You will have an answer if you can answer the question: "Why is an optical microscope needed when unaided vision is good enough?" My PhD is in high energy particle physics ca 1966. This is not intended to be 'Dismissive and/or snarky'. Your statement "Dismissive and/or snarky replies will be deleted unread." has a logic issue.... Regards (73)
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:43:04 -0400, William H. Fite wrote: >Warning: Potentially heretical material below >Let me begin by saying I am neither an engineer nor a time expert. My PhD >is in statistics and my spouse's PhD is in theoretical computer science, >working on quantum computer algorithms. Neither of us claims any special >expertise when it comes to time and frequency measurement. I am a radio >amateur and I came to this group following a recommendation from John >Ackermann, who very kindly answered some questions for me regarding the >amateur radio frequency measurement test. I thoroughly enjoy the dialogue >here and I think that I have learned a bit about the subject though, by any >standard of this group, I am the rankest newbie. >My question is a serious one. I am not trolling, nor am I trying to begin >an argument, nor am I implying criticism of anyone or any endeavor, here or >elsewhere. >What useful purpose, if any, is served by the continuing evolution of >clocks like NIST-F2 that now achieve accuracy along the lines of one second >per many billions of years? Are there tangible benefits to be had? I >consulted an astronomer friend who advised that the current generation of >clocks would allow a suitable space vehicle to plant a probe squarely in >the middle of Alpha Centauri, if rocket technology existed to do so. We >have many friends in the academic computer science community who say that >neither conventional nor quantum computers that exist at present or in the >projectable future require anything like this kind of accuracy. >By no means am I questioning the value of new knowledge qua knowledge. For >theoreticians like the one to whom I am wedded, no justification is needed >beyond the words of mountaineer George Mallory: "Because it's there." I'm >sure that engineers and scientists in the field of time and frequency >measurement feel the same. From that perspective, there need be no >rationalization beyond the desire to do it just a little better than it has >been done. >Please don't lecture me about the value of science for its own sake. My >career has largely been built on that principle. I'd like to be informed as >to present or anticipated applications that require such accuracy. Are we >developing these incredible devices just to push boundaries? Or do they >have some practical purpose? >I'll appreciate thoughtful answers. Dismissive and/or snarky replies will >be deleted unread. >Thanks for your help. >-- >Homo sum humani a me nihil alienum puto. >_______________________________________________ >time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >To unsubscribe, go to >http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com >and follow the instructions there. Bill Beam NL7F _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
