Atomic clocks shrunk, now use lasers

Atomic clocks shrunk, now use lasers

Brad Sams on 16 March 2009 - 12:08 · 28 comments & 5818 views

Advertisement (Why?)

The atomic clocks that reassure us that we are late to work may soon be shrunk in size. A traditional atomic clock is about the size of a refrigerator and seems inaccurate to the latest idea and concept.

The entire mind boggling idea is based around a laser and being able to trap atoms in space and then monitoring their energy state to calculate one second of time.

"Using this method, the team has calculated the second to be 1506 million cycles of microwaves for aluminium-27 and 2678 million cycles for gallium-69."

This impressive process that will allow us all to keep track of time even more precisely than before. It's quite the thought that only a few hundred years ago we kept track of time by the position of the sun and now we track time by the energy field of atoms.

About the Author

Full name: Brad Sams
User name: bdsams
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: View All
More: View Bio New!

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 28 additional comments

(3 replies) #1 -Bryce- on 16 Mar 2009 - 12:41

The more and more we advance in technology, I feel like nothing is impossible.

#1.1 +dead.cell on 16 Mar 2009 - 21:39

Except the AIDS.

#1.2 Solid Knight on 16 Mar 2009 - 21:48

Except interplanetary travel.

#1.3 Shiranui on 17 Mar 2009 - 01:26

Solid Knight said,

Except interplanetary travel.

Interplanetary travel is possible, though not for the masses. It is just a matter of funding. It is inter-stellar and, by extension, inter-galactic travel that are virtually impossible.

(8 replies) #2 +Ricardo Gil on 16 Mar 2009 - 12:57

This impressive process that will allow us all to keep track of time even more precisely than before. It's quite the thought that only a few hundred years ago we kept track of time by the position of the sun and now we track time by the energy field of atoms.

I'll just keep using my cellphone.

#2.1 Kayle on 16 Mar 2009 - 13:40

Your cellphone pulls from an atomic clock somewhere

#2.2 +Ricardo Gil on 16 Mar 2009 - 14:39

Kayle said,

Your cellphone pulls from an atomic clock somewhere

Not really, it's manually adjusted :p

#2.3 flashdata on 16 Mar 2009 - 16:43

Ricardo Gil said,

Not really, it's manually adjusted :p

Then your clock is inaccurate and you aint really keeping track of time.

#2.4 nevann on 16 Mar 2009 - 20:33

Yes he is. If my watch is 5 minutes behind yours, it still keeps track of time. If 30 minutes passed on my watch, 30 would have passed on yours too

#2.5 flashdata on 16 Mar 2009 - 21:01

nevann said,

Yes he is. If my watch is 5 minutes behind yours, it still keeps track of time. If 30 minutes passed on my watch, 30 would have passed on yours too

But it is not the real time. If your watch is 5 minutes behind and you have to meet at 4, then you are late.

#2.6 +Kirkburn on 16 Mar 2009 - 21:20

I think the point is, you ultimately get your time from an atomic clock.

#2.7 Antiprophet on 17 Mar 2009 - 00:06

flashdata said,

But it is not the real time. If your watch is 5 minutes behind and you have to meet at 4, then you are late.

unless i set my watch 5 minutes fast to couter act my habitual lateness...?

#2.8 roblife on 26 May 2009 - 06:06

flashdata said,

But it is not the real time. If your watch is 5 minutes behind and you have to meet at 4, then you are late.

You know I just lay down and the sun cast a shadow of my nipple. That way i'm on time.

#3 rob.derosa on 16 Mar 2009 - 13:50

But how do you know that time is accurate? Using atomic clocks

t(that was in response to ricardo gill)

#4 Luis Mazza on 16 Mar 2009 - 13:52

atomic clocks: NOW WITH LASERS!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/gallery...cture=342812259

#5 Shadrack on 16 Mar 2009 - 16:54

Sure would be nice to get these things small enough and cheep enough to put in, well...everything. If you've ever tried to synchronize multiple video cameras to data you were trying to capture, good luck maintain better than a few seconds sync between all your devices. It can be done with the right equipment ($$$

. Electric oscillators are horrendous at keeping accurate time.

(4 replies) #6 clotz2000 on 16 Mar 2009 - 17:12

I think Sharks with Lasers would be cooler still...

#6.1 Dischordiant on 16 Mar 2009 - 17:16

clotz2000 said,

I think Sharks with Lasers would be cooler still...

Damn it, you beat me to it. Sharks definitely need friggin' lasers on their heads.

#6.2 Magallanes on 16 Mar 2009 - 18:46

Sharks and dolphin.

#6.3 Mr.ed on 16 Mar 2009 - 19:26

What about angry bass? Those could be cool, baby!

#6.4 roblife on 26 May 2009 - 06:08

Dischordiant said,

Damn it, you beat me to it. Sharks definitely need friggin' lasers on their heads.

What would be cooler if my dogs flees had lasers. Hehehe.

(1 reply) #7 Gup20 on 16 Mar 2009 - 17:47

Since time is relative - aka it moves more slowly the closer you get to large gravity wells - we can expect there to be fractions of a second differences at different altitudes. So really, this means that time is different everywhere. With time being different, we will all have to decide on a universal time standard. So really, what we have here is more for technological application than real-life application, as we'll all be going off of a standard somewhere else anyway. In other words - the one who said "I just go by my cell phone's time" had it right.

#7.1 goatsniffer on 17 Mar 2009 - 00:49

Those on the ISS aren't having any trouble with their clocks, so no.

(1 reply) #8 shakey_snake on 16 Mar 2009 - 19:11

This is more reliable:

#8.1 pjak on 16 Mar 2009 - 20:02

lol - link is broken...

(1 reply) #9 TRC on 16 Mar 2009 - 19:24

Yet somehow we haven't advanced beyond the idiotic concept of Daylight Saving Time.

#9.1 Shadrack on 16 Mar 2009 - 23:32

TRC said,

Yet somehow we haven't advanced beyond the idiotic concept of Daylight Saving Time.

It is generally accepted that DST decreases the amount of energy used. Although this is a topic that is heavily debated, I tend to agree that it does decrease the amount of energy consumption which is a good concept, not an idiotic one.

#10 Turion on 17 Mar 2009 - 05:28

I live in a place where DST is not used. I see no real advantage of DST, I don't see it conserving energy. Cause if you realize that when the Sun is up, people are more likely to use aircon. Light bulbs don't use as much energy. Now do they?

I'll stick to my Seiko Kenitic Watch for time keeping and cell phone.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)

Neowin.net

Atomic clocks shrunk, now use lasers

Share this Article

About the Author

Related news