0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
A caesium standard or caesium atomic clock is a primary frequency standard in which electronic transitions between the two hyperfine ground states of caesium-133 atoms are used to control the output frequency. The first caesium clock was built by Louis Essen in 1955 at the National Physical Laboratory in the UK.[1]
By definition, radiation produced by the transition between the two hyperfine ground states of caesium (in the absence of external influences such as the Earth's magnetic field) has a frequency of exactly 9,192,631,770 Hz. That value was chosen so that the caesium second equalled, to the limit of human measuring ability in 1960 when it was adopted, the existing standard ephemeris second based on the Earth's orbit around the Sun.
Remember that the caesium atom has been chosen because it's natural resonating frequency is equal to a second as defined by the movements of the earth around the sun,
then the E=hf transitions of the caesium atom are not fixed. E will increase or decrease as frequency increases or decreases.
In the NIST ground level relativity tests both clocks are held stationary with regards to each other, so kinetic energy cannot be responsible for the difference in frequency between the clocks... and logically speaking if the clock at 1 meter elevation were to zoom off horizontally at speed - adding the subsequent kinetic energy would further increase the frequency and the atomic clock would register a further increase in time, and not the decrease in rate of time as is observed.
[The De Broglie hypothesis holds that a particles energy is proportional to frequency, and momentum is calculated via velocity and mass. The fact that lights mass is calculated via kinetic energy is confusing, but as far as I am aware, a particles frequency is mass related, and it is a particles mass that is velocity related.
Ditch the notion of energy mass equivalence... and under this remit calculation of wavelength is time related and quantum can then be calculated as to a particles position and momentum simultaneously and without recourse to probability...
In a universe where we know that gravity has an effect on particles, and quantum is the world of particles, why is it that these equations you mention do not relate to each other?
Going back to the caesium atom, it's energy level and frequency increase in the weaker gravitational field.
All particles are in motion! When a particle is described as having a rest mass, all this means is that the particle is at rest relative to the earth's motion. ie: it is moving with the earth.
You say that the De Broglie frequency* of an atom is dependent on momentum. Momentum is calculated via mass and velocity. Frequency is calculated via energy... and e=mc2.{/quote]. As you wish. But if you put in the numbers, you will see that the deBroglie frequency of Cs133 is several orders of magnitude higher than the hyperfine transition frequency that drives the clocks. QuoteAre you saying that there is a distinction between how the energies that supposedly contribute to the mass of a particle, or atom, interact with gravity? no[quoote]You are saying that the clock frequency is a function of the electrons making up the structure of the atom. Breaking the atom down to its particle structure, the electron has energy, frequency, wavelength...and mass.
Are you saying that there is a distinction between how the energies that supposedly contribute to the mass of a particle, or atom, interact with gravity?
Why is the 'we don't know' aspect of physics irrelevant to a discussion that attempts to offer an answer to unknowns, or at least gives a 'reason for cause' for observables that may then be discussed?
If a photon gravitationally shifts in energy, any particle is gravitationally shifting in energy!
*(What is the difference between a De Broglie frequency of an atom, and the frequency of light? And if a De Broglie frequency differs from another type of frequency, what is this other type of frequency?)
just the fact that lights frequency reduces in a weaker gravitational field and a particle with mass, it's frequency increases in a weaker gravitational field.
While gravitational redshift refers to what is seen, gravitational time dilation refers to what is deduced to be "really" happening once observational effects are taken into account.
QuoteWhile gravitational redshift refers to what is seen, gravitational time dilation refers to what is deduced to be "really" happening once observational effects are taken into account.
OK so as was pointed out . Therefore in the case of the photon the energy equation becomes .If we take our wavelength as L (1 light second) then we can show that . This 1 hertz wave then shows the direct relationship to the Planck constant.