How do we measure time more accurately?

In summary: Ytterbium. Hg, Aluminium etc) and no one yet knows which will "win"; this is why most of the larger NMIs (such are NIST) are working on several candidates in paralell.
  • #1
ChaseRLewis73
24
0
So I'm beginning to study photonics and the issue of excessively accurate reference times for clock signals are mentioned.

I understand that natural frequencies are often compared to determine the accuracy of a time measure (olden times it was vs astronomical events and nowadays it's against photon / matter interactions like counting vibrations of an atom using lasers). However, how does once exactly determine the range of error in something like time? You can't measure a more accurate frequency with a less accurate frequency ... as the the measurement would just have the same range of error as the less accurate frequency. Only thing i can think of is since we have set a standard of some number of cesium atom vibrations equaling a second we have a counter synchronized to count some relevant phenomon against something that counts the cesium vibrations at very low temperatures and you do that for several seconds and average it out. So in a way it's arbitrarily set by comparing to the standard. Is that how it's actually done in physics labs or is there another method?

hm... i think that ^ might be it I swear typing questions into forums helps you think things out.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You use two copies of the osccillator that is generating the frequency. As long as you can consider them to be independent you can then beat the signals coming from the two oscillators, and that signal can in turn be measured using a reference less stable than the orignal signal because the frequency will be several orders of magnitude lower.

Note that this is a common problem. Optical clocks are about three orders of magnitude more stable than cesium clocks, so there is no way to compare them with any "offical" time signal.
 
  • #3
f95toli said:
You use two copies of the osccillator that is generating the frequency. As long as you can consider them to be independent you can then beat the signals coming from the two oscillators, and that signal can in turn be measured using a reference less stable than the orignal signal because the frequency will be several orders of magnitude lower.

Note that this is a common problem. Optical clocks are about three orders of magnitude more stable than cesium clocks, so there is no way to compare them with any "offical" time signal.

Hmm - three clocks...

I know in mirror grinding (the old way), the question arises - how do you grind a flat surface? What you do is take two glass blanks A and B, and the grinding medium and grind them together. This gets all the small rough edges off (except grinding scratches) and you wind up with a concave and a convex spherical blank, unknown radius of curvature. Now you take a third blank, call it C and grind it with A. Then you grind C and B. Then you start over. If you continue this process, the three blanks will progressively get flatter and flatter until their "unflatness" is just that due to the scratches of the grinding medium. This is based on the geometrical fact that the three surfaces cannot match at every point unless all three are flat.

So you have created a very flat surface without a reference flat surface. I have no experience with clocks, but I wonder if this concept is used to create a very "flat" (i.e. linear, or "correct") clock?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Rap said:
but I wonder if this concept is used to create a very "flat" (i.e. linear, or "correct") clock?

Not really, but so-called 3-cornered hat methods are sometimes used to characherize oscillators

http://www.wriley.com/3-CornHat.htm

However, as long as you can use the "beat" method this should not be needed.
 
  • #5
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Andy Resnick said:
The standard currently under development (in the US) uses Hg ions;

Actually, people working on a whole bunch of ions in various configurations (strontium; Ytterbium. Hg, Aluminium etc) and no one yet knows which will "win"; this is why most of the larger NMIs (such are NIST) are working on several candidates in paralell.

I might be wrong, but I think entangled alumnium/beryllium has the current "world record" (10^-18).
 

1. How do atomic clocks measure time more accurately?

Atomic clocks measure time more accurately by using the natural vibrations of atoms to keep time. They use a process called atomic resonance, which is when atoms absorb and emit electromagnetic radiation at specific frequencies. By counting these vibrations, atomic clocks can measure time more accurately than traditional clocks.

2. What other methods are used to measure time more accurately?

Other methods used to measure time more accurately include using the Earth's rotation as a reference point, using lunar cycles, and using astronomical events such as eclipses. However, these methods are not as precise as atomic clocks.

3. How has technology improved our ability to measure time accurately?

Technology has greatly improved our ability to measure time accurately by allowing us to create more precise clocks and timekeeping devices. It has also allowed us to synchronize these devices across great distances, making it possible for people all over the world to have the same accurate time.

4. How do we account for time dilation in our time measurements?

Time dilation, a phenomenon predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity, is accounted for in our time measurements by using atomic clocks. These clocks are so precise that they can detect the minuscule differences in time caused by time dilation, ensuring that our time measurements remain accurate.

5. Can time be measured without using clocks?

Yes, time can be measured without using clocks. The concept of time is based on the natural rhythms and cycles of the universe, such as the rotation of the Earth and the orbit of the moon around the Earth. These can serve as a reference point for time measurement without the use of clocks.

Similar threads

  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
2
Replies
57
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
503
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
495
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
3
Replies
87
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top