A bit of a reality check. This notion of clock synchronization is most likely from a time of pendulum clocks mounted on a wall of some flexibility. Small reaction forces from pendulums conceivably can be transmitted to and from the wall. The pendulum is a high Q resonator, and clocks of similar design will have pendulums set to nearly equal periods. Under these circumstances it would be a bit difficult to disprove that coupling between clocks is insufficient to produce phase lock.
 
Mike Carrell
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Half baked idea

Robin, Harry,
 
Clocks run by turning gears having force applied to the gear train, and if a gear starts skipping teeth from vibration, the clock will loose time or not operate as the only way to skip a tooth is if that tooth is missing. Vibration has nothing to do with the timekeeping ability of clocks or watches, unless it is from the vibration of the quartz timer, which is electronic and not effected by physical vibration.
 
Timepieces can be adjusted for temperature and pressure - which can effect the hairspring timing by changes in humidity. Also multiple positions can be adjusted for, but most old clocks on a wall were regulators, tripping the escapement with each repeating swing of the pendulum, and timing was controlled by raising or lowering the pendulum weight. I don't normally say things like this, but I find it highly unlikely that vibration was the factor (more likely impossible). If consistent vibration could lower or increase the speed of a clock, it would keep right on going requiring frequent resetting - whereby the pendulum would be adjusted until it kept acceptable time.
 
I believe there were just as many jokesters in the 1600's as there ever where (including here) - and many times a good bridge has been sold for scrap.
 
Best Regards (didn't mean to jump on you Robin)
 
Chris

Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sat, 26 Aug 2006 16:15:49
-0500:
Hi,
[snip]

I think both are correct. I have no doubt that jewelers do try to
keep their clocks showing the same time. However I think that a
degree of self-synchronization also occurs, for the reason stated
in my previous email, particularly for clocks that have a heavy
movement and consequent strong vibrations.


>Huygens (in the 1600's) noticed pendulum clocks mounted on the same wall
>were synchronised. Do you think someone was pulling his leg when he enquired
>about?!
>
>Harry
>
>
>Christopher Arnold wrote:
>
>Gents, I cannot take this - any longer.
>
>
>
>Being a Jeweler who builds new technology particle accelerators and makes
>his own diamonds - I must correct the nonsense of clock group self
>synchronization or CGSS. Most jewelers like all their clocks showing the
>same time, resetting them as often as needed, when they are not busy selling
>diamonds. Why - who will buy the clocks that don't have the same time as the
>majority. This is the same thing as the majority rejecting ideas that do not
>conform with their own empirical wisdom, so those that chirp the same tune
>are accepted and clocks that all have the same time MUST be accurate and
>exactly correct all the time - which provides the appearance of CGSS.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.



Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2ยข/min or less.
________________________________________________________________________
This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.

Reply via email to