. During the fortnight the trial had lasted they
had in the course of their defence been able to dispel prejudices and
misunderstandings, and so to educate German opinion in socialism.
But the 10th of March 1878 saw a demonstration which of all the
events and incidents in the history of the German Social Democracy
may well be regarded as the most deeply significant. It was the
funeral of August Heinsch. August Heinsch was a simple workman, a
compositor; but he had deserved well of the proletariat by
organising its electoral victories in Berlin. He had died of
consumption, called by the socialists the proletarian malady, because
it is so frequently due to the insanitary conditions under which work
is carried on. In the case of August Heinsch the malady was at least
aggravated by his self-sacrificing exertions in the common cause,
and the workmen of Berlin resolved to honour his memory by a
solemn and imposing demonstration. As the body was borne to the
cemetery through the working men’s districts in East Berlin, black
flags waved from the roofs and windows, and the vast crowds of
people, reckoned by the hundred thousand, who filled the streets,
bared their heads in respectful sympathy. Many thousands of
workmen followed the bier in serried ranks to the last resting-place.
Of all the achievements of the German Social Democracy it may be
reckoned the most signal that it has so organised the frugal, hard-
working and law-abiding proletariat of the Fatherland, and has
inspired them with the spirit of intelligent self-sacrifice in their
common cause. The programme and principles of the party have
received modification in the past, and will no doubt receive it in the
future, for the German Social Democracy is a reality and a
movement instinct with vitality. The new times will bring new needs,
which will require new measures. They will bring also, we hope, a
wider and clearer vision and a mellower wisdom, as without wisdom
even organised power is of little avail.
In view of the loyalty and devotion of the working men, it is all the
more incumbent on the leaders of the German Social Democratic
party that they should now guide it along paths which will be wise,
practical, and fruitful. It has too long been their evil fortune or their
own deliberate choice to stand apart from the main movement of
German life. They have had little part in the work of State,
municipality, or country commune. The party began in opposition to
the great co-operative movement of Germany.
It is most important that the theories and ideals of the German
Social Democratic party should be fairly tested and corrected by their
application to the practical work of society. The leaders of the party
agree in their preference for legal and peaceful methods. In this
point they and the representatives of the existing order might find
common ground which may form a basis for better relations in the
future.
[1] The best authority for the facts connected with the
development of the German Social Democracy is
Franz Mehring’s Geschichte der Deutschen Sozial-
demokratie.
[2] See Mehring, Geschichte.
[3] See Appendix.
[4] Our tr. of the programme is taken from the Protokoll
or shorthand report of the party meeting at
Stuttgart, 1898, to which it is prefixed.
CHAPTER X
ANARCHISM
It is agreed that anarchism as a form of socialism originated with

Proudhon; but the theory owes its fuller development chiefly to
Russian agitators. The great apostle of the system in its most
characteristic stage was Michael Bakunin.
Bakunin[1] belonged to the highest Russian aristocracy and was born
at Torshok, in the government of Twer, in 1814. In due time he
entered the army as an officer of artillery, which was a select
department of the service. While serving in Poland, however, he was
so painfully impressed with the horrors which he saw exercised
under Russian despotic rule, that he resigned his commission and
entered on a life of study. In 1847 he visited Paris, and met
Proudhon, who had a decisive influence on his opinions.
The revolutionary movement of 1848 gave the first opportunity for
the activity of Bakunin as agitator. He was particularly concerned in
the rising at Dresden in 1849. But the hands of the reactionary
Governments and of their police were heavy on the baffled
enthusiasts of the revolution. Bakunin had a full share of their bitter
experience. As he tells us himself in his work on Mazzini, he was for
nearly eight years confined in various fortresses of Saxony, Austria,
and Russia, and was then exiled for life to Siberia. Fortunately,
Muravieff, Governor of Siberia, was a relative, who allowed him
considerable freedom and other indulgences. After four years of
exile, Bakunin effected his escape, and through the greatest
hardships made his way to California, and thence to London in 1860.
Bakunin thus passed in prison and in exile the dreary years of
European reaction which followed the revolutionary period of 1848.
When he returned to London he found that the forward movement
had again begun. It was a time of promise for his own country after
the accession of Alexander II. to the throne. In the Kolokol he
assisted Herzen to rouse his countrymen and prepare them for a
new era; but the impatient temperament of Bakunin could not be
satisfied with the comparatively moderate counsels followed by his
friend. The latter years of his life he spent, chiefly in Switzerland, as
the energetic advocate of international anarchism. In 1869 he
founded the Social Democratic Alliance, which, however, dissolved in
the same year, and entered the main International. He attempted a
rising at Lyons in September 1870, soon after the fall of the Second
Empire, but with no success whatever.
At the Hague Congress of the International he was outvoted and
expelled by the Marx party. His activity in later years was much
impaired by ill-health. He died at Berne in 1876.
In their preface to Bakunin’s work, God and the State, his friends
Cafiero and Elisée Reclus afford us some interesting glimpses of the
personality of the agitator. ‘Friends and enemies know that the man
was great by his thinking power, his force of will, and his persistent
energy; they know also what lofty disdain he felt for fortune, rank,
glory, and all the miserable prizes which the majority of men are
base enough to covet. A Russian gentleman belonging to the highest
nobility of the empire, he was one of the first to enter in that proud
association of the revolted, who knew to detach themselves from the
traditions, the prejudices, the interests of race and class—to
contemn their own happiness. With them he fought the hard battle
of life, aggravated by prison, by exile, by all the dangers, and all the
bitterness which devoted men have to undergo in their troubled
existence.’
They then go on to say how ‘in Russia among the students, in
Germany among the insurgents of Dresden, in Siberia among his
brethren in exile, in America, in England, in France, in Switzerland, in
Italy, among men of goodwill, his direct influence has been
considerable. The originality of his ideas, his picturesque and fiery
eloquence, his untiring zeal in propaganda, supported by the natural
majesty of his appearance, and by his strong vitality, gained an
entrance for him in all the groups of revolutionary socialists, and his
activity left deep traces even among those who, after having
welcomed it, rejected it because of differences in aim or method.’
But it was mainly by the voluminous correspondence with the
revolutionary world, in which he spent whole nights, that his activity
was to be explained. His published writings were the smallest part of
his work. His most important treatise, God and the State, was only a
fragment. ‘My life itself is a fragment,’ he said to those who criticised
his writings.
Nothing can be clearer or more frank and comprehensive in its
destructiveness than the socialism of Bakunin. It is revolutionary
socialism based on materialism, and aiming at the destruction of
external authority by every available means. He rejects all the ideal
systems in every name and shape, from the idea of God downwards;
and he rejects every form of external authority, whether emanating
from the will of a Sovereign or from universal suffrage. ‘The liberty
of man,’ he says in his Dieu et l’Etat, ‘consists solely in this, that he
obey the laws of Nature, because he has himself recognised them as
such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally
by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or
individual.’ In this way will the whole problem of freedom be solved:
that natural laws be ascertained by scientific discovery, and the
knowledge of them be universally diffused among the masses.
Natural laws being thus recognised by every man for himself, he
cannot but obey them, for they are the laws also of his own nature;
and the need for political organisation, administration, and
legislation will at once disappear.
It follows that he will not admit of any privileged position or class,
for ‘it is the peculiarity of privilege and of every privileged position to
kill the intellect and heart of man. The privileged man, whether he
be privileged politically or economically, is a man depraved in
intellect and heart.’ ‘In a word, we object to all legislation, all
authority, and all influence, privileged, patented, official and legal,
even when it has proceeded from universal suffrage, convinced that
it must always turn to the profit of a dominating and exploiting
minority, against the interests of the immense majority enslaved.’
The following extracts taken from the programme of the
International Social Democratic Alliance, which he founded, will help
to complete our knowledge of the views of this extraordinary
agitator. The Alliance declares itself atheistic; it seeks the abolition of
all religions, the displacement of faith by science and of divine
justice by human justice, the abolition of marriage as a political,
religious, legal, and bourgeois institution. The Alliance demands
above all things the definite and complete abolition of classes, and
political, economic, and social equality of individuals and sexes, and
abolition of inheritance, so that in the future every man may enjoy a
like share in the produce of labour; that land and soil, instruments of
labour, and all other capital, becoming the common property of the
whole society, may be used only by the workers—that is, by
associations of cultivators and industrialists. It looks forward to the
final solution of the social question through the universal and
international solidarity of the workers of all countries, and condemns
every policy grounded on so-called patriotism and national jealousy.
It demands the universal federation of all local associations through
the principle of freedom.
Bakunin’s methods of realising his revolutionary programme are
suited to his principles. He would make all haste to sweep away the
political and social institutions that prevent the realisation of his
plans for the future. The spirit of destruction reaches its climax in
the Revolutionary Catechism, which has been attributed to Bakunin,
but which contains extreme statements that do not consist with his
acknowledged writings. It is at least a product of the school of
Bakunin, and as such is worthy of attention. The spirit of revolution
could not further go than it does in this document. The revolutionist,
as the Catechism would recommend him to be, is a consecrated
man, who will allow no private interests or feelings, and no scruples
of religion, patriotism, or morality, to turn him aside from his
mission, the aim of which is by all available means to overturn the
existing society. His work is merciless and universal destruction. The
future organisation will doubtless proceed out of the movement and
life of the people, but it is the concern of coming generations. In the
meantime all that Bakunin enables us to see as promise of future
reconstruction is the free federation of free associations—
associations of which we find the type in the Russian commune.
The influence of Bakunin was felt chiefly on the socialist movement
in Southern Europe. The important risings in Spain in 1873 were due
to his activity. In the later revolutionary movement of Italy his
influence superseded that of Mazzini, for there, as elsewhere, the
purely political interest had yielded to the social in the minds of the
most advanced.
The doctrines of Bakunin have also left their mark on the recent
social history of France and French Switzerland. About 1879 the
anarchist propaganda showed signs of activity in Lyons and the
surrounding industrial centres. Some disturbances among the miners
at Montceau-les-Mines in 1882, also provoked the attention of the
police and Government, with the result that sixty-six persons were
accused of belonging to an international association with anarchist
principles. Of the accused the most notable was Prince Kropotkine,
who, with the eminent French geographer Elisée Reclus and the
Russian Lavroff, may be regarded as the greatest recent exponents
of anarchism.
There is no more interesting figure in the recent revolutionary
history of Europe than Prince Kropotkine. Like Bakunin, he belongs
by birth to the highest aristocracy of Russia; his family, it was
sometimes said among his familiar friends, had a better right to the
throne of that country than the present dynasty. A man of science of
European fame, of kindly nature and courteous manners, it may
seem strange that he should be an avowed champion of the most
destructive creed now extant. A few of the leading facts of his life,
as he gave them in his defence at the trial at Lyons in 1883, may
throw some light on that question.[2]
His father was an owner of serfs, and from his childhood he had
been witness to scenes like those narrated by the American novelist
in Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The sight of the cruelties suffered by the
oppressed class had taught him to love them. At sixteen he entered
the school of pages at the Imperial Court, and if he had learned in
the cabin to love the people, he learned at the Court to detest the
great. In the army and the administration he saw the hopelessness
of expecting reforms from the reactionary Russian Government. For
some time afterwards he had devoted himself to scientific work.
When the social movement began, Kropotkine joined it. The
demands made by the new party for more liberty met with a simple
response from the Government: they were thrown into prison, where
their treatment was terrible. In the prison where the Prince was
detained nine lost their reason and eleven committed suicide. He fell
seriously ill, and was carried to the hospital, from which he made his
escape. In Switzerland, where he found refuge, he witnessed the
sufferings of the people caused by the crisis in the watch
manufacture; everywhere the like miseries, due to the like social and
political evils. Was it surprising that he should seek to remedy them
by the transformation of society?
The record[3] of the great anarchist trial at Lyons in 1883, to which
we have already referred, is an historical document of the first
importance. Every one who wishes to understand the causes,
motives, and aims of the anarchist movement should study it
carefully. At the trial a declaration of opinion was signed by the
accused. The following extracts which give the purport of this
declaration may be useful in elucidating the anarchist position. What
they aim at is the most absolute freedom, the most complete
satisfaction of human wants, without other limit than the
impossibilities of Nature and the wants of their neighbours, equally
worthy of respect. They object to all authority and all government on
principle, and in all human relations would, in place of legal and
administrative control, substitute free contract, perpetually subject to
revision and cancelment. But, as no freedom is possible in a society
where capital is monopolised by a diminishing minority, they believe
that capital, the common inheritance of humanity, since it is the fruit
of the co-operation of past and present generations, ought to be at
the disposal of all, so that no man be excluded from it, and no man
seize part of it to the detriment of the rest. In a word, they wish
equality, equality of fact, as corollary, or rather as primordial
condition of freedom. From each one according to his faculties; to
each one according to his needs. They demand bread for all, science
for all, work for all; for all, too, independence and justice.
As one of the accused maintained, even a Government based on
universal suffrage gives them no scope for effective action in the
deliverance of the poor, as of the eight million electors of France only
some half a million are in a position to give a free vote. In such a
state of affairs, and in view of the continued misery and degradation
of the proletariat, they proclaim the sacred right of insurrection as
the ultima ratio servorum.
Perhaps the most striking feature of the trial was the defence of
Émile Gautier before the Court of Appeal. Gautier was described by
the Public Prosecutor as a serious intelligence gone astray, a
licentiate in law who had passed brilliant examinations, a powerful
orator who might be considered as the apostle of the anarchist idea
in France. He was only twenty-nine years of age. In his defence
Gautier described with passionate eloquence how he, the son of a
law-officer (huissier), had been converted to revolution and
anarchism by the sight in court of the daily miseries of debtors and
bankrupts and other victims of a capitalist society. As Voltaire is said
to have had an attack of fever at every anniversary of the massacre
of St. Bartholomew, so he, far away in Brittany, was seized with a
fever of rage and of bitter indignation when the calendar brought
round the accursed dates at which bills and rents became due.
The leading principles of anarchism are marked by great clearness
and simplicity, and may be summed up as the rejection of all
external authority and of all private appropriation of land and capital.
All human relations will depend on the free action and assent of the
individuals concerned. Free associations will be formed for industrial
and other purposes, and these associations will with a like freedom
enter into federal and other relations with each other. The process of
social reconstruction is, in short, the free federation of free
associations.
Considered as an historic socialist movement, anarchism may
therefore be set forth under these three heads: (1) Economically it is
collectivism; (2) it is a theory of revolutionary action, which is
certainly its characteristic feature; (3) it is a theory of the relation of
the individual to law or government.
As regards the first point, its collectivism is common to it with the
prevalent socialism, and therefore need not detain us here. Nor need
much be said in the way of criticism of the details of the ultra-
revolutionary programme of the anarchists. In our chapter on Marx
we have already indicated that the materialism which is common to
both schools cannot now be regarded as a tenable or admissible
theory of the world. The materialism of both schools sprang from
the Hegelian left. It should now be considered as dead, and should
in all fairness be set aside in discussion for or against socialism. With
regard to religion and marriage, it is hardly necessary to state that
progress lies not in the abolition, but in the purification and elevation
of those great factors of human life. Bakunin’s criticism of religion is
simply a tissue of confusion and misconception. Marriage is a
fundamental institution, on the purity and soundness of which social
health and social progress must above all things depend: in this
matter, more than almost any other, society must and should insist
on the maintenance of due safeguards and regulations. Free love is
a specious and delusive theory, which would tend to bring back
social chaos. It would certainly establish a new slavery of women,
whose needs and rights would be sacrificed in the name of a hollow
and disastrous freedom.
With regard to the third leading principle above mentioned, the
negation of government and external authority, the anarchy of
Bakunin is essentially the same as that of Proudhon. But in Proudhon
the principle was set forth in paradox, whereas Bakunin expounds it
with perfect frankness and directness, and with a revolutionary
energy which has seldom been equalled in history. What they both
contemplate is a condition of human enlightenment and self-control
in which the individual shall be a law to himself, and in which all
external authority shall be abolished as a despotic interference with
personal freedom. It is an ideal to which the highest religion and
philosophy look forward as the goal of man, not as one, however,
which can be forthwith reached through the wholesale destruction of
the present framework of society, but through a long process of
ethical and social improvement. The error of the anarchists consists
in their impatient insistence on this proclamation of absolute
freedom in the present debased condition of the great mass of the
people in every class. They insist on taking the last step in social
development before they have quite taken the first.
Like its collectivism, the theory of freedom is not a special feature of
anarchism. Collectivism is simply the economic side of the prevalent
socialism generally. Its theory of freedom is a very old theory, which
has no necessary connection whatever with a revolutionary
programme, and we should not misunderstand it because of the
strange company in which we here find it. It is a high and long-
cherished ideal of the best and greatest minds. The good man does
his duty, not from fear of the police or the magistrate, but because it
is his duty. And we must regard it as the high-water mark of his
probity and goodness that the right is so wrought into the texture of
his conscience and intelligence that the doing of it has become as
natural to him as breathing or locomotion.
It is an ideal, also, which we must cherish for society and for the
human race. And not in vain; for there is an ever-widening circle of
human action, in which good and reasonable men do the right
without pressure or stimulus from without, either from law or
government. We are therefore to regard a well-ordered, intelligent,
and ethical freedom as the goal of the social development of the
human race.
But it is an ideal which must obviously depend for its realisation on
the moral and rational development of men. It cannot come till men
and the times are ripe for it. No doubt the realisation of it may be
hindered by evil institutions and reactionary Governments; yet these,
too, are merely the outcome of such human nature as was once
prevalent in the countries where we now find them. They have
outlived their time. We are certainly right to get rid of them, as of
other evil habits and conditions of the past, but it is best done when
done wisely and reasonably. And it cannot be done in any wise or
effectual manner except through a wide organic change in the
human beings concerned.
A moral and rational freedom is therefore the goal of the social
development of the world, and it is a goal towards which we must
strive even now. But it is a goal that lies far ahead of us. For the
present, and in the future with which we have any practical concern,
society cannot be maintained without adequate laws, sanctioned and
enforced by a regular Government. The elimination of the baser
elements from human character and human society proceeds with
most regrettable slowness. In the meantime, therefore, we must
hold them in check by the best available methods. We may improve
our laws, our police, and magistrates, but we cannot do without
them.
It is an interesting fact that socialism has taken its most aggressive

form in that European country whose civilisation is most recent. The
revolutionary opinions of Russia are not the growth of the soil, and
are not the natural and normal outcome of its own social
development: they have been imported from abroad. Falling on
youthful and enthusiastic temperaments which had not previously
been inoculated with the principle of innovation, the new ideas have
broken forth with an irrepressible and uncompromising vigour which
has astonished the older nations of Europe. Another peculiarity of
the situation is that the Government is an autocracy served or
controlled by a camarilla which has often been largely foreign both
in origin and sympathy. In this case, then, we have a revolutionary
party inspired by the socialism of Western Europe fighting against a
Government which is also in many ways an exotic, and is not rooted
in the mass of the people.
The history of Russia turns on two great institutions, the Tzardom
and the mir. The Tzardom is the organ of Russian political life, while
the mir is the social form taken by the agricultural population, and is
the economic basis of the nation generally.
No reasonable man can doubt that the Tzardom has performed a
most important function in the historical development of Russia. It
was the central power which united the Russian people and led them
in the long, severe, and successful struggle against Tartars, Turks,
Lithuanians, Poles, and Swedes. Without it Russia would in all
probability have suffered the same fate as Poland, which was
distracted, weakened, and finally ruined by the anarchy and
incurable selfishness of its nobles.
As in other countries, so in Russia, the central power was
established through the subjection of princes and lords who were
crushed by the strong and merciless rule of the Tzars. Among those
Tzars, too, were men of originality and courage like Peter the Great,
who forced the people out of the old-world grooves which they loved
so much; and when other means failed they did not hesitate to
employ the cane, the knout, and the axe of the executioner to urge
their nobles into the paths of Western progress. We need not say
that the Tzars were not moved by benevolent reasons thus to benefit
their subjects. The historic Tzars were not philanthropists or
humanitarians. The aim of their reforms was political, to provide the
Russian nation with better means and appliances for the struggle
with her neighbours.
While the nobles were unable to make head against the Tzardom,
the clergy were neither able nor disposed so to do. In Russia the
clergy were not backed by a great international power like the
Papacy. They were nursed in the traditions of Eastern Greek
despotism and had no inclination to resist their rulers. The peasants
were not a political power, except at the rare intervals when
desperation drove them into rebellion.
Thus the circumstances of Russia have combined to establish an
autocracy which has performed the greatest historic functions, and
which has had a power and solidity without example in the rest of
Europe. It has maintained the national existence against fierce and
powerful enemies, it has in every generation extended the borders
of the Russian power, and has been a real centre of the national life,
satisfying the needs and aspirations of the people, not in a perfect
manner by any means, yet with a considerable measure of success.
If we do not realise the supreme importance of the work that the
Tzardom has done for Russia, we cannot understand its present
position and the hold it has on the feelings of the Russian people.
The power of the Tzar has been such that it was hardly an
exaggeration, when the Emperor Paul stated to General Dumouriez
that there was no important man among his subjects except the
person he happened to speak to, and while he was speaking to him.
It is only another instance of the irony of human affairs, however,
that the really effective limit to the power of the Tzars is found in the
officials, who are intended to carry it into effect. These officials act
as the organs of the imperial authority from the centre to the
farthest extremities of the empire. Yet they can by delay, by passive
resistance, by suggestion, by falsehood, by the arts of etiquette and
ceremonial, and all the other methods familiar to the practised
servants of autocracy, mislead or thwart the will of their master or
render it of no effect.
Such is the central power. Let us now consider the body of the
people. In Russia, industry and city life have not formed a large part
of the national existence. The mass of the people still live directly
from the soil, and are organised in the mir. As is now well known,
the mir is merely the Russian form of the village community, which
at one time prevailed over all the countries of the world, as they
attained to the sedentary or agricultural stage of development. It
was the natural social form assumed by people settling down into
agriculture. It was the social unit as determined by obvious local
economic and historic conditions. In most countries the village
community has been reduced to a shadow of its former self, partly
through the operation of natural economic causes, but largely also
because the central power and the classes connected therewith have
crushed it out. The local life of England in particular has been
repressed and starved through the want of the most elementary
resources and opportunities. It has been recognised as a most
pressing duty of statesmen to revive and restore it in accordance
with the prevalent conditions, but it will be long before the capacity
and habit of common action can be again adequately acquired.
Owing to a variety of causes, which we cannot explain here, the
Russian mir has continued to survive. It gave to the mass of the
Russian people their own form of social life and of self-government;
and it was economically self-sufficing. The mir drew from the soil,
which it held in common occupation, the means for its own support
and for the support of the nation as a whole. The relations of the
members of the mir to each other were substantially conducted on
terms of equality and freedom; but in view of the nobles and the
Tzardom they were serfs till their emancipation in 1801. The mir was
a social-economic arrangement, convenient both for the noble
proprietors and for the Tzardom. It afforded to the central
Government the necessary taxes and the necessary recruits; and
therefore the Tzars did not disturb it, but rather sought to fix and
solidity it, and thereby make it more efficient as a source of supply
both of soldiers and material means. Thus for centuries, full of
movement in the political history of Russia, the mir has with little
change endured as the social and economic basis of the national life.
In Russia, therefore, we find only two institutions that have had a
real vitality and a specific influence, the Tzardom and the peasant
community. Nobles and priests have exercised a substantive power
only when the Tzardom has suffered a temporary lapse. The middle
class has always been inconsiderable.
It was into a nation thus constituted that the most advanced
revolutionary opinions of Western Europe at last found their way.
The spirit of revolt had indeed not been unknown in Russia in former
times. Among a peasantry sunk in immemorial ignorance and misery,
and harassed by the incessant tribute of men and taxes which they
were forced to pay, discontent had always been more or less
prevalent, and it had sometimes broken out in open rebellion. During
the reigns of the great Catharine and of Alexander I. a sentimental
Liberalism had been fashionable in the upper classes. But it was not
a very practical matter, and was not a serious danger to the
autocracy. At the beginning of his reign Nicholas had to face a rising
among the Guards at St. Petersburg, led by Liberal officers of high
birth. He suppressed it in the speediest and most summary manner.
Till his death, 1855, Nicholas maintained a régime of repression at
home, and was the champion of absolutism in Europe.
Many circumstances combined to render the accession of Alexander
II. a new departure in Russian history. The old methods of
government had been thoroughly discredited by the failures of the
Crimean war. There was a general feeling that the ideas and
methods of the West, which had proved their superiority during the
struggle, must be tried in Russia. As the young Emperor recognised
the necessity of a new policy, great changes were made, and all
went well for a time. Alexander carried the emancipation of the
serfs, instituted new courts of law and a new system of local
government, and gave a real impetus to education. It was not long,
however, before the Emperor began to hesitate in view of the Liberal
forces which he had let loose, and which threatened to overturn the
whole fabric of Russian society. Like his uncle, Alexander I., the
young monarch had not resolution enough to persevere in a practical
and systematic course of reform.
The changes already made, and the prospect of changes still to
come, roused into action all the conservative instincts and prejudices
of old Russia. The insurrection of Poland in 1863, which called forth
the sympathies of many Russian Liberals, provoked also a powerful
reaction in old Russian circles. An attempt by Karakozoff on the
Emperor’s life in 1866 may be regarded as the turning-point of his
reign. Ideas of steady reform and of gradual temperate change have
not yet become familiar to the Russian temperament. Between those
who wished to reform everything, and those who wished no change
at all or to change very slowly, no compromise was possible in the
circumstances and conditions of Russian society. Thus a
revolutionary movement soon declared itself in full opposition to the
policy of the Tzar. When we consider that the new party menaced
not only the special political institutions of Russia, but the
fundamental principles of the existing society generally—property,
religion, and the family—we can see that the breach was inevitable.
[4]
Three stages may be recognised in the history of the revolutionary

movement. The first covered the period from the accession of
Alexander II. in 1855 to about 1870. Its leading characteristic was
negation, and the name of Nihilism, which is often erroneously
applied to the whole revolutionary movement, should properly be
restricted to this early stage. In the main it was simply the spirit of
the Hegelian left frankly accepting the materialism of Büchner and
Moleschott as the final deliverance of philosophy. In a country where
religion had little influence among the educated classes, and where
philosophy was not a slow and gradual growth of the native mind,
but a fashion imported from abroad, the most destructive
materialism made, an easy conquest. It was the newest fashion; it
was the prevalent form among those who were reckoned the most
advanced thinkers; it was clear, simple, and thorough. It was
particularly well suited to a state of culture which was superficial,
without experience or discipline.
In the words of Turgenief, who has portrayed the movement in his
novel, Fathers and Sons, the Nihilists were men who ‘bowed before
no authority of any kind, and accepted on faith no principle,
whatever veneration may surround it.’ They weighed political
institutions and social forms, religion and the family, in the balances
of that negative criticism, which was their prevailing characteristic,
and they found them all wanting. With revolutionary impatience they
rejected everything that had come down from the past, good and
bad alike. They had no respect for art or poetry, sentiment or
romance. A new fact added to our positive knowledge by the
dissecting of a frog was more important than the poetry of Goethe
or a painting by Raphael.
Nihilism as represented by Bazarof, in the novel of Turgenief, is
certainly not an attractive picture. We may respect his courage,
honesty, thoroughness, and independence; but his roughness,
cynicism, and indifference to family feelings are very repellent.
Through the early death of the hero we are prevented from
observing what might have been the further development of his
character. We feel sure that if the story of this typical life had been
continued, we should have seen very considerable changes in a
more positive direction. The mood of universal negation can only be
a temporary phase in individual or national development. Negation
may be the physic, it cannot be the diet, of the mind.
No movement for emancipation can be a purely negative thing; and
no movement can be adequately described by reference to a single
characteristic. The Nihilists found a wider view of the world in the
writings of Darwin, Herbert Spencer and J. S. Mill; and they had also
at an early period felt the influence of Saint-Simon, Fourier, Robert
Owen, and latterly also of Lassalle and Marx. From the first, Nihilism
seems to have involved a broad and real sympathy with the suffering
classes. They wished to recall the attention of men from windy
verbiage about art and poetry, from a sentimentalism which was
often spurious, and from the clatter of the parliamentary machine,
whose grinding was solely for the benefit of the wealthier classes, to
the question of ‘daily bread for all,’ to the common people perishing
for lack of elementary knowledge. And they insisted strongly on the
equal rights of women.
It is evident that Nihilism could only be a passing phase in the
history of Russia, and that it had a wholesome and beneficial side as
well as a repellent one. In a country which was oppressed by an
enormous burden of immemorial prejudices and abuses, a powerful
dose of negation was calculated to have a most salutary operation.
But the movement could not long live on negations merely. As time
went on, the struggle for emancipation in Russia began to assume a
more positive character.
In this way the revolutionary movement entered on its second stage,
the stage of socialistic teaching and propaganda. Events in the West
had kindled the imagination of the youthful champions of liberty in
Russia, the rise and progress of the International, the terrible
struggle at Paris under the Commune, the growth of the German
Social Democracy. A positive and far-reaching ideal now drew the
aspirations of the enthusiasts for liberty, the deliverance of the
proletariat, represented in Russia by an ignorant and wretched
peasantry. The anarchic socialism of Bakunin was unquestionably the
controlling element in the new Russian movement. Beside it we must
place the influence of Lavroff, another eminent Russian exile, who
represented the more temperate phase of anarchism, shading off
into the recognition of a constitutional and gradual development of
the theory. In its second stage also the revolutionary movement of
Russia was a mixed phenomenon. The anarchism of Bakunin
continued, however, to be the characteristic feature, and thus the
negative factor was still prominent enough.
From Bakunin also proceeded the practical watchword at this stage
of the revolutionary movement, ‘to go among the people’ and spread
the new doctrines. And this course was unwittingly furthered by the
action of the Government. Early in the seventies, hundreds of young
Russians of both sexes were studying in Western Europe, particularly
at Zürich in Switzerland. As their stay there exposed them to
constant contact with revolutionary Russian exiles, and to infection
with all the unsettling ideas of the West, an imperial ukase of 1873
recalled them home. They returned home, but they carried their new
ideas with them. ‘Going among the people’ was adopted as a
systematic principle, a passion and a fashion among the youthful
adherents of anarchism. In accordance with their creed they had no
appointed organisation, no very definite plan of action. They ‘went
among the people’ as the apostles of a new theory, each one as his
heart moved him.
They went to be teachers or midwives or medical helps in the
villages. In order the better to identify themselves with the common
folks, some learned the humblest occupations. The trades of
carpenter or shoemaker were most usually chosen, as being the
easiest to master. Others toiled for fifteen hours a day in the
factories, that they might have an opportunity of saying a word in
season to their fellow-workers. Ladies and gentlemen, connected
with the aristocracy and nurtured in all the refinement of civilisation,
patiently endured the nameless trials of living with the Russian
peasant. They endeavoured to adopt the rough hands and swarthy
weather-beaten complexion, as well as the dress of the peasant,
that they might not excite his distrust, for the gulf between the
lower classes and the gentlemen in Russia is wide and fixed. The
peasants had experience of the gentleman only as the
representative of the Government coming with the knout and the
police to extort taxes and recruits. No wonder that the sight of a
shirt underneath the sheepskin of the socialist missionary was
enough to arouse the unconquerable suspicion of the poor people of
the country.
The success of the missionaries was limited. With all his strong
suspicion and his narrow range of ideas, the peasant could not easily
understand the meaning and purpose of those strange men teaching
strange things. The traditions of the past, as they came down to him
dim and confused, contained many a bitter memory of disappointed
hopes. He was apathetic as well as suspicious. Moreover, the teacher
often delivered his message in half-digested formulas which had a
meaning only as connected with the economic development of
Western Europe, and which did not rightly attach themselves to
anything within the experience of the Russian Peasantry.
Above all, the propaganda enjoyed only a very brief period of
activity. The teachers went about their work with very little
circumspection, in the careless free-and-easy way which seems so
natural to the Russian temperament. Consequently, the Government
had no difficulty in discovering and following up the traces of the
propagandists. Before the year 1876 had ended, nearly all of them
were in prison. More than 2000 were arrested during the period
1873-76! Many were detained in prison for years, till the
investigations of the police resulted in 50 being brought to trial at
Moscow and 193 at St. Petersburg at the end of 1877. Most were
acquitted by the courts, yet the Government sent them into exile by
administrative process.
The adverse experiences which we have recorded brought the
attempts at peaceful propaganda to a close, and the revolutionary
party decided on the propaganda of action. They resolved to settle
among the people and prepare them for a rising against the
Government. Where peaceful teaching had failed, they sought to
force a way by violent methods. It was a desperate policy to pursue
among a people who had not been able even to understand the
aims of the revolutionary party.
It is very characteristic of the circumstances of Russia that the most
successful attempt at thus organising a scheme for revolutionary
action could gain the adhesion of the peasantry only by pretending
that it had the sanction of the Tzar. Jacob Stephanovitz, one of the
prominent members of the revolutionary party, gave it out in South-
Western Russia that he had an order from the Tzar to form a secret
society among the common people against the nobles, priests and
officials who were opposing the imperial wishes to confer land and
freedom on the peasants. Those to whom he addressed himself
could hardly believe that the Emperor was so powerless, but he did
eventually succeed in forming a society of about a thousand
members. When the plot was discovered by the police, the peasants
were naturally enraged at the deception which had been practised
on them. It should be added that such a method of action did not
meet with the approval of the party as a whole.
Like the peaceful propaganda, the propaganda of action failed to
gain a firm footing among the people.
At every step the revolutionary party found the organs of the central
power ready to suppress their efforts in the most summary way.
They were now convinced that they must directly attack the
autocracy and its servants, and as they had received no mercy they
decided to show none; and thus began the resolute, systematic, and
merciless struggle of the revolutionary party against the Tzardom.
For this end they naturally made a great change in their mode of
action. They adopted a strong organisation instead of the lax
discipline or total want of discipline commended by Bakunin. Affairs
were conducted by a secret central committee, who with unsparing
energy carried out the new aims of the party. The first great act in
this the third stage of the Russian revolutionary movement was the
assassination of General Trepoff, Prefect of Police, by Vera
Sassoulitsch, at St. Petersburg, in 1878. The occasion of the deed
was the flogging, by command of Trepoff, of a political prisoner
personally unknown to her. Her object was to avenge the cause of
outraged humanity on the servant of the autocracy. At the trial she
was acquitted by the jury, to the great surprise of the Imperial
Court. An attempt by the police to apprehend her on leaving the
place of trial was frustrated by the mob, and she succeeded in
making her escape to Switzerland.
The public gave the most unmistakable proofs of sympathy with Vera
Sassoulitsch; and the event naturally excited great enthusiasm and
emulation among the eager spirits of the revolutionary party. Police
officials and spies of the Government were cut off without mercy.
General Mezentseff, Chief of Police, was stabbed in the streets of the
capital in broad daylight. Prince Kropotkin, Governor of Charkoff, a
relative of the revolutionist, was shot. General Drenteln was also
openly attacked in the streets. After thus assailing the officers of the
executive, they proceeded systematically to plan the assassination of
the Tzar himself, as the head of the central power which they
abhorred so much. Solovieff fired five shots at the Tzar without
doing any harm; three attempts were made to wreck the imperial
train, one of them failing because the Tzar had made a change in his
arrangements; and he escaped the terrible explosion at the Winter
Palace only because he was later than usual in entering his dining-
room. These failures did not prevent the executive committee from
prosecuting its desperate work, and on March 13, 1881, followed the
tragic death of Alexander II.
We need not say that the violent death of Alexander II. sent a thrill
of horror throughout Europe. It was felt to be a most lamentable
and regrettable ending to a reign which had begun with such high
and generous aspirations, and with so much promise of good to the
Russian people. There was a natural difficulty in understanding how
a Sovereign, benevolent in character and not unwilling to pursue a
liberal policy, should be the victim of a forward movement among his
people. The explanation must be found in the special circumstances
of Russia, for Alexander was merely the representative of a political
system which, by its historic evolution, its nature and position, has
exercised an absolute and often merciless mastery over its subjects,
and the men that cut him off were youthful enthusiasts, who with
revolutionary impatience were eager to apply to the belated
circumstances of Russia the most extreme theories of the West.
The historian has often to regret that more wisdom is not available
for the management of human affairs, and we may believe that a
moderate measure of wisdom and patience might have prevented
the fatal collision between the Tzar and the revolutionary party. The
Tzardom, as we have seen, has performed a great and indispensable
function in the national life of Russia. It still seems to be the only
practicable form of government in such a country. No class is
advanced or powerful enough to take its place. The mass of the
Russian people are not yet capable of self-government on a wide
scale. There is no large educated class. The middle and industrial
class, in the modern sense of the word, are still comparatively small
and unimportant; and it is probable enough that if there had been
an influential middle class, and if the abolition of serfdom had been
effected under their auspices, the peasants would have received less
favourable treatment than they experienced from the autocracy. The
best available form of government for Russia seems to be an
enlightened Tzardom, and the Emperor Alexander II. was personally
both enlightened and well-intentioned.
At the same time the position of the Tzardom cannot very long be
tenable in its present form. Russia lies where it is, in close proximity
to progressive countries. In the past the Russian people have been
largely disciplined by Germans; they have learned much from
England, and have perhaps shown the greatest social and spiritual
affinity to the French. This intercourse will go on. The strongest and
most watchful Tzar cannot maintain a Chinese wall of separation
between his country and the rest of Europe. Nor can the Tzars
expect to have the benefit of the science of Western Europe for
military purposes, and at the same time succeed in shutting it out
from influencing the social and political life of their people. It is
inevitable, therefore, that the liberal ideas of the West will continue
to dissolve and disintegrate the old fabric of Russian ideas and
institutions. One of two results appears necessary, either that the
Tzars must strenuously follow the path of reasonable and energetic
reform, or they may risk a revolution which will sweep away the
present central power.
For Russia, as for other countries, there are but two alternatives,
progress or revolution. If the latter consummation were to happen, it
does not, however, follow that the cause of freedom would have any
great direct and immediate furtherance. In the circumstances of
Russia the man who wields the military power must be supreme. A
new ruler resting on the army might be not less an autocrat than the
old. We can but say that the present policy of the Tzardom is
seriously retarding and arresting the natural and national
development of Russia, and that it tends to provoke a catastrophe
which may endanger its own existence. The industrial progress now
being made in the country renders it only the more necessary that
her political institutions should make a corresponding advance.
It remains now to say a word about the revolutionists who have
played so remarkable a part in the recent history of Russia. The
members of the Russian revolutionary party have been drawn from
nearly all classes of the people. Some, as we have seen, belonged to
highly placed aristocratic families; some have been sons of priests
and of the lower officials. More recently the rural classes supplied
active adherents to the militant party. One of the most notable
features of the movement is the influence exerted in it by women. It
was Vera Sassoulitsch who opened the death-struggle with the
autocracy in 1878. A lady of high birth, Sophia Perovskaia, by the
waving of a veil guided the men who threw the fatal bombs at the
assassination of Alexander II.
But whether aristocrats or peasants, men or women, the members
of the Russian revolutionary party have been remarkable for their
youth. The large majority of those engaged in the struggle had not
attained to the age of twenty-five. In view of their extreme youth,
therefore, we need not say that they had more enthusiasm than
wisdom, and more of the energy that aims at immediate success
than of the considerate patience that knows how to wait for the
slowly maturing fruits of the best and surest progress. Having regard
to the very subversive theories which they tried to sow broadcast
among the masses of the Russian people, we see clearly enough
that no autocracy in the world could avoid taking up the challenge to
authority which they so rudely threw down. Only the Government of
an enlightened people long familiar with the free and open
discussion of every variety of opinion, can afford to give unlimited
opportunity of propaganda to such views as were entertained by the
Russian revolutionary party.
Yet while the theories of the party were from the first of a most
subversive nature, it is right to emphasise the fact that they did not
proceed to violent action till they were goaded into it by the police
and the other officials of the central Government. Indeed, the
measures of the Government and its representatives have often
directly tended to the stirring up of the revolutionary mood. By their
irritating measures of repression they provoked, among the students
at the universities, disturbances which they quelled by most brutal
methods. Young men arrested on suspicion, and kept in vile prisons
for years while awaiting investigation, were naturally driven to
hostile reflection on the iniquity of a Government from which they
received such treatment.
In speaking of a country like Russia, we need not say that the most
elementary political rights were denied the revolutionists. They had
no right of public meeting, no freedom of the press, no freedom of
utterance anywhere. They were surrounded with spies ready to give
to every word and deed the worst interpretation. The peasants
whom they desired to instruct in the new teaching might inform
upon them. Their comrades in propaganda might be induced or
coerced to betray them. It was often fatal even to be suspected, as
the police and the other organs of Government were only too
disposed to take the most rigorous measures against all who were
charged with revolutionary opinion. Nor could the accused appeal to
the law with any confidence, for the ordinary tribunals might be set
aside, and his fate be decided by administrative procedure; that is,
he could be executed, or condemned to prison or exile in Siberia,
without the pretence of a legal trial. In such circumstances it was
natural that resolute champions of liberty should be driven to secret
conspiracy in its extremest form, and to violent action of the most
merciless character.
While, therefore, historical accuracy obliges us to emphasise the fact
that the aims of the revolutionary party far exceeded all that is
included in liberalism and constitutional government, it is only just to
explain that they resorted to violent methods only because the most
elementary political rights were denied them. In the fiercest mood of
their terrible struggle with the autocracy, they were still ready to
throw aside their weapons.
In the address sent by the Executive Committee to Alexander III.,
after the death of his father, in March 1881, they offered to give up
their violent mode of action, and submit unconditionally to a
National Assembly freely elected by the people. They meant under a
constitutional government to have recourse only to constitutional
methods.
With regard to the number of those concerned in the Russian
revolutionary movement, it is not easy to speak with precision.
There is no proof that the anarchist opinions have gained a large
body of adherents in the country. The numerical strength of the
party directly engaged in the struggle with the Tzardom has always
been comparatively small. On the other hand, the movement has
evidently met with a very wide sympathy in Russian society. In the
absence of precise information, we may quote the words of one who
has a good right to speak for the revolutionary party:—
‘The Russian revolutionary movement is really a revolution sui
generis, carried on, however, not by the mass of the people or those
feeling the need of it, but by a kind of delegation, acting on behalf
of the mass of the people with this purpose.
‘No one has ever undertaken, and perhaps no one could with any
certainty undertake, to calculate the numerical strength of this party
—that is to say, of those who share the convictions and aspirations
of the revolutionists. All that can be said is, that it is a very large
party, and that at the present moment it numbers hundreds of
thousands, perhaps even millions of men, disseminated everywhere.
This mass of people, which might be called the Revolutionary Nation,
does not, however, take a direct part in the struggle. It entrusts its
interests and its honour, its hatred and its vengeance, to those who
make the revolution their sole and exclusive occupation; for under
the conditions existing in Russia, people cannot remain as ordinary
citizens and devote themselves at the same time to Socialism and
the Revolution.
‘The real revolutionary party, or rather the militant organisation, is
recruited from this class of revolutionary leaders.’[5]
[1] The detailed Life of Bakunin, promised by Cafiero
and Elisée Reclus in the preface to God and the
State, has apparently not yet been published.
Hence the above meagre account of life.
[2] Procés des Anarchistes, p. 97.
[3] Le Procés des Anarchistes, Lyons, 1883.
[4] For the revolutionary movement in Russia under
Alexander II. see Alphons Thun’s Geschichte der
revolutionären Bewegungen in Russland. See also
Stepniak’s Underground Russia, and Russia under
the Tzars.
[5] Stepniak, Underground Russia, p. 264.

7781GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document informationebook

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

7781GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7781GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick 2024 Scribd Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full download ebook at ebookname.

GPS Satellite Surveying 3rd Edition Edition Leick

Download more ebook from https://ebookname.com

GPS for Land Surveyors 3rd Edition Jan Van Sickle

Engineering Surveying Fifth Edition W. Schofield

A Dictionary of Ancient Near Eastern Mythology Dr

Plane and Geodetic Surveying 2nd Edition Johnson

Intelligent Positioning GIS GPS Unification 1st Edition

Plane and Geodetic Surveying 1st Edition Aylmer Johnson

Satellite Communications 2nd Ed 2nd Edition Timothy

Satellite to Ground Radiowave Propagation 2nd Edition

10 Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey

1 of a measurement. Thus, the actual output is the accumulated phase observable at

1 TABLE 1.1 GPS Development and Performance at a Glance

1 TABLE 1.1 (Continued)

1 mospheric monitoring system (which could provide high vertical-resolution proﬁles

1 2.1 CONVENTIONAL TERRESTRIAL REFERENCE SYSTEM

1 Historically speaking, the International Latitude Service (ILS) was created in

1 the transformation between two epochs is accomplished by (McCarthy, 1996, p. 16)

1 TABLE 2.2 Example of Fourteen-Parameter Transformation between Geocentric

1 is deﬁned by coordinates of a smaller set of essentially stationary quasars whose

1 2.2.1 Transforming between ITRF and ICRF

6 X̄ = R̄(t) R(t) R(t)x (2.9)

12 R(t) = R3 (−GAST) (2.11)

14 R(t) = R1 (yp )R2 (xp ) (2.12) [22

1 t = (TT − J2000.0)[days] /36,525 (2.26)

1 X = R3 (−GAST)R1 (yp )R2 (xp )x (2.34)

1 calendar), 1582, was labeled October 15 (Gregorian calendar). The proceedings of

1 From (2.58) it follows that

2 η=− 2 m −C̄nm sin mλ + S̄nm cos mλ P̄nm (cos θ) (2.75)

1 ϑ Ellipsoidal (geodetic) zenith angle

1 2.3.5.2 Reparameterization Often the geodetic latitude, longitude, and height

It is agreed that anarchism as a form of socialism originated with

It is an interesting fact that socialism has taken its most aggressive

Three stages may be recognised in the history of the revolutionary

You might also like