Reframing the analysis helps show that your thoughts still fit within the proposed model: Sundials and astronomical observations are not principle mechanisms o

Reframing the analysis helps show that your thoughts still fit within the proposed model: Sundials and astronomical observations are not principle mechanisms of clocks.. they are a window of observation into the clock system of moving planetary bodies. Those planetary bodies indeed follow the thermodynamic principles outlined. Imagine you had a rotating disc occluding a light source with a thin slot cut in the disc such that every rotation at one small interval the light source is visible. Rotate it using, say, a coiled spring, and you have a clock, revealing a pulse of light with a constant frequency. This is easy enough to fit into the mold of a thermodynamic clock as proposed in the article. Now, we can think of earth orbiting the sun similarly to our disc rotating in front of the light source…. Every time earth rotates on its axis, half is exposed to the light and half is not…. Quite a wide ‘slot’ cut into our planetary ‘disc’, not useful for much more than knowing what day it is. All a sundial does is narrow that ‘slot’ to make a more accurate observation of our planetary clock’s state. Same goes for observing other planets / stars etc. While these planetary motions appear to be ‘regular and sustained’ on our timescales, they are still subject to the same thermodynamic principles as all other matter, and reach lower entropy over time, until the heat death of the universe :( Someone posted about two bodies orbiting each other, and not know time forward from backward.. again, you can’t ignore physics, those orbits will measurably and irreversibly decay over time until the bodies collide.. just not on timescales that would effect our species using them as clocks!