Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    09 Mar '12 17:25
    http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-pendulum-ytterbium-clock.html

    The old way, which I am familiar with because of my time at Goddard Space Flight Center on the Apollo Timing and tracking system, cesium beam and rubidium beam atomic clocks, now they are going way beyond the microwave signals these atomic beams generate and now are at optical frequencies, at the time of Apollo, the best clock was the hydrogen beam clock, accurate to one second in 6 million years, so this one is three thousand times more accurate than that. The hydrogen clock was about a thousand times more accurate than the cesium beam clocks (made by Hewlett Packard) we used to use.

    Time marches on!

    It means we can perform experiments about gravity, spacetime, and fundamental constants of science with much more certainty now.
  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Mar '12 00:32
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-pendulum-ytterbium-clock.html

    The old way, which I am familiar with because of my time at Goddard Space Flight Center on the Apollo Timing and tracking system, cesium beam and rubidium beam atomic clocks, now they are going way beyond the microwave signals these atomic beams generate and now are at optical frequencies, ...[text shortened]... nts about gravity, spacetime, and fundamental constants of science with much more certainty now.
    Yes, one day everybody will agree on the truth. HalleluYah !!!
  3. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    10 Mar '12 02:50
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Yes, one day everybody will agree on the truth. HalleluYah !!!
    Ah, so you finally admit the universe is billions of years old. About time.
  4. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Mar '12 06:07
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Ah, so you finally admit the universe is billions of years old. About time.
    There is nothing in your reference about a billion year old universe. This article
    is about scientist trying to make an accurate clock. One day we will know how
    and we will all know the truth. Isn't God an awesome Creator? HalleluYah!!!
  5. 10 Mar '12 07:25
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    It means we can perform experiments about gravity, spacetime, and fundamental constants of science with much more certainty now.
    Just make sure you plug it all in correctly, or you might measure nutrinos going faster than light

    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/02/faster-than-light-neutrino-result-apparently-a-mistake-due-to-loose-cable.ars
  6. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Mar '12 07:51 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Just make sure you plug it all in correctly, or you might measure nutrinos going faster than light

    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/02/faster-than-light-neutrino-result-apparently-a-mistake-due-to-loose-cable.ars
    Too many mistakes for scientists.

    P.S. They had to admit to a mistake in dating the Shroud of Turin, too.

    http://www.factsplusfacts.com/
  7. 10 Mar '12 09:13
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Too many mistakes for scientists.
    Everyone makes mistakes, scientists included. The beauty of science however is that it is a process designed to discover and correct mistakes.
  8. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Mar '12 10:15
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Everyone makes mistakes, scientists included. The beauty of science however is that it is a process designed to discover and correct mistakes.
    That is true. I just wish every one would take care to use the process correctly
    so they would not make the mistakes to start with. It can cause animosity
    when that happens.
  9. 10 Mar '12 12:53
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Just make sure you plug it all in correctly, or you might measure nutrinos going faster than light

    http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/02/faster-than-light-neutrino-result-apparently-a-mistake-due-to-loose-cable.ars
    It's actually far more complicated and subtle than a 'lose cable'.

    http://profmattstrassler.com/2012/02/27/why-the-curtain-has-not-fallen-on-opera/
  10. 10 Mar '12 12:54
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That is true. I just wish every one would take care to use the process correctly
    so they would not make the mistakes to start with. It can cause animosity
    when that happens.
    Get out of science you religious whackjob.
  11. 10 Mar '12 13:10
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    That is true. I just wish every one would take care to use the process correctly
    so they would not make the mistakes to start with. It can cause animosity
    when that happens.
    It is impossible to avoid mistakes. Your wishing otherwise won't change that.
    Science deals with this problem by having a process that corrects mistakes.
  12. 10 Mar '12 13:14
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    It's actually far more complicated and subtle than a 'lose cable'.
    I'm sure it is, but my point was that having a super accurate atomic clock is not enough if you read it wrong.
  13. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Mar '12 00:27
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Get out of science you religious whackjob.
    I have things to say about science too. I am not a one trick pony.
  14. 11 Mar '12 01:49
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I have things to say about science too. I am not a one trick pony.
    you're a no trick pony.
  15. Subscriber Kewpie
    since 1-Feb-07
    11 Mar '12 04:51
    If you simply must respond to the nutter, please don't quote him. I've got him obliterated and quoting him reveals the content.