On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 15:41:06 -0800, Jim Kelley
wrote:

Personally, I liken it to debating whether or not the fairies on the
head of the pin are actually dancing.

That could only lead to debates of: 4-4 time, or in a triple minor?

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Jimmie D" wrote in
:


"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:22:38 GMT, Dave Oldridge
wrote:

The same problem still exists. The cesium atom didn't
exist before the first super nova. How can the time
be calculated between the Big Bang and the first super
nova if cesium didn't exist?

There are other entropic processes that can be calibrated against the
cesium.

Hi Dave,

You have been snookered into answering a complaint manufactured (as
usual) from the misapplication of relationships. The resonance of
Cesium is not a function of time. Time is not a function of Cesium's
resonance (the incorrect correlation drawn, to which you are
responding).

There is no dependency between the two. It is our dependency in our
usage of one to measure the other. The sophism above is much like
saying sound did not exist before someone was close enough to hear
the falling tree. The excitation of gas molecules we call sound
existed long before the appearance of the first amoeba, much less
apes in falling trees. Both sound and time are phenomenological
terms for simple and rational physical processes that exist without
dependence on us.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Yes, time is about as much related to the vibration of a cesium atom
as it is to the pendulum im my grandfather clock.

Except we now define its unit in terms of the oscillations of a cesium
atom. And sure, it's relative. But, in the same reference frame as the
observer, the cesium clock is sufficient.

--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667

Dave Oldridge wrote:
Except we now define its unit in terms of the oscillations of a cesium
atom. And sure, it's relative. But, in the same reference frame as the
observer, the cesium clock is sufficient.

Let me rephrase that to be more accurate, "our time" is about as related
to the real functioning of RF as is a fairy tale told to children which
serves as a "satisfactory" explanation to them on some abstract
functioning of reality.

Although some type of movement seems to be involved in RF (at least at
this present time), it has little to do with our observations of
movement of other objects and phenomenon which is unrelated to RF.
However, it would be difficult to deny a real and accurate "universal
time frame" (UTF) of some sort. It is even quite possible our
understanding of RF, antennas, etc. with greatly expand when we finally
discover this UTF and are able to devise ways to further expand our
manipulations of our use of RF ... time is movement (but the movement of
our earth and atoms are defined by the UTF, NOT the opposite!), if you
view time as anything else, you are most likely in error ...

Regards,
JS