John Smith I wrote:
wrote:
...
Are you saying you don't believe that is the definition of the second
since 1967 or that you don't understand the definition?
Start with:
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/second.html
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/cesium.html
I am saying:
Yes, I believe someone would search for "solid ground" to base
measurements on. Again, yes, I believe that is about the best we can
find in an un-perfect world ...
No, I don't think that is any better than basing it on my goldfish, and
he/she is unpredictable (quantum effects perhaps.) But still, if all
which availed itself to me were my goldfish--I'd be damn temped to start
basing measurements on his/her activity!
At least your argument(s) cause one to think ...
I made no arguments.
I stated facts that can be verified by reading the links.
If you were to read them you might stop babbling nonsense about goldfish
and "solid ground".
--
Jim Pennino
Remove .spam.sux to reply.