[time-nuts] The forbidden question

[John Miles]

> As to your analogy, it is valid only if and to the extent that NIST-F2 has
> practical applications. That is what I am asking about.

The important thing about devices like NIST-F2 is not that they are better
than any other clocks, it's that they are still imperfect.  The researchers
are studying the physical principles and interactions that limit the
accuracy of their clocks.  Historically, this type of research has helped
with discovering new physics fundamentals as well as refining our knowledge
of old ones.

Also, since time and frequency underlie most other measurements, that's the
last field where you want "knowledge bottlenecks" to exist.  Anything that
advances the science of timekeeping can potentially benefit lots of other
research areas.  Want to build a better clock?  Find better ways to preserve
and probe quantum states.  Oh, by the way, the free donuts and coffee are
courtesy of the lab down the hall where they're working on quantum
computers.

Some people build giant laser interferometers, other people build
large-scale particle accelerators, still other people build elaborate
clocks.  They are all looking for the same thing: a conversation with Mother
Nature that begins with, "Hmm, that's funny," and ends in a Nobel acceptance
speech.  What time it is, is largely beside the point.

-- john, KE5FX