[time-nuts] Are there limits to the accuracy of clocks?

[Didier Juges]

So, if I ever have to walk the Planck along its length (I don't walk 
anywhere near the speed of light), how much much Planck time is it going 
to take?

Didier KO4BB

(sorry I'm not a physicist, just an engineer...)

Thank Ulrich for a very thought provoking piece of information for the 
engineer.

Ulrich Bangert wrote:

>Hal,
>
>i guess a physicist's answer to your question would be something like
>that:
>
>Question:
>What is Planck length? What is Planck time?
>
>Answer:
>The Planck length is the scale at which classical ideas about gravity
>and space-time cease to be valid, and quantum effects dominate. This is
>the 'quantum of length', the smallest measurement of length with any
>meaning. 
>
>And roughly equal to 1.6 x 10-35 m or about 10-20 times the size of a
>proton. 
>
>The Planck time is the time it would take a photon travelling at the
>speed of light to across a distance equal to the Planck length. This is
>the 'quantum of time', the smallest measurement of time that has any
>meaning, and is equal to 10-43 seconds. No smaller division of time has
>any meaning. With in the framework of the laws of physics as we
>understand them today, we can say only that the universe came into
>existence when it already had an age of 10-43 seconds.
>
>Regards
>Ulrich
>
>  
>
>>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>Von: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com 
>>[mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com] Im Auftrag von Hal Murray
>>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. März 2006 10:21
>>An: time-nuts at febo.com
>>Betreff: [time-nuts] Are there limits to the accuracy of clocks?
>>
>>
>>Daniel Kleppner's "Time Too Good To Be True" article in 
>>Physics Today said that atomic clocks have been getting 
>>better by a factor of 10 every decade for the past 50 years.
>>    http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-59/iss-3/p10.html
>>    
>>http://www.timing-consultants.com/images/App%20notes/vol59no3p
>>    
>>
>10_11.pdf
>Thanks to Rob Kimberley for telling me/us about that article.  It's a
>really neat article if anybody hasn't read it yet.
>
>Are there any known/predicted bumps in the road?  Is there some physical
>limit?  What happens after atomic clocks?  ... 
>
>Does anybody have a list of all the "limits" for silicon chips or
>magnetic recording that have come and gone?
>
>Does Heisenberg get involved?  If so, how far are we from being able to
>notice it?  How would a timekeeper state the basic idea?  I'm fishing
>for something like "If you know the time you don't know where you are."
>
>
>
>  
>