Atomic Clocks
nist.gov
Atomic Clocks
1–10 of 89 posts
Re: Atomic Clocks
#2Fun fact, two (very expensive) wristwatches have actual atomic timekeeping in them, instead of just receiving a radio time signal: the Bathys Hawaii Cesium 133, and a few different shaped from Hoptroff London.
All released 2013-2015. Not sure what happened then for there to be suddenly two.
Re: Atomic Clocks
#3Fun fact, two (very expensive) wristwatches have actual atomic timekeeping in them, instead of just receiving a radio time signal: the Bathys Hawaii Cesium 133, and a few different shaped from Hoptroff London. All released 2013-2015. Not sure what happened then for there to be suddenly two.
Symmetricom (now owned by Microchip) released the first Chip Scale Atomic Clocks in 2011. It probably took some time for them to become available to watch designers and for them to be integrated into watch designs.
https://www.nist.gov/noac/success-story-chip-scale-atomic-cl...
I'm guessing the watches sold poorly and the chip packages are still large compared to a watch movement, so no new designs.
Re: Atomic Clocks
#4> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second.
Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context:
> New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about.
What is possible by pushing past that incredibly narrow margin of 1s in 13b years? What dreamy capabilities do we get that we don’t enjoy today?
Edit: I’d assumed they were talking about new approaches to making these clocks more accurate, but I wonder if they’re referring to power and form factors? I.E. an atomic clock the size of a grain of rice: https://www.nist.gov/noac/success-story-chip-scale-atomic-cl...
Re: Atomic Clocks
#5Fun fact, two (very expensive) wristwatches have actual atomic timekeeping in them, instead of just receiving a radio time signal: the Bathys Hawaii Cesium 133, and a few different shaped from Hoptroff London. All released 2013-2015. Not sure what happened then for there to be suddenly two.
Symmetricom (now owned by Microchip) released the first Chip Scale Atomic Clocks in 2011. It probably took some time for them to become available to watch designers and for them to be integrated into watch designs. https://www.nist.gov/noac/success-story-chip-scale-atomic-cl... I'm guessing the watches sold poorly and the chip packages are still large compared to a watch movement, so no new designs.
Sadly, no major miniaturization breakthroughs since. And those CSACs still eat up a lot of power (as do good OCXOs), making them rough for battery powered wearables.
Re: Atomic Clocks
#6> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second. Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context: > New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about…
There are still big leaps, like their optical lattice clock that's sensitive to the gravitational difference caused by tidal effects on the earth's crust.
It can detect gravitational differences of a few cm!
Re: Atomic Clocks
#7> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second. Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context: > New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about…
What are these atomic clocks measured against?
Re: Atomic Clocks
#8> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second. Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context: > New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about…
Pretty sure you can rig something far better than radar if you have the ability to detect extremely tiny gravitational waves via an array of hyper-accurate clocks.
Re: Atomic Clocks
#9> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second. Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context: > New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about…
In radio astronomy, more precise clocks can directly improve the quality/resolution of observations.
> Data received at each antenna in the array include arrival times from a local atomic clock, such as a hydrogen maser. At a later time, the data are correlated with data from other antennas that recorded the same radio signal, to produce the resulting image. The resolution achievable using interferometry is proportional to the observing frequency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very-long-baseline_interferome...
Re: Atomic Clocks
#10> Today’s best atomic clocks are billions of times more accurate and precise than any other type of clock. If they had been running since the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, they would have lost or gained less than a second. Absolutely incredible, but then confused by the next assertion that is made without context: > New kinds of clocks may soon open up capabilities that previous generations could only dream about…
> What is possible by pushing past that incredibly narrow margin of 1s in 13b years? What dreamy capabilities do we get that we don’t enjoy today?
You can measure speed (via special relativity) and altitude (via gravity/general relativity) with atomic clocks [0], so with a more accurate clock, you should be able to calculate your speed/altitude more accurately.
GPS is already pretty good at measuring speed/altitude, but its not always very accurate, and it only works if you can receive the satellite's signal. In theory, a more accurate atomic clock would solve both of these problems (as long as you had an equally-accurate clock at a fixed location to compare to).