Rick Karlquist wrote:
If you want to get technical, the frequency of a cesium standard
also depends on the gravitational acceleration, but for relativistic
reasons, not newtonian physics. Any decent cesium is accurate
enough that it will noticably speed up at NIST in Boulder. NIST's
best
The time nut post is still discvarding my rants, BUT I do not give up easy, ONE
more try to trick it and get it all in.
Rick
Thanks, Interesting but maybe you have missed my too subtle of a point.
Example:
Lets say the second is redefined in the future to some new super duper thing
that is
** Primary means that the clock will meet its spec without being
calibrated against a better
clock**
From your definition a Rb can be a primary standard for a 1e-6 world and
a crystal as well as my
wrist watch
can be a primary standard in a 1e-3 spec or whatever they can
A REAL primary standard is something that you can assemble the kit of
parts anywhere in the Universe, flip the switch, and get exactly the same
time interval as anywhere else.
That obviously does NOT apply to the pendulum, as it depends on the value
of G.
-John
==
I suppose a
If you want to get technical, the frequency of a cesium standard
also depends on the gravitational acceleration, but for relativistic
reasons, not newtonian physics. Any decent cesium is accurate
enough that it will noticably speed up at NIST in Boulder. NIST's
best clocks speed up noticibly if
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 1:43 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Primary standard again
A REAL primary standard is something that you can assemble the kit of
parts anywhere in the Universe, flip the switch, and get exactly the same
time
-nuts] Primary standard again
Aren't there relativistic effects on Cs standard frequency because of
different gravity? (or is that really, the same frequency, just in a
different frame of reference)
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
