What is Digg?114 Comments
- noahgelman, on 06/18/2008, -1/+83"The fastest clock in the world" kinda sounds like an oxymoron
- TwolfJB, on 06/18/2008, -1/+67by fastest don't you mean most accurate, cause all clocks work at the same speed, its just depends on the accuracy of them
- RubineBoy, on 06/18/2008, -0/+57Hey, that reminds me of the counter on the gas pump!
- dacrazydude, on 06/18/2008, -0/+39I don't think it's the "fastest" clock in the world....
- inactive, on 06/18/2008, -2/+39Cool. But what's the point for a regular person?
- karmabandit, on 06/18/2008, -0/+36There are atomic clocks that are at least 1000 times faster than this. The NIST standard in 2000 had accuracy to 0.1ns, for example. This clock is only accurate to a microsecond, which is horrible by comparison. Light travels about 1/5th of a mile in a microsecond, so if this were the fastest clock in the world, then your GPS accuracy would be only about 1/5 of a mile (and that would be what the military used, civilians would probably be even worse.) So, let's all be glad this isn't the fastest.
- PDF84, on 06/18/2008, -0/+34Hey, my clock goes at a speed of 1second per second. Fast enough.
- borez, on 06/18/2008, -0/+28That title makes absolutely no sense wot-so-ever.
- blueagave00, on 06/18/2008, -0/+23Big deal, my clock does a minute in 57 seconds.
- tama00, on 06/18/2008, -4/+26that was kinda lame.
unless you synchronise it to those super clocks in London what's the point? I mean sure it can display that many numbers but there not accurate to the actual time! Its like me selling you a chocolate bar for $1.30324329283223892384 in cash, the rest of the numbers dont do anything! - awtripp, on 06/18/2008, -1/+22it's all relative.
- ThankTheCheese, on 06/18/2008, -1/+21To get to front page on Digg?
- loopyloopy, on 06/18/2008, -0/+17buried for inaccuracy :)
- GordonClass, on 06/18/2008, -6/+21Thats a millionth of a second I'll never get back.
- bosssmiley, on 06/18/2008, -0/+14Fifty-two states you say? That's quite an achievement.
- Hindu_Wardrobe, on 06/18/2008, -0/+13I was thinking "fastest" as in a clock whose time is most inaccurately ahead. You know. Wrong.
- dc5mike, on 06/18/2008, -0/+13Well, the fastest clock in the world would be a clock attached to the fasted moving object in the world. No?
- feanix, on 06/18/2008, -1/+14GOOD POINT. Also, let's scrap all that pointless space exploration and make more episodes of Lost.
- Jwoey, on 06/18/2008, -0/+12Truly, most clocks are just as accurate, they just aren't as *precise*
- prrudman, on 06/18/2008, -1/+11How do they know it is accurate? They may just have a stop watch and make up the rest of the number...
- Parkeway, on 06/18/2008, -0/+7x.xxxx99 TWICE!!
Either this guy has incredible luck or he has the fastest reaction time in the history of man... - cair0, on 06/18/2008, -0/+7This is one of those cases where you can't count floating point operations, you have to fall back on the old standard of clock speed. A clock is only a clock if it measures time accurately. I think the upper limit for real microprocessors has been around 5-6 GHz, which would give you mostly accurate sub-nanosecond timings, depending on the quality of the baseline frequency.
In any case, it will count much more precisely than counting operations on a 1 petaflop massively parallel computer where the speed of operation has little to do with its clock speed. - kmartshopper, on 06/18/2008, -1/+8The chance of hitting the same two ending numbers twice really isn't that bad.
Now as for ending in 99, that gets a little more tricky but it's still more likely than you ever getting laid. - ertz, on 06/18/2008, -1/+7but time doesn't exist
- rickishomer, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6..."But Petah, that was just a loud yelping noise."
- SoundJudgment, on 06/18/2008, -1/+7That's 15.278408205866238392828451239 seconds of my life I will never get back.
- Darmichar, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6That or he's pushing the x.xxxx99 button.
- B3000, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5Well, I think that would be my clock. I have it set 100 years ahead, down to the minute.
- furbyboy, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5There are a number of uses for a clock such as this, i.e. measuring fluctuations in time caused by gravity
- databyss, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5I just threw my clock out the window... it was moving much faster than this.
- bazwilliams, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5Each GPS satellite is a highly accurate atomic clock and they continually broadcast this time, GPS receivers receive this time from multiple sources and by some clever maths can work out how far it is away from each satellite (this is where speed of light comes in) and then it triangulates using these different distances to give you an accurate location on the planet.
- dpcamp, on 06/18/2008, -0/+5YES! finally someone is speaking my language!
- Verrier, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
- notman, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4So how did they time it if it's the fastest clock?
- Nosferotu, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4Whoopty *****' doo. Still no cure for cancer out there, eh?
- zomgwaffles, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4So you can tell your girlfriend, "What do you mean 5 minutes? I lasted at least 5 minutes and 30 millionths of a second"
- fas2, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4I'm absolute.
- chaon93, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4a GPS satellite uses ping time in order to triangulate your position, they need incredible timing accuracy in order to approximate your distance from them by means of radio transmission (remember electromagnetic waves also travel at the speed of light)
- rompom7, on 06/18/2008, -0/+4Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
- inactive, on 06/18/2008, -0/+31.Create super fast clock
2. Know what time it is down to the millionth of a second
3. ?
4. Profit - inactive, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3Lol thats pretty impressive!!
- Marumekomu, on 06/18/2008, -1/+4The inaccuracy and impossibility, respectively, of the parts of your comment, have BLOWN my mind. They've blown it. It's blown. Poof, gone.
- Owwmykneecap, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3No accurate means close to the true value, even if values are a little away from each other.
Precise means all values given are close to each other, it does not mean that the are close to the true answer.
That is why you want a machine that is both precise and accurate. - acceleration, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3Did you take leap years into account, though?
- mytruckhasdents, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3ZING!
- LeRenard, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3Even if they calibrated it to be perfectly accurate, at a millionth of a second displayed, just walking across the room with it would be enough to require a recalibration for time dilation.
- Jwoey, on 06/18/2008, -0/+3That's true, but it would've been pointed out if it ended in .34 2x in a row, too.
There's a 1/10000 chance of it landing on any *given* number twice in a row, but landing on the same number 2x in a row is just 1/100. - heresy_fnord, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2Where were you yesterday at 5:45:37.583749 ???!?!
- B3000, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3Ok, so everyone has already pointed out the fallacy of calling it "the fastest clock", what's left for me? Do I ask if it has a radio? If it's a pain in the ass to program the alarm? How you re-set it correctly after the power goes out? *****. That's what I get for showing up late.
- specialK16, on 06/18/2008, -0/+2I see what you did there.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 115 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is