Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site hou2g.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hou2g!stekas
From: stekas@hou2g.UUCP (J.STEKAS)
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: Atomic clocks - Who knows if they're correct?
Message-ID: <175@hou2g.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Feb-84 18:11:26 EST
Article-I.D.: hou2g.175
Posted: Mon Feb 20 18:11:26 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Feb-84 08:01:46 EST
References: <229@heurikon.UUCP>, <163@ihopa.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 19

Since there is no such thing as absolute time, no clock can be
constructed which is correct in an absolute sense.  To wonder
when an atomic clock will get out of synch with the sun is missing
the point.  The atomic clock has replaced astronomical standards
because the physical processes which govern the atomic clock are
better understood and can be better controlled.  Atomic clocks also
have a great advantage in that they are transportable.

Dirac has suggested that the ratio of the gravitational force to the
electromagnetic force is changing with time.  That means that if astro-
nomical standards of length and time are used, elecromagnetic forces would
be increasing with time.  If atomic (E&M) standards are used, then gravity
would be weakening.   Lunar laser ranging experiments were done to measure
the effect, and the last I heard the evidence favored Dirac.

                                                    Jim
decreasing with respect to the electromagnetic force.

When atomic and astronomical clocks disagree,