What is this some may ask?
Well, actually it is a clock! Although it looks nothing like our standard analog or digital clock, this is what is known as an Atomic clock.
What is an Atomic Clock?
First off, it is located in Boulder, Colorado. Simply, it is the clock that is the basis for United State's time. It sets the official time for the U.S. Looking in depth, electrons are the keys to the reason that this clock is used. When these electrons are exposed to certain frequencies, they have the ability to jump back and forth between energy states within the internuclear axis. Clocks based off of this atom jumping phenomena can therefore provide extremely precise measurements for counting seconds.
How do we Quantify/ Define Seconds?
Tal makes a point stating that, "the notion of a stable frequency is an idealized one, derived from the theoretical definition of a second" (Tal 301).
But, how do we define a second?
Theoretically, the second has been defined as the exact duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to a hyperfine transition of caesium-133 in the ground state.
This is the equation in mathematical form. There is also a way to inverse this equation so that Delta v Cs is on the top and 9,192,631,770 is on the top. This would result in producing Hz. Thus, a period of 1 second is equal to one Hz, they are inverse. 1 Hz=1 s^1-.
But, we are all very accustomed to denoting a second as 1/60 of a minute. When we look at an analog clock, we may pay attention to the seconds hand, but in this day in age with our advancements in technology, iPhones and such have merely eliminated that factor. Another reason is that people are not reliant or worried about exact time unless necessary for an application. Perhaps, I could make the assumption that fields where exact measurements for time are necessary, is where seconds are most utilized (example; chemist or physicist).
What do Standard Clocks Measure?
As Tal argues in this piece, time is standardized. A standard clock counts periods of some period changes. Early on in history, time was based off the assumption that Earth's daily rotational rate was constant. But, these time standards were replaced in 1952 based off of Earth's orbital period and relative motion of the moon. We are all well known to looking at a standard clock and stating the time, "Hey Mom, what is the time" ...looks at the clock..."Oh it is 4:34". But, why?...How?...What does it mean?
Constructivism:
This is the position that I saw Tal argue for the most. It has to do with the fact that time has been theorized all throughout history. But, do we actually have a firm grasp of what it is? The theoretical commitments that have been socially accepted throughout history, are merely thoughts, ideas, and theories that cannot be tested. So, how are we supposed to know if they are true or not? This is why time is relative, it depends on the observer's frame of mind or perspective. No one knows if it is actually true, not even the brightest physicist could come out and state ,"Time is definable, here is the equation." This is because it is all theoretical...
Closing Thoughts:
The above paragraph provides some insight for the reason why time is standardized. If everyone had their own opinions on time, there would be no frame of reference to base off. Hence, the atomic clock or even the standard iPhone give us a relative idea of time that we all use to base our actions on.
Hi Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI liked your thought out post and your supplemental information that you provided. My question would be whether you personally agreed with Tal with constructivism, or whether you think that conventionalism's benefits may outweigh its drawbacks. Let me know what you think!
Hi Andrew, I agreed with most of what you said in your constructivism and closing thoughts sections. Time is highly theoretical but we have to rely on these theories and standards otherwise everything comes into question.
ReplyDelete