![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
symbioidljso, i was thinking about planck time (the shortest measurable moment of time) -- yes, there is a limit to how small we can divide time.
I was wondering if someone ever built a planck clock that could measure that time.
But apparently: "As of 2006, the smallest unit of time that was directly measured was on the order of 1 attosecond (10^ −18 s), or about 10^ 26 Planck times." (planck time is ~10 ^-43 sec)
So yeah, we're quite a ways off. I wonder if there's even any sort of system that could convey the change fast enough. It seems that electronics works on a speed much slower than this. I mean, it's the speed of light, yes, but... the distance traveled is so minute, and how can we transmit the data without it being out of sync? Since it's the smallest unit, any display would automatically be displayed (relatively) much later than the actual time. So it would never be "on time".. Hmm.. maybe i'm not making sense.
anyways, just interesting we haven't measured planck time yet. How do we measure it, anyways? I mean, it's defined as the length of time it takes light to travel planck distance (which is the "resolution" of reality -- that's the smallest distance of space we can conceivably perceive, though we're not there yet...)
I was wondering if someone ever built a planck clock that could measure that time.
But apparently: "As of 2006, the smallest unit of time that was directly measured was on the order of 1 attosecond (10^ −18 s), or about 10^ 26 Planck times." (planck time is ~10 ^-43 sec)
So yeah, we're quite a ways off. I wonder if there's even any sort of system that could convey the change fast enough. It seems that electronics works on a speed much slower than this. I mean, it's the speed of light, yes, but... the distance traveled is so minute, and how can we transmit the data without it being out of sync? Since it's the smallest unit, any display would automatically be displayed (relatively) much later than the actual time. So it would never be "on time".. Hmm.. maybe i'm not making sense.
anyways, just interesting we haven't measured planck time yet. How do we measure it, anyways? I mean, it's defined as the length of time it takes light to travel planck distance (which is the "resolution" of reality -- that's the smallest distance of space we can conceivably perceive, though we're not there yet...)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 09:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-17 10:45 pm (UTC)I'm not a big fiction reader, but occasionally I attempt it.
The only Rucker I have is "White Light". Didn't quite get into that.
Is "Master of Time and Space" any good?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-18 10:13 pm (UTC)I'm defintely partial to rucker since his nonfiction work and some of his fiction were the source material that really elped me conceptualize hyperdimensional spaces.
I'd also recommend his book spaceland which is a fun homage to the classic flatland.