iPhone time vs. Mac time
in [Mac Systems]
|
From: DevilsPGD on 15 Jul 2010 16:39 In message <tph-F00F20.11511815072010(a)localhost> Tom Harrington <tph(a)pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net> was claimed to have wrote: >Man, once upon a time people would just assume such an over the top >comment on Usenet was a joke. IQs on usenet aren't what they once were...
From: Jon Ribbens on 15 Jul 2010 17:16 On 2010-07-15, Thomas R. Kettler <tkettler(a)blownfuse.net> wrote: > In article <C864C0AA.60F95%nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid>, > Nick Naym <nicknaym@_remove_this_gmail.com.invalid> wrote: >> > You're wrong. The 10 minute difference was due to relativistic effects >> > since everyone knows that moving clocks run slow. >> >> You _are_ kidding, aren't you? > > Of course. The relativistic effects do exist but are two small to be > observable for speeds humans have ever experience. Even for a speed of > 0.8 * speed of light, clocks would just run 40% slower. I'm sure I read about some physics professor who claimed in court that because he was travelling towards the traffic lights, the red light appeared green to him. Supposedly, the Judge decided to deny this defence when informed that in order for it to be true, the professor would have to have been travelling towards the traffic lights at over 100,000,000 mph.
From: Rick Jones on 15 Jul 2010 17:56 Thomas R. Kettler <tkettler(a)blownfuse.net> wrote: > Of course. The relativistic effects do exist but are two small to be > observable for speeds humans have ever experience. Even for a speed of > 0.8 * speed of light, clocks would just run 40% slower. Or at least not to have noticed as biological entities. However, relying on some extremely precise/accurate clocks... long ago some HPers took some HP atomic clocks on commerical jet flights to see the effects. :) rick jones that part of HP was spun-off with Agilent, which then sold it to Symmetricom -- Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought. these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :) feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...
From: Jim Gibson on 15 Jul 2010 18:37 In article <i1o05q$ga6$1(a)usenet01.boi.hp.com>, Rick Jones <rick.jones2(a)hp.com> wrote: > Thomas R. Kettler <tkettler(a)blownfuse.net> wrote: > > Of course. The relativistic effects do exist but are two small to be > > observable for speeds humans have ever experience. Even for a speed of > > 0.8 * speed of light, clocks would just run 40% slower. > > Or at least not to have noticed as biological entities. However, > relying on some extremely precise/accurate clocks... long ago some > HPers took some HP atomic clocks on commerical jet flights to see the > effects. :) Interestingly enough, that experiment involved two time dilation effects: moving fast and being in a smaller gravity field. The effect of these is opposite: moving fast slows your clock, being away from the earth speeds it up. Also, a clock moving east is moving faster than a "stationary" clock that is rotating with the earth, but a clock moving west is moving slower. In the case of commercial airliners, the gravity effect predominates. The experiment was done in 1971. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment> -- Jim Gibson
From: Mike Rosenberg on 15 Jul 2010 18:49
Fred Moore <fmoore(a)gcfn.org> wrote: > Sounds like another one of those NASA units screw ups. The phone system > was using English seconds while the launch countdown was using metric > seconds. Now if you guys had just standardized on UTC seconds, there > wouldn't have been any problem. That's what you get for using the lowest > bidder. Are you sure it has nothing to do with using hex zeroes instead of binary zeroes? -- My latest dance routines: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkxGQmTvctc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTajUBrlA6c |