> Seconds tick by ever so slightly faster atop a mountain than they do in the valleys of Earth. Did they push an update with new laws of physics, or have I completely missed something?
Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
11–20 of 31 posts
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#12> Seconds tick by ever so slightly faster atop a mountain than they do in the valleys of Earth. Did they push an update with new laws of physics, or have I completely missed something?
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#13Idk. Is this actually needed in practice? Most RTC chips are off by several seconds per day. If you need accurate time you sync them to an outside source (a network time server or GPS). Does it matter if your oscillator is 56 microseconds off because of relativistic effects if it is off by multiple seconds because the chip is cheap? You need some sort of network connections back to Earth anyway, can't you just spare…
Personal computers don't care much about timing down to the nanosecond, but scientific pursuits often need that level of precision, standardizing timing with high precision would make it easier to perform experiments that depend on time correlated comparisons across the lunar surface.
It's still a weak case in my opinion, things can always be refined later.
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#14Idk. Is this actually needed in practice? Most RTC chips are off by several seconds per day. If you need accurate time you sync them to an outside source (a network time server or GPS). Does it matter if your oscillator is 56 microseconds off because of relativistic effects if it is off by multiple seconds because the chip is cheap? You need some sort of network connections back to Earth anyway, can't you just spare…
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#15Given that there are 86,400,000,000 microseconds in a day, we will need a leap year every 1.5 billion years to stay in sync. I think we’ll be fine.
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#16Idk. Is this actually needed in practice? Most RTC chips are off by several seconds per day. If you need accurate time you sync them to an outside source (a network time server or GPS). Does it matter if your oscillator is 56 microseconds off because of relativistic effects if it is off by multiple seconds because the chip is cheap? You need some sort of network connections back to Earth anyway, can't you just spare…
For scientific experiments of the type one might be running on the moon? Almost certainly for at least some of them.
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#17"Private moon lander will carry Nokia's 4G cell network to the lunar surface this year" https://www.space.com/nokia-4g-cell-network-on-the-moon Doesn't 4G include a time synchronization service for receivers with no GPS; and is the SI second unit (which is currently defined in terms of the cesium decay) const hardcoded in the new system?
Yes, but I believe accuracy is on the order of minutes.
> is the SI second unit (which is currently defined in terms of the cesium decay) const hardcoded in the new system?
Are you saying that a moon second should be defined to be slightly longer/shorter than an earth second to compensate for the relativistic difference? That wouldn't help, since relativity affects all physical processes; if you do that, all your other measures would be off too, including e.g. length (defined as the distance light travels in a given unit of time).
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#18> Seconds tick by ever so slightly faster atop a mountain than they do in the valleys of Earth. Did they push an update with new laws of physics, or have I completely missed something?
Relativity: The Special and the General Theory (1916) Einstein, Albert https://www.abebooks.com/9780517884416/Relativity-Special-Ge...
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#19> Seconds tick by ever so slightly faster atop a mountain than they do in the valleys of Earth. Did they push an update with new laws of physics, or have I completely missed something?
This is because of relativity and the fact that there's more force at in the valley than the mountain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
Does this also have an effect on your relative time?
Re: Why scientists say we need to send clocks to the moon
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is because of relativity and the fact that there's more force at in the valley than the mountain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
What about the fact that you are moving faster when on top of a mountain than in a valley due to the rotation of the earth and being farther from the center of rotation? Does this also have an effect on your relative time?