Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy

Liste des GroupesRevenir à p relativity 
Sujet : Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy
De : yayl (at) *nospam* ikda.ru (Anil Movsarov Dikarevsky)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity
Suivi-à : sci.physics.relativity
Date : 03. May 2025, 20:04:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vv5pb6$60ie$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1
User-Agent : Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
Maciej Woźniak wrote:

On 4/10/2025 10:41 PM, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
 
 > GPS clocks are adjusted down by (1 - 4.4647e-10)
 > so the adjusted clock will measure a mean solar day to last 86400 s,
 > and the clock will stay in sync with UTC.
 
That's right - the clocks made for serious measurements are adjusted
(calibrated) to count seconds of 1/86400 of a mean solar day. See, poor
idiots - common sense has been warning you.

impossible. Try think. If all you have is the 'solar_day', dividing it by
86400 equal intervals of time is impossible. Pleas think and rethink.

it reveals you never had an hour inside a physics laboratory in fuck
polakia. Which is a shame.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
3 May 25 * Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy5Anil Movsarov Dikarevsky
3 May 25 `* Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy4Maciej Woźniak
3 May 25  `* Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy3Vidal Kachanovsky
3 May 25   `* Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy2Tim Takács
4 May 25    `- Re: Yes, the old definition of second is winning against SI idiocy1Kiefer Babanoff

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal