SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + + + + + +
More stuff.
[[File:Setterfieldfigure4.jpg|thumbnail|800px|Figure 4. Zooming in on the period from 1860 to 1983.]]
[[File:Setterfieldfigure4.jpg|thumbnail|800px|Figure 4. Zooming in on the period from 1860 to 1983.]]
{{clear}}
{{clear}}
The paper seems to make two definitions of a time scale. One, called "atomic time", is calibrated from the orbital speed of the electrons in the Hydrogen atom. It, for all practical purposes, matches the time scale that the scientific community uses. (The scientific community currently uses a hyperfine transition in the Cesium spectrum, but they depend on the same fundamental constants and are, for all practical purposes, the same.) If "atomic time" had changed significantly during the time that scientific measurements were being made, it would have been noticed. In fact, if it differed at any point in human history, such things as colors of light would have changed noticeably.
The other scale he refers to as "dynamical time". It is apparently calculated from the Earth's orbital period around the sun. Prior to the adoption of the Cesium standard in 1967, the Earth's daily rotational period was used as the scientifically accepted time scale. Whether the Earth's daily rotation or yearly revolution is used doesn't matter; any disconnect between them at any time in human history would have been clearly noticed.
The paper seems to associate changes in the speed of light with divergence between the two time scales.
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}