StringJunky Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 ..at a temperature of 0 K. Has 0oK been achieved?
Strange Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 Has 0oK been achieved? No, but I believe any (very small) differences are compensated for (swansont could provide more detail than you could possibly want ).
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2015 Posted June 8, 2015 No, but I believe any (very small) differences are compensated for (swansont could provide more detail than you could possibly want ). Yes, I imagine that would be the case. I suppose the extrapolation from the measured temperature is smooth down to zero. Yes, like drinking from a fire hydrant probably, what he could tell us. 1
DimaMazin Posted June 9, 2015 Author Posted June 9, 2015 The second is defined as: the duration of 9192631770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom at rest at a temperature of 0 K. Radiations are motions. Do you think the clock doesn't count quantities of the radiations?
DimaMazin Posted June 23, 2015 Author Posted June 23, 2015 And I don't know what "counted by standard of simultaneity" means. Especially in regard to a single clock. Well.Then time is quantity of standard motions of simultaneity in simultaneity with other motions and immovability.
swansont Posted June 23, 2015 Posted June 23, 2015 Radiations are motions. Do you think the clock doesn't count quantities of the radiations? You are measuring the frequency of the radiation. Calling that motion is a stretch. And most clocks don't actually measure it that way, they measure whether the atoms have undergone a hyperfine transition (a change in spin orientation). It's QM, so it's really hard to describe that in terms of motion. What moves when an electron changes its spin state? What's the trajectory? Has 0oK been achieved? Doesn't matter. You calculate the effect of the blackbody shift based on the temperature of the system. The point is that motion is not part of the system that gives you the time. Motion actually limits the precision of the measurement; great effort is expended to keep the atoms from moving very much. That's why the state of the art clocks and frequency standards use cold atoms, or ions.
Strange Posted June 23, 2015 Posted June 23, 2015 Well.Then time is quantity of standard motions of simultaneity in simultaneity with other motions and immovability. What does "standard motions of simultaneity" mean?
DimaMazin Posted October 28, 2015 Author Posted October 28, 2015 I know exact definition of time. Time is quantity of nonsimultaneity between two events. Nonsimultaneity is change of ability of distance to transmit signal.
TJ McCaustland Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) Dima my congradulations, Hopefully you can come up with more equations like this, but hopefully something more original next time. Edited October 30, 2015 by TJ McCaustland
DimaMazin Posted June 18, 2016 Author Posted June 18, 2016 Maybe clock measures quantity(as part of lack of absolute motion) of lack of own motion relative to observer?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now