Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #474006 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-03 13:38 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-10-07 08:22 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 237 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-03 13:38 -0700
How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:19 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 21:40 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 08:26 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 17:24 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 13:36 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 21:33 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:00 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 16:44 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:52 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 17:09 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 08:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 18:52 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-05 17:32 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 13:18 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 10:38 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 02:02 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:08 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 16:47 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:59 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-05 17:30 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 08:43 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 16:58 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 13:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 21:42 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 08:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 04:55 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 10:40 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-05 18:29 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 07:48 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 00:46 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:15 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 16:26 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:10 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-04 17:35 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2018-10-04 18:46 -0700
How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:41 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-03 18:17 -0400
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 21:57 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-04 07:06 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-04 07:08 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 22:57 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 09:01 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 17:28 +0000
Re:How atomic clocks measure time Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-04 00:26 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 05:23 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 09:15 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 09:45 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-04 10:23 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 13:23 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-04 08:50 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 08:57 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-04 19:54 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 21:51 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-05 01:26 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-08 13:49 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-08 05:08 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:15 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-09 09:22 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 03:36 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-09 06:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-09 16:42 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 12:48 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-10 09:32 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 09:37 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-10 19:11 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-11 14:03 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 10:07 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-11 21:30 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-11 13:08 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-11 13:55 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-12 15:36 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-12 21:45 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-13 11:34 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 09:44 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-05 18:40 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-04 13:53 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 01:06 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:29 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 07:44 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 16:35 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 10:01 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 17:13 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 13:17 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 22:06 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-05 19:38 -0400
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-05 17:50 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-05 18:06 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-05 18:24 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-06 11:02 -0500
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 09:34 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-06 18:43 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 10:08 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-06 16:18 -0500
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:10 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 00:47 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-06 16:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 00:31 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 22:38 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 00:54 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 23:09 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:55 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 10:37 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 09:53 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-06 16:30 -0500
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-07 09:06 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 16:35 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-07 10:26 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 20:32 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-07 13:52 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 21:31 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 22:13 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 05:22 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:21 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:32 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 13:40 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 06:45 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 07:27 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 17:21 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 13:19 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 21:29 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-09 07:12 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 09:03 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-09 18:22 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-09 13:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-09 22:15 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-10 07:39 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-10 08:32 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-10 09:04 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-10 09:47 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-10 10:49 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-10 13:29 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 21:19 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-11 07:26 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-11 15:11 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-11 09:10 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-11 09:16 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-11 09:59 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-11 13:50 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-11 14:01 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 07:42 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-11 21:47 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 08:06 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-12 18:45 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-12 12:09 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 13:20 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-12 21:25 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-13 03:03 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-13 09:25 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-13 10:29 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-13 18:10 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-11 15:49 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-11 17:27 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-11 17:43 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 08:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-12 09:41 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-12 18:50 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 13:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 08:24 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-12 10:13 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 08:38 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-12 18:59 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-12 13:42 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2018-10-13 11:10 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-11 19:51 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-11 13:52 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-11 13:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-11 02:33 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 21:22 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-11 07:42 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 12:19 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-10 08:57 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-07 14:55 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 07:35 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 08:04 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 17:24 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 10:43 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 13:24 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 21:36 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-08 11:59 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 12:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 14:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 14:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-09 02:45 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 23:41 -0400
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 22:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 08:24 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 05:09 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-07 09:34 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 20:17 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 08:28 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 09:18 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 10:55 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 13:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 19:46 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 11:01 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 20:26 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-08 18:02 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 20:29 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-08 11:44 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-05 17:01 -0400
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 14:26 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2018-10-06 01:03 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 18:15 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-06 07:42 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 08:47 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-06 09:45 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 10:35 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 17:56 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 12:50 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 13:16 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 05:17 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 12:32 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-06 19:43 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 08:48 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 19:56 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-05 09:02 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 08:10 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 09:01 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 09:56 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 17:31 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 13:37 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-08 21:48 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-09 07:32 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 10:52 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-08 13:54 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 09:30 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 21:57 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 05:24 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 13:25 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-06 13:47 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 21:57 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:06 -0700
Re: How atomic clocks measure time moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-07 05:27 +0000
Re: How atomic clocks measure time Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 14:51 +0200
Re: How atomic clocks measure time mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-07 08:22 -0700
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-11 14:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c0af397e-083d-44f1-b5b7-46e230727c71@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474691 |
El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > You clearly have no idea how cesium atomic clocks work. Here are the steps: > According to whom?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 07:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1b2b304c-dc80-4bbe-bca8-a5073d007dc6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474695 |
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 4:01:47 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > You clearly have no idea how cesium atomic clocks work. Here are the steps: > > > > According to whom? I've got about 20 different documents describing how atomic clocks work. What I wrote is a summary of what is in those documents. There is a step by step description in this document: https://www.explainthatstuff.com/howradiocontrolledclockswork.html There is also one here: https://www.timeanddate.com/time/how-do-atomic-clocks-work.html And here: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/dec/aclockmoreperfec938 I probably have others which also have step by step descriptions. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-11 21:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppoge7$q56$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474691 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 11:59:33 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: >> The fact is that you can't read a scientific paper. They clearly wrote: >> "we take a sample of atoms (or molecules) and build an apparatus that produces >> an oscillatory signal that is in resonance with the atoms' natural oscillations". ... >> You are wrong in all your opinions about how physics works, mostly because >> of your total ignorance of mathematics. >You clearly have no idea how cesium atomic clocks work. Here are the steps: oh boy, the following is so bad! >1. Cesium is a liquid at room temperature, so the liquid is heated in an >"oven" which turns the liquid into a gas. The gas consists of atoms that >are half negatively charged AND half positively charged. The gas is then >ejected as a stream of individual atoms into the next part of the clock. >2. A pair of magnets separates the positively charged atoms from the negatively >charged atoms. The positive atoms are sent to an absorber. The negative atoms >continue on into the "Microwave interrogation cavity." >3. Inside the "Microwave interrogation cavity," the negatively charged atoms >are bombarded with microwave photons oscillating at 9,192,631,770 Hertz. >Every atom hit by photons at that frequency will change into a positively >charged atom. If everything is "normal," all the atoms will be changed to >positive charged atoms. >4. The atoms then exit the "Microwave interrogation cavity" and pass between >two more magnets. This magnets direct all atoms that are STILL NEGATIVELY >CHARGED into an absorber, and the positively charge atoms continue on. >5. The positively charged atoms hit a DETECTOR which counts them. If the >detector counts FEWER atoms than expected, that means that too many atoms >were NOT changed to positive inside the "cavity." Too many atoms remained >negatively charged and went into the absorber. Oh man, no WONDER why you don't understand how atomic clocks work! The cesium atoms do NOT become positively/negatively charged! They remain neutral, but the atoms are in one or the other of the two hyperfine levels. The 9,192,631,770 Hz microwaves are the exact energy to cause atoms in the lower energy hyperfine level to transition to the higher level. >6. A feedback mechanism then adjusts the microwave photon emitter to a higher >or lower frequency, i.e., to 9,192,631,771 Hz or to 9,192,631,769 Hz. Let's >assume it is to the higher frequency. WRONG. Due to some environmental variable, the oscillator drifts from 9,192,631,770 Hz to 9,192,631,771 Hz. Fewer Cs atoms transition to the higher state. The slope of the count amount voltage is fed back as negative feedback to the phase lock loop comparitor, which produces a correction voltage to the frequency adjustment of the oscillator, which DECREASES the frequency. That puts it back to 9,192,631,770 Hz. As this is continuous, the frequency REMAINS ON the 9,192,631,770 Hz frequency. Once again, a standard phase locked loop. >8. If the frequency that resulted in the right number of atom conversions is >9,192,631,771 Hz., that means the length of a second must be SHORTENED for >the clock. The feedback system adjusts the length of a second to be one >tick less than previously. The clock then still measures 9,192,631,770 >"ticks" as being "one second" but that second is now 1 tick shorter than it >was previously. WRONG. If the frequency is now at 9,192,631,771 Hz, the clock is AT THE WRONG FREQUENCY so is now a bad clock! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 Hz, 9,192,631,771 Hz is WRONG. I did tell you to look at the design specs of atomic clocks. I didn't realize you'd misinterpret that so badly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 08:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <623df9ba-dae7-45f4-b0b0-b44398b3b4f6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474702 |
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 4:47:54 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 11:59:33 AM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > >> The fact is that you can't read a scientific paper. They clearly wrote: > >> "we take a sample of atoms (or molecules) and build an apparatus that produces > >> an oscillatory signal that is in resonance with the atoms' natural oscillations". > > ... > > >> You are wrong in all your opinions about how physics works, mostly because > >> of your total ignorance of mathematics. > > >You clearly have no idea how cesium atomic clocks work. Here are the steps: > > oh boy, the following is so bad! > > >1. Cesium is a liquid at room temperature, so the liquid is heated in an > >"oven" which turns the liquid into a gas. The gas consists of atoms that > >are half negatively charged AND half positively charged. The gas is then > >ejected as a stream of individual atoms into the next part of the clock. > > >2. A pair of magnets separates the positively charged atoms from the negatively > >charged atoms. The positive atoms are sent to an absorber. The negative atoms > >continue on into the "Microwave interrogation cavity." > > >3. Inside the "Microwave interrogation cavity," the negatively charged atoms > >are bombarded with microwave photons oscillating at 9,192,631,770 Hertz. > >Every atom hit by photons at that frequency will change into a positively > >charged atom. If everything is "normal," all the atoms will be changed to > >positive charged atoms. > > >4. The atoms then exit the "Microwave interrogation cavity" and pass between > >two more magnets. This magnets direct all atoms that are STILL NEGATIVELY > >CHARGED into an absorber, and the positively charge atoms continue on. > > >5. The positively charged atoms hit a DETECTOR which counts them. If the > >detector counts FEWER atoms than expected, that means that too many atoms > >were NOT changed to positive inside the "cavity." Too many atoms remained > >negatively charged and went into the absorber. > > Oh man, no WONDER why you don't understand how atomic clocks work! The > cesium atoms do NOT become positively/negatively charged! They remain > neutral, but the atoms are in one or the other of the two hyperfine > levels. The 9,192,631,770 Hz microwaves are the exact energy to cause > atoms in the lower energy hyperfine level to transition to the higher > level. A quote: "Atoms of cesium 133 happen to have two energy levels known as hyperfine states, which differ only in how the magnetic field of their outermost electron is aligned. The magnetic field of that electron can point either in the same direction as the magnetic field of the atom’s nucleus or in the exact opposite direction, and these two possibilities are known as the hyperfine states." Source: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/dec/aclockmoreperfec938 Magnets sort out the atoms based upon the magnetic fields of their outermost electrons. > > >6. A feedback mechanism then adjusts the microwave photon emitter to a higher > >or lower frequency, i.e., to 9,192,631,771 Hz or to 9,192,631,769 Hz. Let's > >assume it is to the higher frequency. > > WRONG. Due to some environmental variable, the oscillator drifts from > 9,192,631,770 Hz to 9,192,631,771 Hz. Fewer Cs atoms transition to the > higher state. The slope of the count amount voltage is fed back as > negative feedback to the phase lock loop comparitor, which produces a > correction voltage to the frequency adjustment of the oscillator, which > DECREASES the frequency. That puts it back to 9,192,631,770 Hz. As this is > continuous, the frequency REMAINS ON the 9,192,631,770 Hz frequency. > Once again, a standard phase locked loop. The oscillator only drifts when it malfunctions. The atoms slow down or speed up depending upon their altitude and velocity. The oscillator is then adjusted to match the oscillation rate of the atoms. The purpose of an atomic clock is to have the oscillator match the oscillation rate of the cesium atoms. The oscillator is ADJUSTED mechanically, the atom's oscillation rate changes NATURALLY. > > >8. If the frequency that resulted in the right number of atom conversions is > >9,192,631,771 Hz., that means the length of a second must be SHORTENED for > >the clock. The feedback system adjusts the length of a second to be one > >tick less than previously. The clock then still measures 9,192,631,770 > >"ticks" as being "one second" but that second is now 1 tick shorter than it > >was previously. > > WRONG. If the frequency is now at 9,192,631,771 Hz, the clock is AT THE > WRONG FREQUENCY so is now a bad clock! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 > Hz, 9,192,631,771 Hz is WRONG. Right, the clock changes the length of a second so that it is always a COUNT of 9,192,631,770 cycles, which matches the oscillation rate of the cesium atoms. > > I did tell you to look at the design specs of atomic clocks. I didn't > realize you'd misinterpret that so badly. Nothing you posted changes anything. You are just stating YOUR OPINION. I've already told you many times I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 18:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppqq4m$mjc$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474741 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 4:47:54 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >> Oh man, no WONDER why you don't understand how atomic clocks work! The >> cesium atoms do NOT become positively/negatively charged! They remain >> neutral, but the atoms are in one or the other of the two hyperfine >> levels. The 9,192,631,770 Hz microwaves are the exact energy to cause >> atoms in the lower energy hyperfine level to transition to the higher >> level. >A quote: >"Atoms of cesium 133 happen to have two energy levels known as hyperfine states, >which differ only in how the magnetic field of their outermost electron is >aligned. The magnetic field of that electron can point either in the same >direction as the magnetic field of the atom's nucleus or in the exact opposite >direction, and these two possibilities are known as the hyperfine states." >Source: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/dec/aclockmoreperfec938 >Magnets sort out the atoms based upon the magnetic fields of their outermost >electrons. So why did you write the following crap: :1. Cesium is a liquid at room temperature, so the liquid is heated in an :"oven" which turns the liquid into a gas. The gas consists of atoms that :are half negatively charged AND half positively charged. >> >6. A feedback mechanism then adjusts the microwave photon emitter to a higher >> >or lower frequency, i.e., to 9,192,631,771 Hz or to 9,192,631,769 Hz. Let's >> >assume it is to the higher frequency. >> WRONG. Due to some environmental variable, the oscillator drifts from >> 9,192,631,770 Hz to 9,192,631,771 Hz. Fewer Cs atoms transition to the >> higher state. The slope of the count amount voltage is fed back as >> negative feedback to the phase lock loop comparitor, which produces a >> correction voltage to the frequency adjustment of the oscillator, which >> DECREASES the frequency. That puts it back to 9,192,631,770 Hz. As this is >> continuous, the frequency REMAINS ON the 9,192,631,770 Hz frequency. >> Once again, a standard phase locked loop. >The oscillator only drifts when it malfunctions. WRONG. No electronic component is perfect, or even in the 100 parts per trillion range which is what would be needed here. And if the oscillator actually was stable to 100 parts per trillion, you wouldn't even need the cesium, except perhaps for initial calibration! >The atoms slow down or speed up depending upon their altitude and >velocity. The oscillator is then adjusted >to match the oscillation rate of the atoms. This is your incorrect MISINTERPRETATION of what happens. It is just wrong! Remember, if this was true, it would violate the first Postulate of Relativity. >The purpose of an atomic clock is to have the oscillator match the oscillation >rate of the cesium atoms. The oscillator is ADJUSTED mechanically, the >atom's oscillation rate changes NATURALLY. Cesium doesn't change oscillations, that is the ENTIRE POINT of using it! No matter where you are, or where you get your cesium, a clock using it will oscillate at 9,192,631,770 Hertz. >> >8. If the frequency that resulted in the right number of atom conversions is >> >9,192,631,771 Hz., that means the length of a second must be SHORTENED WRONG! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 times the Cs oscillation period. If the clock osciallates at 9,192,631,771 Hz, it is just plain WRONG! >> >the clock. The feedback system adjusts the length of a second to be one >> >tick less than previously. WRONG! The feedback system is there to prevent the osciallator from drifting off frequency. Remember the description in one of those papers you misunderstand, where the feedback is like constantly adjusting a radio tuner to keep the station perfectly locked on? That's how phase locked loop circuits operate. >> WRONG. If the frequency is now at 9,192,631,771 Hz, the clock is AT THE >> WRONG FREQUENCY so is now a bad clock! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 >> Hz, 9,192,631,771 Hz is WRONG. >Right, the clock changes the length of a second so that it is always a If the clock changes the length of a second, it is BROKEN, because a second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 cycles. >> I did tell you to look at the design specs of atomic clocks. I didn't >> realize you'd misinterpret that so badly. >Nothing you posted changes anything. You are just stating YOUR OPINION. >I've already told you many times I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS. This is not my opinion. This is from my education and experience as a degreed electrical engineer, including the use and operation of phase locked loops. I have DESIGNED phase locked loop circuits in the past. In fact the operation of an atomic clock was actually USED AS AN EXAMPLE of phase locked loops in a university course, and that has inspired my responses here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 12:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ac20444f-2ab5-45d0-89ff-905463006c23@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474755 |
On Friday, 12 October 2018 20:45:47 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote: > If the clock changes the length of a second, it is BROKEN, because a > second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 cycles. A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. Easy to check in any dictionary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 13:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c34874d3-c366-4843-87ca-7cc49c2db9ad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474755 |
On Friday, October 12, 2018 at 1:45:47 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 4:47:54 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > >> Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > >> Oh man, no WONDER why you don't understand how atomic clocks work! The > >> cesium atoms do NOT become positively/negatively charged! They remain > >> neutral, but the atoms are in one or the other of the two hyperfine > >> levels. The 9,192,631,770 Hz microwaves are the exact energy to cause > >> atoms in the lower energy hyperfine level to transition to the higher > >> level. > > >A quote: > > >"Atoms of cesium 133 happen to have two energy levels known as hyperfine states, > >which differ only in how the magnetic field of their outermost electron is > >aligned. The magnetic field of that electron can point either in the same > >direction as the magnetic field of the atom's nucleus or in the exact opposite > >direction, and these two possibilities are known as the hyperfine states." > > >Source: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/dec/aclockmoreperfec938 > > >Magnets sort out the atoms based upon the magnetic fields of their outermost > >electrons. > > So why did you write the following crap: > > :1. Cesium is a liquid at room temperature, so the liquid is heated in an > :"oven" which turns the liquid into a gas. The gas consists of atoms that > :are half negatively charged AND half positively charged. I'm not sure what your problem is. Are you just complaining that I should have written, "The gas consists of atoms that have different magnetic charges, about half having a negative charge and half having a positive charge"? > > > > >> >6. A feedback mechanism then adjusts the microwave photon emitter to a higher > >> >or lower frequency, i.e., to 9,192,631,771 Hz or to 9,192,631,769 Hz. Let's > >> >assume it is to the higher frequency. > > >> WRONG. Due to some environmental variable, the oscillator drifts from > >> 9,192,631,770 Hz to 9,192,631,771 Hz. Fewer Cs atoms transition to the > >> higher state. The slope of the count amount voltage is fed back as > >> negative feedback to the phase lock loop comparitor, which produces a > >> correction voltage to the frequency adjustment of the oscillator, which > >> DECREASES the frequency. That puts it back to 9,192,631,770 Hz. As this is > >> continuous, the frequency REMAINS ON the 9,192,631,770 Hz frequency. > >> Once again, a standard phase locked loop. > > >The oscillator only drifts when it malfunctions. > > WRONG. No electronic component is perfect, or even in the 100 parts per > trillion range which is what would be needed here. And if the oscillator > actually was stable to 100 parts per trillion, you wouldn't even need the > cesium, except perhaps for initial calibration! Correct, but then you couldn't use the clocks to verify time dilation. > > >The atoms slow down or speed up depending upon their altitude and > >velocity. The oscillator is then adjusted > >to match the oscillation rate of the atoms. > > This is your incorrect MISINTERPRETATION of what happens. It is just wrong! > Remember, if this was true, it would violate the first Postulate of > Relativity. No, it would just violate your screwball MISunderstanding of the First Postulate of Relativity. > > >The purpose of an atomic clock is to have the oscillator match the oscillation > >rate of the cesium atoms. The oscillator is ADJUSTED mechanically, the > >atom's oscillation rate changes NATURALLY. > > Cesium doesn't change oscillations, that is the ENTIRE POINT of using it! > No matter where you are, or where you get your cesium, a clock using it > will oscillate at 9,192,631,770 Hertz. Nope. The point of using cesium in atomic clocks is that the clock will keep very precise time AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT MOVE IT. Keating's job was to deliver newly built atomic clocks to labs around America. Every time he delivered one he saw that the clock deviated from what the US Naval Observatory clock was showing. So, he'd have to reset it. > > >> >8. If the frequency that resulted in the right number of atom conversions is > >> >9,192,631,771 Hz., that means the length of a second must be SHORTENED > > WRONG! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 times the Cs oscillation period. A second is defined at equal to a cesium atom oscillating 9,192,631,770 times. > > If the clock osciallates at 9,192,631,771 Hz, it is just plain WRONG! The clock doesn't oscillate. The atoms do and the microwave photons do. When the atoms change their oscillation rate to 9,192,631,771 Hz, one second still remains as a COUNT of 9,192,631,770 Hz. The clock adjusts to that new length for a second. > > >> >the clock. The feedback system adjusts the length of a second to be one > >> >tick less than previously. > > WRONG! The feedback system is there to prevent the osciallator from > drifting off frequency. The feedback system cannot "prevent" the oscillator from drifting, it can only CORRECT the oscillator AFTER it has drifted, adjusting it back to the correct rate needed to alter the atoms. > > Remember the description in one of those papers you misunderstand, where > the feedback is like constantly adjusting a radio tuner to keep the station > perfectly locked on? That's how phase locked loop circuits operate. Right. > > >> WRONG. If the frequency is now at 9,192,631,771 Hz, the clock is AT THE > >> WRONG FREQUENCY so is now a bad clock! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 > >> Hz, 9,192,631,771 Hz is WRONG. > > >Right, the clock changes the length of a second so that it is always a > > If the clock changes the length of a second, it is BROKEN, because a > second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 cycles. A second is defined as a COUNT of 9,192,631,770 cycles. When the cesium atoms change their rate, the clock adjusts to keep that COUNT as a measurement of one second. > > >> I did tell you to look at the design specs of atomic clocks. I didn't > >> realize you'd misinterpret that so badly. > > >Nothing you posted changes anything. You are just stating YOUR OPINION. > >I've already told you many times I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS. > > This is not my opinion. This is from my education and experience as a > degreed electrical engineer, including the use and operation of phase > locked loops. I have DESIGNED phase locked loop circuits in the past. In > fact the operation of an atomic clock was actually USED AS AN EXAMPLE of > phase locked loops in a university course, and that has inspired my > responses here. And opinion is still just an opinion when it does nothing but state a BELIEF. If you want to discuss the subject, then EXPLAIN WHAT IS WRONG AND WHAT IS RIGHT AND PROVIDE SOURCES, DO NOT JUST SAY IT IS WRONG BECAUSE IT CONFLICTS WITH YOUR BELIEFS. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 21:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppr3fc$t5c$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474771 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Friday, October 12, 2018 at 1:45:47 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >> >> >"Atoms of cesium 133 happen to have two energy levels known as hyperfine states, >> >which differ only in how the magnetic field of their outermost electron is >> >aligned. The magnetic field of that electron can point either in the same >> >direction as the magnetic field of the atom's nucleus or in the exact opposite >> >direction, and these two possibilities are known as the hyperfine states." >> >> >Source: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/dec/aclockmoreperfec938 >> >> >Magnets sort out the atoms based upon the magnetic fields of their outermost >> >electrons. >> >> So why did you write the following crap: >> >> :1. Cesium is a liquid at room temperature, so the liquid is heated in an >> :"oven" which turns the liquid into a gas. The gas consists of atoms that >> :are half negatively charged AND half positively charged. >I'm not sure what your problem is. Are you just complaining that I should >have written, "The gas consists of atoms that have different magnetic charges, >about half having a negative charge and half having a positive charge"? "Magnetic charges" ? That is very, very wrong as well. The magnetic monopole has never been detected. I think you are either clueless about physics in general to write something like that. Or perhaps you are like Ken Seto and invent your own meanings for existing words and phrases. That is very bad as well since it starts arguments about something when the two parties are simply talking about completely different things. "Charge" has a specific meaning when discussing atoms, as does "magnetic charge", for something that doesn't even exist. There are many hyperfine states of the Cs atom. The two that are used in the clock are called the F_g=3, m_f=0 and the F_g=4, m_f=0 states. (and since you want references, https://www.ptb.de/cms/fileadmin/internet/fachabteilungen/abteilung_4/4.4_zeit_und_frequenz/pdf/2003_Bauch_MST_CAC_VF_author_version.pdf, esp Figure 3) Use standard terminology, or just state the atom changes state between the two hyperfine levels. >> >> >6. A feedback mechanism then adjusts the microwave photon emitter to a higher >> >> >or lower frequency, i.e., to 9,192,631,771 Hz or to 9,192,631,769 Hz. Let's >> >> >assume it is to the higher frequency. >> >> WRONG. Due to some environmental variable, the oscillator drifts from >> >> 9,192,631,770 Hz to 9,192,631,771 Hz. Fewer Cs atoms transition to the >> >> higher state. The slope of the count amount voltage is fed back as >> >> negative feedback to the phase lock loop comparitor, which produces a >> >> correction voltage to the frequency adjustment of the oscillator, which >> >> DECREASES the frequency. That puts it back to 9,192,631,770 Hz. As this is >> >> continuous, the frequency REMAINS ON the 9,192,631,770 Hz frequency. >> >> Once again, a standard phase locked loop. >> >> >The oscillator only drifts when it malfunctions. >> >> WRONG. No electronic component is perfect, or even in the 100 parts per >> trillion range which is what would be needed here. And if the oscillator >> actually was stable to 100 parts per trillion, you wouldn't even need the >> cesium, except perhaps for initial calibration! >Correct, but then you couldn't use the clocks to verify time dilation. Why not? If it was really that stable, it could. >> >The atoms slow down or speed up depending upon their altitude and >> >velocity. The oscillator is then adjusted >> >to match the oscillation rate of the atoms. >> >> This is your incorrect MISINTERPRETATION of what happens. It is just wrong! >> Remember, if this was true, it would violate the first Postulate of >> Relativity. >No, it would just violate your screwball MISunderstanding of the First Postulate >of Relativity. It is trivially easy to connect a voltmeter or frequency counter (not based on a Cs clock) to measure the PLL feedback signal, and determine your altitude. Thus different laws of physics (the ones controlling the signal voltage) for different inertial states. Therefore, your misunderstanding violates the first postulate. In a PLL, the feedback signal controls a voltage controlled oscillator where the change in frequency is proportional to the voltage. >> >The purpose of an atomic clock is to have the oscillator match the oscillation >> >rate of the cesium atoms. The oscillator is ADJUSTED mechanically, the >> >atom's oscillation rate changes NATURALLY. >> >> Cesium doesn't change oscillations, that is the ENTIRE POINT of using it! >> No matter where you are, or where you get your cesium, a clock using it >> will oscillate at 9,192,631,770 Hertz. >Nope. The point of using cesium in atomic clocks is that the clock will keep >very precise time AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT MOVE IT. The Cs clocks in GPS orbits are moving many miles per second! The H-K experiments flew Cs clocks on airliners! > Keating's job was to deliver >newly built atomic clocks to labs around America. Every time he delivered >one he saw that the clock deviated from what the US Naval Observatory >clock was showing. So, he'd have to reset it. Yeah yeah, we all know about GR and its effects on clocks. Keating knew about GR and decided he could verify it with his clocks. >> >> >8. If the frequency that resulted in the right number of atom conversions is >> >> >9,192,631,771 Hz., that means the length of a second must be SHORTENED >> >> WRONG! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 times the Cs oscillation period. >A second is defined at equal to a cesium atom oscillating 9,192,631,770 times. And that is a fixed constant, it NEVER changes locally, which is why it was chosen. >> If the clock osciallates at 9,192,631,771 Hz, it is just plain WRONG! >The clock doesn't oscillate. The atoms do and the microwave photons do. Wrong. The atoms don't oscillate, photons don't, but the oscillator in the clock does. >When the atoms change their oscillation rate to 9,192,631,771 Hz, one >second still remains as a COUNT of 9,192,631,770 Hz. The clock adjusts >to that new length for a second. Which means the clock itself is wrong! It changed! You wouldn't accept length measurements by a rubber ruler, why do you believe in this rubber second! >> >> >the clock. The feedback system adjusts the length of a second to be one >> >> >tick less than previously. >> >> WRONG! The feedback system is there to prevent the osciallator from >> drifting off frequency. >The feedback system cannot "prevent" the oscillator from drifting, it can >only CORRECT the oscillator AFTER it has drifted, adjusting it back to >the correct rate needed to alter the atoms. A properly designed PLL does not have the phase detector output signal oscillating like that. Once locked in, the oscillator is LOCKED onto the reference signal. That is where the word "LOCKED" comes from in "phase locked loop". If you measure the phase detector output voltage in a properly operating PLL, you'll see it is a constant DC value if the reference frequency is stable. It means the VCO is in LOCKSTEP with the reference. >> Remember the description in one of those papers you misunderstand, where >> the feedback is like constantly adjusting a radio tuner to keep the station >> perfectly locked on? That's how phase locked loop circuits operate. >Right. >> >> WRONG. If the frequency is now at 9,192,631,771 Hz, the clock is AT THE >> >> WRONG FREQUENCY so is now a bad clock! A second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 >> >> Hz, 9,192,631,771 Hz is WRONG. >> >> >Right, the clock changes the length of a second so that >> >> If the clock changes the length of a second, it is BROKEN, because a >> second is DEFINED as 9,192,631,770 cycles. >A second is defined as a COUNT of 9,192,631,770 cycles. A count of the cycles of a Cs-133 atom, something that NEVER CHANGES. Which is why it was chosen. > When the cesium >atoms change their rate, Which happens the day pigs start flying? > the clock adjusts to keep that COUNT as a >measurement of one second. >> >> I did tell you to look at the design specs of atomic clocks. I didn't >> >> realize you'd misinterpret that so badly. >> >> >Nothing you posted changes anything. You are just stating YOUR OPINION. >> >I've already told you many times I DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR OPINIONS. >> >> This is not my opinion. This is from my education and experience as a >> degreed electrical engineer, including the use and operation of phase >> locked loops. I have DESIGNED phase locked loop circuits in the past. In >> fact the operation of an atomic clock was actually USED AS AN EXAMPLE of >> phase locked loops in a university course, and that has inspired my >> responses here. >And opinion is still just an opinion when it does nothing but state a >BELIEF. It is not a belief. It is fact. I paid good money for an EE degree, and I had to know that stuff to get it. Documents are all over the net if you search legitimate sources. > If you want to discuss the subject, then EXPLAIN WHAT IS WRONG I already did! >AND WHAT IS RIGHT AND PROVIDE SOURCES, DO NOT JUST SAY IT IS WRONG BECAUSE >IT CONFLICTS WITH YOUR BELIEFS. I looked at several of the links in your "collection" and they ALL either agree with what I wrote or don't state anything either way. You always misinterpret stuff to agree with your beliefs (very common with those with an idee fixe) so providing sources to you becomes an exercise in frustration. I will do so for the benefit of others. The best example is your wild misinterpretation of Einstein's 1905 SR paper, you wouldn't even accept his statements of the postulates in the paper!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-13 03:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ab8f67ac-d739-4947-b145-09a43559e990@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474786 |
On Friday, 12 October 2018 23:25:02 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote: > A count of the cycles of a Cs-133 atom, something that NEVER CHANGES. > Which is why it was chosen. A lie, as expected from fanatic trash. Anyone can check at GPS that it changes. And it was chosen because your bunch of idiots is preferring clocks confirming your Shit instead usable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-13 09:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6d0e07b4-cac5-4f0b-9a56-538e27397cc4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474786 |
It has become clear that arguing here has become counter-productive. I need to focus on writing a paper about atomic clocks and time dilation. When I've finished that paper, I'll start a new thread to discuss it. Byebye for now. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-13 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <441948ae-bfdc-491e-913c-dce6ddd0375c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474833 |
Ed Lake escrito It has become clear that arguing here has become counter-productive. I need to focus on Farting into my own Mouth. When I've finished that paper, I'll start a new thread to discuss it. Byebye for now. Ed Bye Eduardo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-13 18:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pptcds$tag$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474833 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> wrote: > It has become clear that arguing here has become counter-productive. I need > to focus on writing a paper about atomic clocks and time dilation. When > I've finished that paper, I'll start a new thread to discuss it. > > Byebye for now. > > Ed > At which point you will decide that arguing about all the mistakes in your new paper are counter-productive. Then you will announce its time to write another paper full of mistakes. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-11 15:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a46904cf-9f6e-4d34-8bb2-d718fd03dbaa@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474691 |
El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/122/jres.122.029.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-11 17:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <eac3c8c9-1894-4c80-8f69-8db04365b28f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474708 |
El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 19:49:54 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/122/jres.122.029.pdf How a cesium atomic clock works, in grandmother language!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2BxAu6WZI8 Manual of the Agilent 5061 cesium atomic clock http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/time/5061/5061A_ops_and_schematics.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-11 17:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f42eec24-2b43-4df7-b938-bf8020ba477a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474709 |
El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 21:27:05 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 19:49:54 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/122/jres.122.029.pdf > > How a cesium atomic clock works, in grandmother language!! > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2BxAu6WZI8 > > Manual of the Agilent 5061 cesium atomic clock > > http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/time/5061/5061A_ops_and_schematics.pdf Interesting video of one of the NIST engineers. Watch closely what he says at the end of the video. "The cesium atomic process works the same at sea level, at the top of a mountain and at space vehicle". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FAfMNVHETk
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 08:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5b6e32d5-f9fc-4628-99d6-0adeec67077d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474715 |
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 21:27:05 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 19:49:54 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > > > https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/122/jres.122.029.pdf > > > > How a cesium atomic clock works, in grandmother language!! > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2BxAu6WZI8 > > > > Manual of the Agilent 5061 cesium atomic clock > > > > http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/time/5061/5061A_ops_and_schematics.pdf > > Interesting video of one of the NIST engineers. Watch closely what he says > at the end of the video. "The cesium atomic process works the same at sea level, > at the top of a mountain and at space vehicle". > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FAfMNVHETk That last section is misleading. That is probably why you like it. The key here is Pound-Rebka. Atoms at the same altitude CAN exchange photons. Atoms at different altitudes CANNOT exchange photons. That is because atoms at different altitudes oscillate at different rates and become incompatible. So, we KNOW that atoms change oscillation rates. And in an atomic clock the microwave oscillator has to ADJUST to the changed rate. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 09:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b76710df-3d74-48d2-9ade-08a981196b00@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474744 |
EdTard prophesied That last section is misleading. That is probably why you like it. The key here is Pound-Rebka. Atoms at the same altitude CAN exchange photons. Atoms at different altitudes CANNOT exchange photons. That is because atoms at different altitudes oscillate at different rates and become incompatible. So, we KNOW that atoms change oscillation rates. And in an atomic clock the microwave oscillator has to ADJUST to the changed rate. Ed NO DUMB DICK EDUARDO!!! Pound Rebka is Exploiting Quantum Physics to verify SR & GR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 18:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppqqdt$mjc$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474744 |
Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: >> Interesting video of one of the NIST engineers. Watch closely what he says >> at the end of the video. "The cesium atomic process works the same at sea >> level, >> at the top of a mountain and at space vehicle". >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FAfMNVHETk >That last section is misleading. That is probably why you like it. Why is it "misleading"? Because it disagrees with your opinion? >The key here is Pound-Rebka. Atoms at the same altitude CAN exchange >photons. Atoms at different altitudes CANNOT exchange photons. That is >because atoms at different altitudes oscillate at different rates and become >incompatible. They SEE the photons as arriving at a different frequency because of gravitational redshift/blueshift. They are EMITTED at the same frequency. >So, we KNOW that atoms change oscillation rates. No, we don't. We KNOW that gravitational redshift/blueshift change the received frequency. > And in an atomic clock >the microwave oscillator has to ADJUST to the changed rate. Wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 13:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b9cc3102-7c22-487a-8887-95939f543da9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474756 |
On Friday, October 12, 2018 at 1:50:40 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: > Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> writes: > > >On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 7:43:42 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > > >> Interesting video of one of the NIST engineers. Watch closely what he says > >> at the end of the video. "The cesium atomic process works the same at sea > >> level, > >> at the top of a mountain and at space vehicle". > > >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FAfMNVHETk > > >That last section is misleading. That is probably why you like it. > > Why is it "misleading"? Because it disagrees with your opinion? > > >The key here is Pound-Rebka. Atoms at the same altitude CAN exchange > >photons. Atoms at different altitudes CANNOT exchange photons. That is > >because atoms at different altitudes oscillate at different rates and become > >incompatible. > > They SEE the photons as arriving at a different frequency because of > gravitational redshift/blueshift. They are EMITTED at the same frequency. NO THEY ARE NOT. Photons emitted at higher altitudes have a higher frequency than photons emitted at lower altitudes. They do NOT change frequency along the way. > > >So, we KNOW that atoms change oscillation rates. > > No, we don't. We KNOW that gravitational redshift/blueshift change the > received frequency. No, that is just your INCORRECT BELIEF. > > > And in an atomic clock > >the microwave oscillator has to ADJUST to the changed rate. > > Wrong. So, you want to start a STUPID opinion versus OPINION argument: Wrong! Right! Wrong! Right! Wrong! Right! Wrong! Right! Wrong! Right! Wrong! Right! And on and on forever. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ed Lake <detect@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-12 08:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <966a5d3f-a68e-45e9-9b44-89ff7a621146@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474709 |
On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 7:27:05 PM UTC-5, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 19:49:54 (UTC-3), Paparios escribió: > > El jueves, 11 de octubre de 2018, 17:51:00 (UTC-3), Ed Lake escribió: > > > > https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/jres/122/jres.122.029.pdf Yes, I've had that paper in my collection for a long time. Here's a good quote from it: "The detector sends a feedback signal to a servo circuit that continually tunes the quartz oscillator so that the maximum number of atoms reaches the detector, thereby locking the frequency of the microwaves to the cesium hyperfine transition frequency. The process of keeping the quartz oscillator locked to the cesium frequency is analogous to carefully and continuously tuning a radio dial to ensure that the loudest and clearest signal is always heard." The quartz oscillator adjusts to match the oscillation rate of the atoms. When the oscillation rate of the atoms speeds up or slows down due to changes in altitude or velocity, the quartz oscillator adjusts the length of a second to always be 9,192,631,770 oscillations. > > How a cesium atomic clock works, in grandmother language!! > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2BxAu6WZI8 It's a video that is misleading. It says nothing about what happens when a clock is raised or lowered. > > Manual of the Agilent 5061 cesium atomic clock > > http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dga/time/5061/5061A_ops_and_schematics.pdf Thanks VERY MUCH!!! That's a document I didn't have in my collection. Section 1-4 in the Introduction contains good information on how the quartz oscillator is tuned to the atom's frequency, i.e., how the clock knows whether to adjust up or down to find the atom's frequency. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web