The most accurate clock – using Quantum Entanglement ..Accuracy within a tenth of a second – over 14 billion years.

But just imagine those compounded service costs at 10-year intervals :0(

Currently if the world’s most precise clocks started ticking at the birth of the Universe, they would be out by a full half a second today. In theory this new design would be off by only 0.1 seconds …after 14 billion years….

In a similar way to how a grandfather clock uses the swinging of its pendulum to keep time, modern atomic clocks use lasers to measure the regular oscillations of clouds of atoms — the most stable periodic events that scientists can presently observe. Ideally, one would be able to use the motion of a single atom. Yet on atomic scales, the bizarre rules of quantum mechanics come into play — and measurements are subject to probabilities that must be averaged out to yield reliable data. 'When you increase the number of atoms, the average given by all these atoms goes toward something that gives the correct value,' explains paper author and physicist Simone Colombo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, or 'MIT'.

Current atomic clocks take measurements from thousands of ultra-cooled atoms — which are corralled into an optical 'trap' with lasers and probed by a different laser whose frequency is similar to that of the vibrations of the atoms being measured. However, even this approach is subject to a degree of quantum uncertainty.

Vladan Vuletić, a professor of physics at MIT Vuletić and his team, along with researchers from the University of Belgrade in Serbia, had an idea A decade ago, for how to overcome this limitation: Entangle the particles. Quantum entanglement — or "spooky action at a distance," as Albert Einstein famously called it — is the idea that the fates of tiny particles are linked to each other even if they're separated by long distances. So, by entangling the atoms that keep time, the scientists might be able to keep each pair or group of entangled atoms in the same state and thus oscillating at similar frequencies, thereby allowing the clock to overcome the standard quantum limit and measure time more precisely.

The MIT team have actually shown, some of this can be eliminated by turning to quantum entanglement, in which groups of atoms give correlated measurements. This, the researchers explained, means that the individual oscillations of the entangled atoms tighten up around a common frequency — thereby increasing the precision of the measurements taken by the clock.

In their new design, Dr Pedrozo-Peñafiel and colleagues entangled some 350 atoms of the rare Earth element ytterbium, which oscillates 100,000 times per second more often than caesium, the element employed in conventional atomic clocks.

This fact means that — if tracked accurately — the new clock can distinguish even smaller internals of time.

There's even speculation that so-called absolute constants in the world of physics, such as the speed of light or the charge of electrons, may change as the universe expands. And because these constants define the laws of physics that govern the energy levels in an atom, they may also change the measurement of time. So, it's possible that "the very essence of time changes as the universe expands."

@Omegafanman says I have found for years that time expands to fill whatever space time I have allowed to do things (especially things I don’t want to do :0)

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-3006-1?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=3_nsn6445_deeplink_PID100032693&utm_content=deeplink

https://www.livescience.com/quantum-entanglement-atomic-clock.html

.

 

Will it fit on my wrist?

 

What kind of battery does it take?

 

Here’s a nut-cracker:

These clocks are so accurate, they can discern increments of time dilation due to a mere meter difference in gravitational field, or a mere few kilometers per hour difference in acceleration.

Accordingly, the clocks, if running at different altitudes or moving, are recording alternate space-time

 

While this is all quite interesting, does it mean anyone will be closer to “on time” for dinner than anyone else? And just how accurate is the time piece this is being compared to? Are there any realistic practical applications for this? Is this just a theoretical exercise? How much taxpayer money, if any was used for this? Will anyone be around in 14 billion years to even care? So many questions.

 

I think Bathys had a Cesium old school atomic option incoming … so I am sure someone will find a way... The battery pack might be a kicker.

https://www.ablogtowatch.com/bathys-hawaii-cesium-133-atomic-wrist-watch-accurate-second-1000-years/

 

I hear you and there are lies, damned lies and statistics - but I suspect we will get pay-back (one way or another) if we don't get to grip with the fundamentals :0)

''As of 2014 MIT alumni had "launched 30,200 active companies, employing roughly 4.6 million people, and generating roughly $1.9 trillion in annual revenues."

 

I am guessing something like...…………...

 

Then you remember that time is all relative and it doesn't matter in the least...

 

Does it come with box and papers?

 

Can you snorkel in it?

 

Well, for just one example: GPS satellites must compensate for time dilation due to differences in time at the satellite (due to lower gravitational field and higher acceleration) compared to clocks on earth - and minimizing these differences in time recording is just one piece of providing better GPS.

Now, that’s just one example and not at all to claim that these clock’s accuracy translate into GPS differ need that are practicable for you and me: instead only to point out that years ago the project of seeking more accurate clocks were subject to the same critique/questions you just posed, and resulted in - for just one example - GPS.

 

Awesome

 

It would depend on who's watch is sync'd closest to the host's.

 

The only fitting response to this thread in my humble opinion is a quote from one of the greatest books of all time The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams and it's hero Ford Prefect with

"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so."

Marc

 

So the current clock at 1/15,000,000,000 secs. (1 sec. per 15 billion years) Per year is not good enough? And to determine the accuracy there must be an even more accurate device. So if there is a clock so accurate to determine the accuracy of others, why not just use that one ?

 

Tiiiiiiiiime, is on my side, yes it is.
- The Rolling Stones.

Nobody is better at extending time than the Stones....

 

Time the 4th dimension ?
Cosmologist can prove there're 11 dimensions

 

When speaking of the “accuracy” of these clocks, you’re actually instead speaking of something more like the “consistency” of behaviors in the underlying quantum particles - each such particle being its own clock, and the average of them being measured the consistency.

But as mentioned above, the real nut-cracker regarding their “accuracy” is that these clocks are so accurate they correctly record time dilation effects of even walking speeds or cm height difference.

One of these clocks on top of Mt Everest will be faster than one at sea level (and vice-versa!), and both will be completely accurate.

 

I watched a documentary on time a couple weeks ago. Pretty frikin' amazing.

It boils down to fact that we're all on our own individual time line. If you stand next to me we're in sync. If I'm on a ladder we're not.