13 Nov 12
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-surveying-earth-interior-atomic-clocks.html
This goes way beyond what I used to work on at Goddard Space Flight Center, our atomic clocks back in the Apollo days was accurate to about 1 second in 2000 years, I think these clocks are more like 1 second in a billion years or so.
Since time flow varies with mass, you can use an atomic clock to measure the geode of the Earth, if you are over a heavy mass, time slows down, over a lighter mass, the clock speeds up.
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by sonhouseSuper cool:
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-surveying-earth-interior-atomic-clocks.html
This goes way beyond what I used to work on at Goddard Space Flight Center, our atomic clocks back in the Apollo days was accurate to about 1 second in 2000 years, I think these clocks are more like 1 second in a billion years or so.
Since time flow varies with mass, you can use ...[text shortened]... Earth, if you are over a heavy mass, time slows down, over a lighter mass, the clock speeds up.
"In 2010 ultraprecise atomic clocks have measured the time difference between two clocks, one positioned 33 centimeters above the other,"
And to think that at least one poster over in spirituality believes we have got it all wrong and that time is really absolute and our instruments are faulty or being misinterpreted.
14 Nov 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadoh yes, I know exactly what you mean. A few years back I argued against a religious fundamentalist ( don't remember his name ) that denied relativity and insisted that there is absolute time despite experiments with atomic clocks orbiting the Earth ticking slower than those on the surface of the Earth thus proving relativistic time dilation effects that prove relativity. His 'explanation' of the clock in space ticking at a slower rate was that the atomic clock “experiences stress” of being in space ( whatever that is supposed to mean -exactly what kind of “stress” would do that? Is there some special physics he knows about that we don't? If so, I wish he tell us what it is ).
Super cool:"In 2010 ultraprecise atomic clocks have measured the time difference between two clocks, one positioned 33 centimeters above the other,"
And to think that at least one poster over in spirituality believes we have got it all wrong and that time is really absolute and our instruments are faulty or being misinterpreted.
I wonder how these religious nuts that deny relativity explain how an atomic clock placed just a few centimeters above another always ticks at a slightly slower rate just as relativity predicts? I cannot imagine but you can bet on your life they will still deny it somehow. Perhaps they will lower themselves to resort to just saying all the observations are false and made-up and all this science is just part of a vast atheist conspiracy to disprove specifically their God? ( as if all these intelligent scientists want to waste their time doing that )
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadYeah, but it gives serious headaches for people trying to synchronise events/clocks around the world.
Super cool:"In 2010 ultraprecise atomic clocks have measured the time difference between two clocks, one positioned 33 centimeters above the other,"
And to think that at least one poster over in spirituality believes we have got it all wrong and that time is really absolute and our instruments are faulty or being misinterpreted.
Now they have to include precise data about exactly how far above the geode the clocks are.
In fact it's worse than that, because the world is rotating you have to account for varying amounts
of time dilation due to special relativity as well as general relativity.
Keeping the worlds atomic clocks is a tricky business.
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeTell me about it! When I was with NASA on Apollo, we were taxed to get the clocks synced to within 100 nanoseconds, all of them around the world. I imagine now they do it within picoseconds.
Yeah, but it gives serious headaches for people trying to synchronise events/clocks around the world.
Now they have to include precise data about exactly how far above the geode the clocks are.
In fact it's worse than that, because the world is rotating you have to account for varying amounts
of time dilation due to special relativity as well as general relativity.
Keeping the worlds atomic clocks is a tricky business.
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by sonhouseSo we can expect that a fat man will start getting to work later and later.
http://phys.org/news/2012-11-surveying-earth-interior-atomic-clocks.html
This goes way beyond what I used to work on at Goddard Space Flight Center, our atomic clocks back in the Apollo days was accurate to about 1 second in 2000 years, I think these clocks are more like 1 second in a billion years or so.
Since time flow varies with mass, you can use ...[text shortened]... Earth, if you are over a heavy mass, time slows down, over a lighter mass, the clock speeds up.
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeNot necessary. Synchronization and subsequent measurements will in fact tell you exactly how far above the geode the clocks are. It is not necessary to for the initial synchronization and because the drift due to geode will be constant, it can easily be corrected for over time. It is the variable effects that are a problem. I wonder if this effect can be used to precisely measure the rate that mountains/ continents are rising/sinking.
Now they have to include precise data about exactly how far above the geode the clocks are.
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadIn effect they already are, super precise gps systems are directly measuring continental drift, which is for the atlantic plate, about 1 inch per year.
Not necessary. Synchronization and subsequent measurements will in fact tell you exactly how far above the geode the clocks are. It is not necessary to for the initial synchronization and because the drift due to geode will be constant, it can easily be corrected for over time. It is the variable effects that are a problem. I wonder if this effect can be used to precisely measure the rate that mountains/ continents are rising/sinking.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
14 Nov 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadDrift due to geode will only be constant if geode is constant.
Not necessary. Synchronization and subsequent measurements will in fact tell you exactly how far above the geode the clocks are. It is not necessary to for the initial synchronization and because the drift due to geode will be constant, it can easily be corrected for over time. It is the variable effects that are a problem. I wonder if this effect can be used to precisely measure the rate that mountains/ continents are rising/sinking.
Mass of atmosphere/oceans/lunar gravity/tectonic movement all make the geode non-constant.
15 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeBut those things can be factored out by re-scans since they would be making many many measurements, going over land masses again and again. A geode won't move much, all those other things move, like the atmosphere changes daily and so does the moon.
Drift due to geode will only be constant if geode is constant.
Mass of atmosphere/oceans/lunar gravity/tectonic movement all make the geode non-constant.
15 Nov 12
Originally posted by sonhouseBut gps although using clocks, does its work by measuring distance and time distortion is a factor that must be taken into consideration but removed from the equations. I am talking about measuring the time distortion and using that to measure position relative to the earth's gravity well.
In effect they already are, super precise gps systems are directly measuring continental drift, which is for the atlantic plate, about 1 inch per year.
15 Nov 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeAny idea how large these changes are? I believe the Japanese earthquake made a measurable difference to earth's spin, presumably by changing the geode.
Drift due to geode will only be constant if geode is constant.
Mass of atmosphere/oceans/lunar gravity/tectonic movement all make the geode non-constant.
15 Nov 12
Originally posted by iamatigerFor buried geodes, the other method is the two satellite method where they have lasers measuring the distance between them and going over a geode changes that distance slightly, but the time clock way they mentioned the ability to see changes of 33 cm, 1/3 of a meter so it is probably more sensitive than the 2 satellite method and will get more sensitive as clocks get more accurate still.
Is it possible that you can measure the depth of a gravity well by its effect on time more precisely than you can by more direct means?