The device, which traps thousands of atoms to keep time, is "pushing the boundaries of what's possible with timekeeping." The device traps thousands of atoms to keep time, and is "pushing the boundaries of what's possible with timekeeping."
In clocks like this, the “set time” is often irrelevant. It’s more important to know exactly how much time has passed since the last time the clock was “checked.” If you’re running a radio transmitter at 6ghz, that’s 6 billion cycles per second. If you synch your transmitter to your clock once per second, it had better be accurate to the billionth of a second.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@lemmy.world
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
What do you set it to?
In clocks like this, the “set time” is often irrelevant. It’s more important to know exactly how much time has passed since the last time the clock was “checked.” If you’re running a radio transmitter at 6ghz, that’s 6 billion cycles per second. If you synch your transmitter to your clock once per second, it had better be accurate to the billionth of a second.
This. Clocks like this are for measuring duration in a scientific context.
Surely in 30 billion years nothing could possibly happen to the supercooled strontium to throw that off, right?
Yeah, but in 1.8 trillion years, you’re going to be a minute late for everything.
I mean but this should save me some hassle from my current clock that I need to adjust every 10 billion years.
Oh shit I missed the sun explosion!
Does it still need a groundhog to tell it when spring is?
Yes, of course.
But the groundhog will be made out of gallium arsenide.