3 ms·
You are right, you'd have to use a new second definition. That's why I am referring to "simple seconds" (you can debate the name...) in the article. I guess it
by telmich 13y ago
You are right, you'd have to use a new second definition. That's why I am referring to "simple seconds" (you can debate the name...) in the article.
I guess it's easy to find another molecule/atom to relate the time to - there are many around.