3 ms·

Why needlessly complicate things? Use GMT + 0, earth days, and earth weeks. Why introduce all this unnecessary confusion? There is no practical need to measure

by Daz1 4y ago

Why needlessly complicate things? Use GMT + 0, earth days, and earth weeks. Why introduce all this unnecessary confusion? There is no practical need to measure local time on the moon. >Earth clocks and moon clocks don’t run at the same time, due to relativity. I'm sure the 1/3000th of a millisecond per year won't be a problem

wyldfire 4y ago
> There is no practical need to measure local time on the moon Could it be useful to know when the sun would rise and set, or when Earth rises and sets, for the sake of having routines related to solar power or LOS communications? Having a Luna-native time-of-day might be handy for some things. I think it makes some sense to come to an agreement, even if that agreement was to use UTC (TFA does mention that it's used for ISS).
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > Could it be useful to know when the sun would rise and set, or when Earth rises and sets, for the sake of having routines related to solar power or LOS communications? The sun rises and sets over exactly one (Earth) lunar month, 29.5 days. That's what the phases of the moon are, the progression of sunlight over the face of the moon. Earth never rises or sets; the near side of the moon always faces toward Earth, and the far side of the moon never faces toward Earth. (This is known as "tidelocking".) So no, neither of those could be useful.
doctor_eval 4y ago
> I'm sure the 1/3000th of a millisecond per year won't be a problem But that’s several orders of magnitude incorrect. FTA: > Clocks run faster on the moon than on Earth, gaining about 56 microseconds each day Unless my maths is wrong isn’t it actually 200 milliseconds per year? It’s not a lot of time, sure. But it seems important to people like scientists. Which, not coincidentally, is probably the most ”practical” thing people will be doing while spending time on the moon.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > Unless my maths is wrong isn’t it actually 200 milliseconds per year? 20, not 200.
  - doctor_eval 4y ago
    Yes, you are right. 0.02 seconds; I made a conversion error to ms.

by Daz1 4y ago

wyldfire 4y ago

> There is no practical need to measure local time on the moon Could it be useful to know when the sun would rise and set, or when Earth rises and sets, for the sake of having routines related to solar power or LOS communications? Having a Luna-native time-of-day might be handy for some things. I think it makes some sense to come to an agreement, even if that agreement was to use UTC (TFA does mention that it's used for ISS).

thaumasiotes 4y ago
> Could it be useful to know when the sun would rise and set, or when Earth rises and sets, for the sake of having routines related to solar power or LOS communications? The sun rises and sets over exactly one (Earth) lunar month, 29.5 days. That's what the phases of the moon are, the progression of sunlight over the face of the moon. Earth never rises or sets; the near side of the moon always faces toward Earth, and the far side of the moon never faces toward Earth. (This is known as "tidelocking".) So no, neither of those could be useful.

doctor_eval 4y ago

> I'm sure the 1/3000th of a millisecond per year won't be a problem But that’s several orders of magnitude incorrect. FTA: > Clocks run faster on the moon than on Earth, gaining about 56 microseconds each day Unless my maths is wrong isn’t it actually 200 milliseconds per year? It’s not a lot of time, sure. But it seems important to people like scientists. Which, not coincidentally, is probably the most ”practical” thing people will be doing while spending time on the moon.

thaumasiotes 4y ago
> Unless my maths is wrong isn’t it actually 200 milliseconds per year? 20, not 200.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  Yes, you are right. 0.02 seconds; I made a conversion error to ms.