-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Atomic Clocks
- Thread starter JohnR7
- Start date
Atomic clocks are self correcting also. They are regular quartz clocks. The atomic part of them just corrests the quartz movement.
From what I understand the "real" time is based on real earth time. In terms of the spin of the Earth. The earth tends to fluxuate and is not as accurate at it is on the atomic level. So every now and then they have to add or subtract a second from the atomic clock.
That means that atomic clocks are never accurate, because they have to wait a whole second before they can adjust them. Also the spin of the earth can fluxuate a second or so from atomic time.
Upvote
0
Today at 07:47 AM Eddie said this in Post #41
Yeah but you know the stopped one is absolutely correct twice a day
For exactly two seconds a day they are accurate. But that is only because a clock only measure to the second. If you had a clock that measured in 100 th of a second, then it would only be accurate for 2 / 100 of a second per day.
Upvote
0
No. What you have is a regular clock that merely corrects twice a day based on a signal from a true atomic clock.
The true atomic clock keeps time by measuring the oscillations of a specific atom. Such clocks, depending on what atoms they measure and how, can be accurate out to 14 decimal places. It might be further, these days.
A "day" is the length of time it takes the earth to revolve around it's axis. Since it takes a non-integer number of seconds to do this, every few days a "leap second" has to be added to the atomic clock time.
If I'm adding 1.0001 + 1.0001 all day long, and I have another clock adding 1.0000000000000 + 1.0000000000 all day long, every once in awhile I'm going to have to correct one of them.
An atomic clock, which keeps the most accurate time in the world, is based on quantum mechanics. The same sorts of quantum mechanics that describe exactly how radiometric decay works.
In fact, John, the difference in degree between the accuracy of even the best quartz clock and an atomic clock is like the difference between a stopwatch and a calender.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: No, a "day" is the length of time it takes the Earth to ROTATE once around its axis. The Earth REVOLVES around the Sun.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: Uhm, try looking it up. The Earth revolves around the Sun and rotates about its own axis.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: Here Orihalcon, I spent 30 seconds looking it up on the web for you.
DNAunion: Did you catch that? If not, pay attention at least to the last sentence: Earth rotates on its axis and revolves about the Sun. Gee, where did I hear that before??!!!????!!!????
DNAunion: Did you catch that? If not, pay attention at least to the last sentence: Earth rotates on its axis and revolves about the Sun. Gee, where did I hear that before??!!!????!!!????
Upvote
0
*cough**cough*PEDANT*cough**cough*
"Although they are used as synonyms in everyday writing..."
Did you catch that bit? Last I checked, this wasn't an astronomy journal, nor was I teaching a class. As my meaning was clear to everyone, I think you're being a bit pedantic. No, scratch that, really pedantic.
"Although they are used as synonyms in everyday writing..."
Did you catch that bit? Last I checked, this wasn't an astronomy journal, nor was I teaching a class. As my meaning was clear to everyone, I think you're being a bit pedantic. No, scratch that, really pedantic.
Upvote
0
According to the dictionary I look at revolve can mean rotate, but rotate does not mean revolve.
Upvote
0
DNAunion: Let's see - we are in the science forum, discussing atomic clocks, quantum mechanics, and the periodic motions of the planet Earth. Gee, wouldn't you think the scientific definition would be the applicable one here?
Upvote
0
DNAunion: I just love the irony. Morat, while trying to show everyone how superior his knowledge of science is, makes a scientific mistake. And this isn't the first time (remember Morat's earlier "statement" that viruses were living cells).
Upvote
0
Similar threads
