3 ms·
Seconds don't vary, your approximation of a second varies. If you want to nitpick, you're going to need to start with Cesium-133 oscillation periods as average
by gervu 7y ago
Seconds don't vary, your approximation of a second varies.
If you want to nitpick, you're going to need to start with Cesium-133 oscillation periods as averaged from over nine billion samples.
- IggleSniggle 7y agoI like the cut of your jib. But I suppose what I was saying was that, for the purposes of establishing “now”, “now” isn’t really standardizable except with respect to a single inertial frame, and any time-keeping that occurs outside of this inertial frame will not be absolutely in sync, even though it may have a highly accurate measure of time for its own inertial frame. This matters when computers are bouncing records about time around satellites and across the global. Edit: I have no idea what I’m talking about so please do not hesitate to correct me on the particulars!
- astrange 7y agoSeconds do vary because there are no privileged reference frames in the universe. You'll get a different measurement if your cesium measuring experiment is traveling at a different speed than you are.
- gervu 7y agoThat's the direction of your mass-energy vector, not seconds. A bit like complaining that UTC is wrong because it doesn't match your local Solar time.