[time-nuts] Atomic Watch.

Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani at screen.it
Wed May 1 14:32:43 EDT 2013

Yes, you're right: the radioactive decay is not involved. Anyway the CSAC
is not a primary reference (even if the Cs in used) as pointed out here
when the CSAC was first introduced. Nor a special permission has to be
asked to "wear" the CSAC.

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Sarah White <kuzetsa at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/1/2013 8:43 AM, Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB) wrote:
> >
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_movement/
> >
> Stephen, fellow time nuts,
> [DISCLAIMER] I should really know better than to attempt internet
> discussions or comments first thing after waking up. Didn't stop me
> today though (oops)
> So...
> Did I just make a fool of myself?
> Was I mistaken?
> I tweeted the author of this article, trying to point out that (as I
> understand) "radioactive decay" is not relevant in any way for cesium
> frequency standard/reference thingies:
> https://twitter.com/kuzetsa/status/329618223916011520
> If someone more authoritative and/or experienced (or at least more
> awake) wanted, please let me know if I was confused and such
> --Sarah
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

More information about the time-nuts mailing list