4 ms·
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)
by 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 agoWouldn'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 agotech/science*
- lupire 3y agoYes, 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 agoA clock that ticks in microseconds on Earth will tick in (local) microseconds on the Moon.
- Vox_Leone 3y agoNo, no. Time is a function of the gravitational field. Two different masses, two different ticking and tacking.
- torstenvl 3y agoThe 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 agoA 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]