The New Thermodynamic Understanding of Clocks

Studies of the simplest possible clocks have revealed their fundamental limitations — as well as insights into the nature of time itself.

more…

Tick, tock, tick, tock
His life seconds numbering
Tick, tock, tick, tock

roughbarked said:

Tick, tock, tick, tock
His life seconds numbering
Tick, tock, tick, tock

Off topic but still about clocks

About Time: A History of Civilization in Twelve Clocks – by David Rooney

https://www.amazon.com.au/About-Time-History-Civilization-Twelve/dp/0393867935

Tau.Neutrino said:

The New Thermodynamic Understanding of Clocks

Studies of the simplest possible clocks have revealed their fundamental limitations — as well as insights into the nature of time itself.

more…

Interesting. Thanks.

Tau.Neutrino said:

The New Thermodynamic Understanding of Clocks

Studies of the simplest possible clocks have revealed their fundamental limitations — as well as insights into the nature of time itself.

more…

> In 2013, a masters student in physics named Paul Erker went combing through textbooks and papers looking for an explanation of what a clock is.

As you do.

I’d come to the conclusion that a clock is defined as a count of almost-regular cycles. That puts it always behind the real time because time has elapsed before you can measure it. And it also made it inaccurate because cycles can never be exactly regular.

> quantum information theory and quantum thermodynamics, disciplines concerning the flow of information and energy. They realized that these theoretical frameworks, which underpin emerging technologies like quantum computers and quantum engines, also provided the right language for describing clocks.

That had not occurred to me. Nor any suggestion that clocks are a thermal phenomenon.

> Engines use energy to propel; clocks use it to tick.

Yeah, that’s a different understanding to mine.

> Over the past five years, through studies of the simplest conceivable clocks

So, what are the simplest conceivable clocks?

https://journals.aps.org/prx/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevX.11.021029

So this is one of the “simplest conceivable clocks”? It looks complicated to me.

Brief history of time: World’s most accurate clock can tell us about the cosmos
https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2021/09/10/brief-history-of-time-worlds-most-accurate-clock-tell-us-about-the-cosmos-.html

Tau.Neutrino said:

Brief history of time: World’s most accurate clock can tell us about the cosmos
https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2021/09/10/brief-history-of-time-worlds-most-accurate-clock-tell-us-about-the-cosmos-.html

> It would take 15 billion years for the clock that occupies Jun Ye’s basement lab at the University of Colorado to lose a second — about how long the universe has existed.

> By comparison, current atomic clocks lose a second once every 100 million years.

Never EVER refer to time accuracy like that, because it is just plain wrong.

The most accurate clocks are only accurate over short intervals of time. The longer the interval; of time, a microsecond, a second, a year, ten years, 100 years, the lower the relative accuracy will be. So always state the time interval over which the clock accuracy has been measured.