# Calendars

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

12500.  Thu Dec 23, 2004 9:20 pm

 Quote: The difference between that scenario and the leap second is that instead of setting the clock that is running slow, we choose to set the clock that is keeping a uniform, precise time. This is because we can change the time on an atomic clock, but it is not possible to alter the Earth's rotational speed to match the atomic clocks!

Why wouldn't it be possible to re-define the second to x number of vibrations of the atomic clocks workings to match the earths rotation?

12505.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 5:26 am

I suppose because you'd no sooner do so than it'd be out of date because
 Quote: The Earth is constantly decelerating

 12511.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:01 am Q; Why is a stopped watch more use than one that loses a second every thousand years? A; Because the stopped watch is right twice a day.

 12513.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:08 am So Eccles' bit of paper with 8 O'clock written on it is bettter than an atomic clock.

 12524.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:24 am No Eccles' bit of paper was a forgery what you need is what Bluebottle's Grandad got when he did retire,that not only tells him when it's eight oclock but it also makes him a cup of tea

12526.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 5:31 pm

 Quote: Civil time is occasionally adjusted by one second increments (leap seconds) to ensure that the difference between a uniform time scale defined by atomic clocks does not differ from the Earth's rotational time by more than 0.9 seconds. Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), an atomic time, is the basis for civil time. Currently the Earth runs slow at roughly 2 milliseconds per day. After 500 days, the difference between the Earth rotation time and the atomic time would be 1 second. Instead of allowing this to happen, a leap second is inserted to bring the two times closer together.

This might all change in the not too distant future. The link below connects to a site with some information I find a little disturbing.

http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html

12528.  Fri Dec 24, 2004 7:24 pm

That site made my head ache, but I did get as far as this bit:
 Quote: over the past 30 years (coincidentally since the inception of leap seconds) the rotation of the earth's crust has accelerated (my emphasis). This acceleration is apparently due to changes of fluid circulation in the outer core of the earth.

 12536.  Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:32 am So somebody sometime did actually say, 'Stop the world, I want to get off!' and for once God's doing it - but in His/Her/Its/Their own good time. Never mind - it's like the Big Bang, theoretically intriguing but of no practical use. Either that, or it's another conspiracy theory. Somebody Out There doesn't like us... Don't worry about it - have a Good New Many Years anyway!

12595.  Thu Dec 30, 2004 12:46 am

 Jenny wrote: Did you know that the earth is running slow?

as a result of the tsunami in the Indian Ocean it would seem the world has speeded up a little, how sad that the Americans had the technology to prevent the losses but the asians didn't seem to want to use it

 from the news thread on davegorman.com wrote: The north-west tip of Sumatra might have shifted to the south-west by as much as 36 metres, Mr Hudnut said. "That is a lot of slip. That earthquake has changed the map," he said. However, scientists will have to use handheld GPS devices to establish the exact degree of shift. Some believe the land mass may have moved up or down, not sideways. Richard Gross, a geophysicist with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California, theorised that a shift of mass towards the Earth's centre during the quake caused the planet to spin faster by three microseconds, or three millionths of a second, and to tilt about 2.5 centimetres on its axis.

12639.  Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:09 pm

laidbacklazyman wrote:

as a result of the tsunami in the Indian Ocean it would seem the world has speeded up a little, how sad that the Americans had the technology to prevent the losses but the asians didn't seem to want to use it

 from the news thread on davegorman.com wrote:

I imagine that the Americans were selling it for a dirt cheap \$5billion.

p.s Yahy Dave Gorman, defenetly the funniest man ever.

 12642.  Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:58 am I think it was more the American Tsunami Research bods that have the gear to early detect, and I think they only need somerwhere to set up their study centre in a reciprocal agreement type thing. My understanding from BBC News was the Tsunami guys in Hawaii had enquired sometime ago about setting up a centre for the Indian Ocean but were met with a brick wall of red tape. Although you understand this is my take on what was said on the news, I am in no way an authority on research so it is quite likely that I have the wrong end of this stick. On a side note with the world speeding up, does this mean I will put on or lose weight as a rate of the side efect on gravity? not that I'm vain or anything I'm just curious in a male version of the question "does this dress make my bum look big" kind of way

 12698.  Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:52 pm The earth is running slow! Personally I blame the government ;o)

 13038.  Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:43 am Something that struck me about the tsunami. Seeing as a butterfly flap can change the weather in ways we cannot predict, could this catastrophic event, which displaced so much water, lead to some massive meteorological changes? I know it's a piffling question in the scheme of things, but it's been bugging me.

 13047.  Thu Jan 06, 2005 11:32 am I think the point of the butterfly hypothesis is about chaos, which is to do with unpredictability. So a major event like this would have pervasive (but unpredictable) consequences.

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Display posts from previous:

Forum tools
User tools