Hi John,
I hadn't run into this idea before, and I like it. But I have a problem with
the statement:. "If you move through space at 100,000,000 meters per second in
space, then your velocity in the t direction is 283,000,000 meters per second
(because sqrt(100E6^2 + 283E6^2) = 300E6.)" The pr
Or, you could just stay at high elevation for a longer
period of time and make the travel time less significant.
-Chuck Harris
Arthur Dent wrote:
Tom wrote: "I'll make just a one word correction to your
summary. The clocks run a bit faster not because of "the
spinning earth" but because of "the
Tom wrote: "I'll make just a one word correction to your
summary. The clocks run a bit faster not because of "the
spinning earth" but because of "the earth"."
You are correct, I misspoke. While that point may have
been wrong I did check the elevation of Mount Sunapee
and it is indeed at 2726 feet
A lot of BBC Horizon episodes are broadcast in the states as Nova, and visa
versa. (Often with different narrators and sometimes localized content.) So
it's possible this one will make it to the other side of the pond too.
I'm pretty sure the bulk of this one was filmed by WGBH (choice of
Microsem
So, here's how I finally grokked this stuff. c, the speed of light in a
vacuum, is often spoken of as a "speed limit" that nothing can ever exceed.
That's a bad way to put it, and people who have expressed it that way in
popular science writing for 100 years should feel bad.
Instead, the wa
Hi Tom -
It has been a while. Well, I guess I am not in bad company if you struggled
with this as well. I also like your take on it and will think some more, but it
helped. So, if frequency remains the same, then d(phi)/d(t) ratio remains the
same and both phase and time must change. Also, the
Hi Mike,
It's a good question and I've wrestled with it too. I see two choices:
1) Time is stable and every ultra-precise timing measurement of atomic behavior
appears to depend on gravity.
2) Every ultra-precise timing measurement of atomic behavior is stable, and
Time appears to depend on grav
Hi Mike,
The time rate does remain the same - at the device. The problem is the idea
that it is the hyperfine transitions that determine the time. They are only a
measurement of the time in that environment. So, if the rate of time is
different at two locations, you will never see it *at* ei
Bob -
Thanks for attempting to make me see the light. But, I still do not. You said
it yourself that hyperfine transitions remain the same. Since "time" on these
device are derived from these transitions, they should also remain the same. I
agree, from a relativistic point of vie the time will
Here in the UK, regarding the link below, I get
" Were Sorry but this video is not available in your region due to right
restrictions"
So much for science being universal.
On 27/11/15 14:55, Tom Van Baak wrote:
Thanks, Joe. I thought it was well done. Note the show (length 53:07) is also
Hi Mike,
I'm far from an expert on this, but what you're missing is that time and space
isn't the same between any two points that are located in different gravity
gradients and/or moving at different relative velocities. The hyperfine
transitions are happening at the same local rate whether th
Hi Arthur,
That's a good summary. I'm glad you got to visit the mountain. Did you happen
to check the elevation? Are there lodges along the road on the way up?
I ask because at 2726 feet a clock will run 9.0e-14 fast (compared with sea
level), which is 7.8 ns/day, or 31 ns over 4 days. But they
> They mentioned some "6 miles per day" offset due to GPS relativity effects.
> I think this is the sum of both special relativity (time dilation) and
> general relativity (gravitational) effects. The GR correction is 45
> microseconds a day fast; the SR correction is 7 microseconds slow. 38
> micr
I just do not get it. I know that now I am 70 and my good smart days are behind
me, but, this should be simple. In all these clocks mentioned, time is derived
from the transition of a hyperfine line of a certain atom within some element,
in this case cesium, In order for any of these clocks to d
Would've been more fun to see Tom and his kids going to the top of Mt
Ranier in 2005 with the ensemble :-). http://leapsecond.com/great2005/
They mentioned some "6 miles per day" offset due to GPS relativity effects.
I think this is the sum of both special relativity (time dilation) and
general re
Thanks, Joe. I thought it was well done. Note the show (length 53:07) is also
online:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/inside-einsteins-mind.html
"Inside Einstein's Mind - Retrace the thought experiments that inspired his
theory on the nature of reality."
If you want to skip ahead past the
In the special it looks like they used two HP5071A standards, an
SRS620 counter, and a scope. They first made sure the stds were
in sync then took one to the building at the top of the ski lift
on New Hampshire's Mount Sunapee at 2726' elevation for 4 days
where it would be running a little faster
17 matches
Mail list logo
