Homeless,
The quote from the article is talking about the current delta between the actual day length and the day as measured by the atomic clocks, this is not the de acceleration rate.

Again you demonstrate a reading comprehension failure.

People have been pointing this out to him for a month now. He has his own agenda for being here, it is not to learn. Until he really wants to drop his defenses, no one's going to get through to him.

Your explanations were very fun to read. You've got a good way of being clear about the issues at hand. And I contributed lots to that thread quite a bit.

So I'll just pose this as a question for all to consider.

At what point does it become that not just one person is beating off a dead horse, but a group of enablers is gathering around to encourage a dead horse beating off?

Good point.... maybe we should petition the mods for some ostraka?

His mind is made up don't confuse him with facts.

Hahaha!!! I'm not part of this argument but I just think that's a hilarious statement! Reminds me of Mormons :P

He is very "Mormon" in his thought process.

I would change the statement slightly "His mind is made up, you can't confuse him with facts."

I haven't heard of that particular disorder, is it similar to proctocranial intercalation?

Let's quote it again:

“"Measurements show that the Earth currently runs slow, compared to atomic time, at about one millisecond per day. These data are generated by the USNO using the technique of Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI). VLBI measures the rotation of the Earth by observing the apparent positions of distant objects near the edge of the observable universe. These observations show that after roughly 1000 days, the difference between **Earth rotation time** and atomic time would be about **one second**. Instead of allowing this to happen a leap second is inserted to bring the two times closer together. We can easily change the time of an atomic clock, but it is not possible to alter the ***Earth's rotational speed*** to match the atomic clocks."

I explained in the detail why the millisecond cannot be due to comparing two clocks with the same constant rate, for they are both using the definition of the same atomic second, and the spin of the earth is NOT constant, which is causing the difference in time.

Now the article also states:

"Confusion sometimes arises over the misconception that the occasional insertion of leap seconds every few years indicates that the Earth should stop rotating within a few millennia. This is because some mistake leap seconds to be a measure of the rate at which the Earth is slowing. The one-second increments are, however, indications of the accumulated difference in time between the two systems."

As explained in my previous post, both "clocks" use the same defintion of a second, and therefore, that logic falls apart.

THis is published by the US government, and it is no different than the LDS prophet saying something to inspire faith in the LDS people to hide the truth of Joseph Smith's indiscretions. The idea of the earth slowing would be publically a disaster that we can't handle, the government supposes, just like the LDS people can't handle the truth about Joseph Smith, so they have relayed the "facts" in such a way to deliberately dismiss the truth:

1) If it is true that the two systems were both constant rates of time, the atomic clock could be easily changed to redefine the second and put both clocks in perfect harmony!

2) That can't ever happen because the earth is slowing and thus, the two clocks will always be different and there needs to be an adjustment.

3) The scientists and governemnt do not want the people to know this, so they present propaganda to hide it, such as this article.

4) The article is so skillfully written, that it deflects the idea that the earth is slowing at a greater rate than science cares to publish and admit.

These four conclusions are hidden deliberately by the article. However, the discrepancies of the two clocks is clearly 1 millisecond per day, which is good data to hang my hat on to determine how fast the earth is slowing down. Again, if the two clocks had "constant rates" the atomic second could be redefined to make both systems agree without a leap second. It's called propaganda. The only reason we can't do that is because the earth is slowing down and the atomic clock is not.

Again, both clocks USE THE SAME DEFINITION of an atomic second, making the logic fall apart in the article.

Keep reading your scientific Ensigns, if you wish. I will be happy to read what you show me, but I will find the discrepencies and share them with you.

I forgot to post the link:

http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/tours-events/2012_Leap_Second%20Press%20Release%20-%20120120.pdf

Your own article contradicts you, quite clearly actually:

Confusion sometimes arises over the misconception that the occasional insertion of leap seconds
every few years indicates that the Earth should stop rotating within a few millennia. This is
because some mistake leap seconds to be a measure of the rate at which the Earth is slowing.
The one-second increments are, however, indications of the accumulated difference in time
between the two systems.

The government said it. It must be true. you are right.

By the way, if yoiu read the post above, I quote the same thing you do...

U should know that by adding a second, they are not also lengthening the day. They are merely adding a second. In other words, the year is the same length each year. But if the clocks tick a bit faster than the rotation of the day, then they'll add a second. So your existing watch will be second slow in 18 months, or whatever it is. In 100 years, it'll still be just a second slow, every 18 months, and would need to be adjusted by that same 1 second every 18 months, but guess what, the days are still the same length as before. This does in no way indicate deceleration.

If it were deceleration, your watch would be 1 second slow this year, then 100 seconds slow every year in say 150 years. Make sense? Simple really.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2013 03:41PM by Mormoney.

You logic is good and sound. I agree. But if it is true, why don't they just redefine the atomic second and do away with the leap year?

You are assuming both clocks are ticking at a constant rate, and each clock is defining it's own second.

Think about it.

Your last sentence reflects reality, but the government is hiding that from you by the way they word the article.

I meant do away with the leap second, not leap year...typo.

Sure, they could re-redefine the second. I don't know if this is indicative of some kind of conspiracy though. The only point I was trying to make was that this is not indicative of deceleration. I don't know enough about the leap second, or definition of a second to form an opinion on that.

Homeless, I do not tolerate fools very well, and I should probably just follow RJ's advice and leave you in your ignorance but I will try one last time.


You should probably refrain from engaging in scientific discussion as each time you do you show an amazing lack of ability to read with comprehension and a marked lack of understanding of scientific principles.

Breaking it down real simple:

Quote:
“"Measurements show that the Earth currently runs slow, compared to atomic time, at about one millisecond per day."

Means that the current difference in the length of a measurable day, against when it was originally measured is is .001 s per day as measured by an atomic clock eg the period as measured by an atomic clock is slightly off against reality, we compensate for it by introducing leapseconds.

This is a delta which simply means difference in time Δt. If we take the original day length as it was established and call it t0 and subtract it from the current called t1 we get: Δt = t1 - t0 = 0.001 sec. This is not an acceleration value. It the difference in the length of a day as originally measured, vs the actual measurable length today using an atomic clock. Said difference is the result of the de-acceleration, but is not the rate of de-acceleration.

The formula for acceleration is a = Δv/Δt = (v1 - v0) / (t1 - t0). I am not going to do the math here for you as I would have to look up a couple of values and dates, needless to say a = 0.005 s/y^2.

You keep trying to pass the Δt of 0.001 s as an acceleration
value. It isn't.

You are sorely confused about cause and effect. You lack reading comprehension, and basic math and science skills. All you are succeeding in doing is further establishing your ignorance.

Homeless claims to be a process engineer for accounting. There is no possible way he is a dumb as he is acting - we are being played.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2013 04:05PM by bc.

I am more and more convinced that Homeless is pulling our leg.

Posters have been patient and tried to answer homeless's questions. He doesn't want answers. He uses the sources provided to him to twist sentances away from their original meanings into some distorted logic of his own and then throws it back at us like a monkey throwing @#$%&.

He's too smart to be as dumb as he is acting.

The difference is I don't trust religions, the government, scientists, or a science Ensign on the table. I'm using the tools of my brain to find coherent ideas that don't contradict each other. This article from the navy contradicts the notions of the earth slowing down, completely denying it even happens, sending out a false message to the public, but at the same time, providing a great measurement of what the actually difference of the rotation of the earth is based -- 1 millisecond per day.

The article states:

"Measurements show that the Earth currently runs slow, compared to atomic time, at about one millisecond per day."

The propaganda of the government machine does not tell you that the atomic clock and rotation of the earth uses the SAME UNIT OF TIME -- which is an atomic second. Which means that the diffence is because the earth is slowing down, not because there is a difference in the two clocks over time. The two clocks use the same rate. The atomic second.

The article uses words to deliberately deceive, since the earth clock uses the SAME defintion of a second as an atomic clock, which means, the rotating of the earth is not constant and can never be in sync with the atomic clock, or science would have fixed the leap second decades ago.

>
> The article uses words to deliberately deceive,
> since the earth clock uses the SAME defintion of a
> second as an atomic clock, which means, the
> rotating of the earth is not constant and can
> never be in sync with the atomic clock, or science
> would have fixed the leap second decades ago.

Hoy hell. the leap second is the fix. The pediod of the Earth's rotation is changing, it will never be in sync with the atomic clock. That is why the leap second exists in the first place.

The measurement of time is the discretization of a linear flow. No matter how accurate a measurement process we device we will never be able to measure anything at 100% accuracy, not time, length, mass, volume, etc. There is always some small degree of rounding error, however infinitesimal. When you set the length of a day based on an angular velocity at some time in the past, and that velocity changes, then you have to compensate. Hence the leapday and leapsecond.

Your inability to understand this betrays why do you not trust science. You neither understand nor can perform science. So to you it is magic. Easier to believe in the magic god that you were indoctrinated in as a youth.

No. I'm just thinking through the problem. If the earth is spinning at a constant rate, one could define an atomic second to be equal to the rotation of the earth's second,and there would be no leap second at all. But since it's not spinning at a constant rate, the atomic second can never be calculated to be the same as the earth rotation second. Think about it. I don't just believe what I read because someone else said it. It has to make sense to me first, and this does not make sense. Both the earth rotation and the atomic second is defined by the same unit of time, the atomic second. Thus, the difference is due to the earth slowing down.

Wow! This is STILL GOING!?! And nobody's made an inch of progress. People are still pointing out the exact same errors in Homeless' math and logic and he's still saying the exact same things as though he is physically incapable of comprehending what everyone is telling him.

Raptor are you homeless? There are 5 or so people I can think of on this board who could pull off this kind of a lampoon...

There's NO way I could keep that shit up right now.

True...

I really think he believes this stuff. I think he think he's educating us.

I've debated a couple of TBMs and YEC EVs on another board that are this dense. The problem is they work at logic backwards. They choose a conclusion (biblical) and then mash, mangle, and destroy the facts and any logical process to make the evidence fit their predetermined conclusion. There is not rationing with them as they are completely incapable of rational thought, plus they are as ignorant as all get out about math and science.

The concept that changing the length of a second by a small fraction of a second - a nano-second does not reconcile the difference between .005 & .75 seconds is not a particularly difficult concept to grasp. I don't believe that someone with 30 years of accounting experience could fail to understand that.

This point is not even important to his overall thesis - if he were less articulate I could buy it.