What is the accuracy of world time and can it be improved?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wisp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
wisp
Messages
179
Reaction score
0
Atomic clocks around the world (including the GPS) agree on a time which is accurate to about 1nS per day. I think I read somewhere that the system has to be adjusted daily because of unknown errors of about 0.9nS.
Does anyone know if this is correct?
Can world time achieve accuracies better than this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
wisp said:
Atomic clocks around the world (including the GPS) agree on a time which is accurate to about 1nS per day. I think I read somewhere that the system has to be adjusted daily because of unknown errors of about 0.9nS.
Does anyone know if this is correct?
Can world time achieve accuracies better than this?

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/clocks.html

says that the USNO master clock rate does not vary by more than .1 nanoseconds (100 picoseconds) per day.

I don't think we can disseminate time this accurately over large distances, though.

GPS time dissemination is one of the more accurate available methods, but it's only good to somewhere around 100ns or so from what I've read. This seems a bit conservative to me though, it's equivalent to 100 ft accuracy in position.
 
well, it is true that the commerical gps satallites are accurate to only 100ft, but some of the units that we (military) have are a lot more accurate than that. there's a lot more in those navsats then you may know about. however, the time of 100ns, it is not entirely used to it's full potentional for most uses. it seems conserative, but that's just because of the limits that are applied to it by the gov't.
 
My 1nS was a little bit out.

The feedback is very helpful:
USNO master clock rate does not vary by more than .1 nanoseconds (100 picoseconds) per day.
GPS time around 100ns or more.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top