4 ms·

I just know this is going to take weeks or months of planning meetings, stakeholder sensing sessions, and arguments over minutiae. Not a good use of official ti

I just know this is going to take weeks or months of planning meetings, stakeholder sensing sessions, and arguments over minutiae. Not a good use of official time and taxpayer resources. It's all arbitrary anyway. Just pick something that makes sense. UTC, UTC+1 (ESA), UTC-6 (Houston), whatever.

t0mas88 3y ago
It's not about a "timezone", the article is about high precision time keeping and how to set a standard for it on the moon. Because (according to the article) an earth clock when moved to the moon wold be a few micro seconds per day slower then it was on earth, causing drift. So just setting UTC or UTC+1 isn't the ting they're trying to decide. It's more about a scientific method to derive highly accurate time on the moon, which can't just be earth type atomic clocks because they would drift.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- eek2121 3y ago
  Wouldn't the solution be to use microseconds? Maybe I'm just being naive, I love science, but as I get older it gets hard to keep all the whims of tech in my head.
  - eek2121 3y ago
    tech/science*
  - lupire 3y ago
    Yes, that would be the solution. Do you know how to make a microsecond on the moon? No, you do not. No one does. NASA has been assigned to figure it out.
    - zardo 3y ago
      A clock that ticks in microseconds on Earth will tick in (local) microseconds on the Moon.
      - Vox_Leone 3y ago
        No, no. Time is a function of the gravitational field. Two different masses, two different ticking and tacking.
        torstenvl 3y ago
        The consensus is that gravitational time dilation occurs has a constant effect, not that it's qualitatively different in some complicated way that requires a Presidential directive to figure out. Do you have any evidence that they're more "different" than Earth "local microseconds" versus moon "local microseconds"?
  - callamdelaney 3y ago
    A microsecond up there is different from a microsecond down here, because of gravity difference, kinda like interstellar but much much more subtle.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

t0mas88 3y ago

It's not about a "timezone", the article is about high precision time keeping and how to set a standard for it on the moon. Because (according to the article) an earth clock when moved to the moon wold be a few micro seconds per day slower then it was on earth, causing drift. So just setting UTC or UTC+1 isn't the ting they're trying to decide. It's more about a scientific method to derive highly accurate time on the moon, which can't just be earth type atomic clocks because they would drift.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
eek2121 3y ago
Wouldn't the solution be to use microseconds? Maybe I'm just being naive, I love science, but as I get older it gets hard to keep all the whims of tech in my head.
- eek2121 3y ago
  tech/science*
- lupire 3y ago
  Yes, that would be the solution. Do you know how to make a microsecond on the moon? No, you do not. No one does. NASA has been assigned to figure it out.
  - zardo 3y ago
    A clock that ticks in microseconds on Earth will tick in (local) microseconds on the Moon.
    - Vox_Leone 3y ago
      No, no. Time is a function of the gravitational field. Two different masses, two different ticking and tacking.
      - torstenvl 3y ago
        The consensus is that gravitational time dilation occurs has a constant effect, not that it's qualitatively different in some complicated way that requires a Presidential directive to figure out. Do you have any evidence that they're more "different" than Earth "local microseconds" versus moon "local microseconds"?
- callamdelaney 3y ago
  A microsecond up there is different from a microsecond down here, because of gravity difference, kinda like interstellar but much much more subtle.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]