[guest39538]

“The crucial question there was: Compared to what?

A question I have raised many times before and I know the answer too.   All clocks are relative to the Earth's rotation including the Caesium clock.   

1 second is equal to approx 0.288 mile of rotation of the Earth and all clocks are synchronise to this or we simply would not have a 24 hour day.


Synchronised timing that we use is very different to time, time is timeless and we are timing travelling through timeless.  We are timing things , we never did record time, we record the history of events passing by our observation.

added- we can ''predict'' future events by repetition and the very fact that we have clear lines of sight of start and end points.

 

[guest39538]

I recommend a Cesium atomic clock. These are known to be able to measure time dilation on Earth and in its vicinity (the GPS satellites have pre-distorted atomic clocks, so they run "correctly" when they are on orbit, as seen by an observer on Earth).

A timing synchronisation variation relative to other timing synchronisations! how in any way is a Caesium clock related to time other than abstract synchronisation with other clocks?

[evan_au]

A timing synchronisation variation relative to other timing synchronisations!

That's how we have always done it. For human-manufactured time:
- We synchronize minutes to 60 seconds. For a mechanical clock, that means a gear ratio of 60:1.
- We synchronize hours to 60 minutes. Another gear ratio of 60:1.
- We synchronize days to 24 hours. etc
- Although traditionally, you would do it in the reverse order...

For "Natural" time-keeping, it is a bit more random...
- A year is roughly 365.25 days, so we call it 365 and throw in a leap year every so often
- A Lunar month is roughly 29.53 days, so some cultures call it 12 months, and throw in an extra month every so often
- The length of a day varies throughout the year. With 12 hours in the day (and implicitly 12 at night), the length of an hour as measured by a sundial is different between summer and winter.
- The rotation of the Earth is approximately 24 hours (but it varies a bit), so we call it 24 hours, and throw in a leap second every so often.

how in any way is a Caesium clock related to time other than abstract synchronisation with other clocks?

In 1960, the Caesium clock was initially calibrated to the length of the average day in the year 1900, as estimated by astronomers. The answer was defined as 1 second = 9,192,631,770 oscillations of Cesium.

But the Cesium clock is far more stable than the rotation of the Earth, so we now use the Cesium clock to measure the rotation of the Earth.

Comparing two Cesium clocks is fairly easy if they are in the same laboratory. They each generate a signal that is approximately 9,192,631,770Hz, and if they differ by even 1Hz, that is apparent within 1 second as a "slip" in phase between the two signals.

It gets way more complicated if the Cesium clocks are traveling at different velocities and reside in different positions in a gravitational well.

Einstein's Relativity suggests that there serious limitations to how well you can synchronize two clocks if they are not in the same frame of reference.

[Colin2B]

how in any way is a Caesium clock related to time other than abstract synchronisation with other clocks?

This has been explained to you in a number of other threads. If you continue to interrupt threads by repeating this question we will delete your posts.
The same goes for questions you are repeatedly asking regarding sight and light.
If you want to discuss your ideas then open up a new theory just as Timey has and encourage people to join the discussion.

[guest39538]

A timing synchronisation variation relative to other timing synchronisations!

[quote-=Evan]That's how we have always done it. For human-manufactured time:[/quote]

Exactly, humans change the parameters of time...

[guest39538]

In 1960, the Caesium clock was initially calibrated to the length of the average day in the year 1900, as estimated by astronomers. The answer was defined as 1 second = 9,192,631,770 oscillations of Cesium.

Sorry Evan you have this backwards,  ''1 second = 9,192,631,770 oscillations of Cesium''.

It was defined that 9,192,631,770 = 1 second.

The rate of the Caesium at ground state was defined by cycles equal to the present second of 1960.   The present second of 1960 being  based on a standard clock that is based originally on a sundial that is based on relative rotation of the Earth.

[Colin2B]

I am separating this off from the other thread which was about biological clocks.

Exactly, humans change the parameters of time...

Humans change the way time is measured, but not time itself. Reread Evan's reply it answers your question.

Over the centuries humans have changed the way temperature, length, weight etc are measured, that does not make the items measured any different. A weight in your hand would not suddenly get heavier just because we redefine the Pound or Kilogram.

Please keep to the topic and do not stray into wild speculation or your posts will be deleted. This is not discrimination, it has happened to others. See sticky post at top of this forum.

[guest39538]

Humans change the way time is measured, but not time itself.

Human's change the way time is measured, they change devices and define a rate of time, of course we know human's can not change time itself .   
So of course any change in the measurement  and a human suggestion that time changes is clearly not time itself.


What do you mean by time itself?   To me that sounds like you are suggesting the existence of an entity which has physical presence as if it were a ''thing'' of real value!  Rather than an abstract creation of synchronise process.

[Colin2B]

... an abstract creation of synchronise process.

A what??

People had a concept of the passage of time long before clocks or any idea of 'synchronisation'
If time did not pass, nothing would happen, stasis, stopped, frozen (without the singing).

[chris]

I wrote this news piece recently to cover a publication from Germany regarding optical clocks, which are the successor to the caesium clock. There's some background in there which you might find helpful.

[guest39538]

If time did not pass, nothing would happen,

OK, let us try an experiment and remove all the clocks in the world, do you really think that if we stopped measuring  that nothing would happen?


Why do you think we need clocks for things to happen?

[guest39538]

I wrote this news piece recently to cover a publication from Germany regarding optical clocks, which are the successor to the caesium clock. There's some background in there which you might find helpful.

Thank you for the interesting read, the problem like normal even with your new clock is that you are not measuring time, you are recording the mechanism of the clock relative to you sitting there and watching it.

[Colin2B]

If time did not pass, nothing would happen,

OK, let us try an experiment and remove all the clocks in the world, do you really think that if we stopped measuring  that nothing would happen?

Why do you think we need clocks for things to happen?

You are confusing the process of measurement with the thing being measured.
If we removed all the rulers in the world would distance cease to exist?
If we removed all the thermometers in the world would temperature cease to exist?

You are confusing a mechanism for recording elapsed time between events as being responsible for the existence of time. No one claimed that is true.