Re: nuclear clock better then 'atomic' clock?? What's in a name...

On a sunny day (Thu, 5 Sep 2024 10:32:04 +0100) it happened Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote in <vbbtqk$9js1$1@dont-email.me>:

On 05/09/2024 06:20, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Major leap for nuclear clock paves way for ultraprecise timekeeping
  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/09/240904130817.htm
  September 4, 2024
Source:
  National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Summary:
  Nuclear clocks would measure time based on changes inside an atom's nucleus,
  which would make them less sensitive to external disturbances and potentially
  more accurate than atomic clocks.
  These clocks could lead to improved timekeeping and navigation,
  faster internet speeds, and advances in fundamental physics research.
  Scientists have demonstrated key components of a nuclear clock,
  such as precise frequency measurements of an energy jump in a thorium-229
  nucleus.
 
future babble?
Paper is 25 dollars measured at today's nuclear inflation time, eh speed
I would have thought that NIST, financed by public money,
would publish their papers for free for thee.

>
Nature is an expensive journal to run and publish. They charge for
access. This is getting less common many are now free access.
>
The paper you want here isn't on arxiv that I can see but this one is:
>
https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.13023

Cool! got the paper, reading it.