<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ep. 117: Time</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/</link>
	<description>Take a weekly facts-based journey through the cosmos with Astronomy Cast.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:26:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/comment-page-1/#comment-1430</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:21:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.astronomycast.com/?p=439#comment-1430</guid>
		<description>The explanation of atomic clocks isn&#039;t quite right.  Cesium clocks are passive — they don&#039;t radiate when undergoing the transition between the states.  This oscillation occurs because they are in a superposition of the two states (which are the hyperfine, or spin-orientation, states).  The frequency information is &quot;encoded&quot; in the relative population of the two states when you make a measurement.  The operation is not, as it is explained, because the atoms are excited and then spontaneously de-excite.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The explanation of atomic clocks isn&#039;t quite right.  Cesium clocks are passive — they don&#039;t radiate when undergoing the transition between the states.  This oscillation occurs because they are in a superposition of the two states (which are the hyperfine, or spin-orientation, states).  The frequency information is &#034;encoded&#034; in the relative population of the two states when you make a measurement.  The operation is not, as it is explained, because the atoms are excited and then spontaneously de-excite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Colin</title>
		<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/comment-page-1/#comment-1381</link>
		<dc:creator>Colin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 22:57:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.astronomycast.com/?p=439#comment-1381</guid>
		<description>Fraser &amp; Pamela

Fantastic show. I look forward to every episode. 

Don&#039;t ever think about stopping!

Many Thanks &amp; Best Wishes from England.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fraser &amp; Pamela</p>
<p>Fantastic show. I look forward to every episode. </p>
<p>Don&#039;t ever think about stopping!</p>
<p>Many Thanks &amp; Best Wishes from England.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alden Pearl</title>
		<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/comment-page-1/#comment-1380</link>
		<dc:creator>Alden Pearl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.astronomycast.com/?p=439#comment-1380</guid>
		<description>I enjoy the show &amp; you do a wonderful job. Regarding Time (ep 117) I may have missed it but what about the &quot;leap second&quot; ( see http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/wires?id=124150279&amp;c=y) - how do we figure that out ??? I am familiar with the leap year and even the 400 yr rule but a second. Also some years 2 leap seconds are added ? Is this arbitrary - why not in some systematic way like we have for days every 4th year ? 

Thanks Alden J Pearl MD

PS Please keep up these &quot;brain hurting&quot; episodes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I enjoy the show &amp; you do a wonderful job. Regarding Time (ep 117) I may have missed it but what about the &#034;leap second&#034; ( see <a href="http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/wires?id=124150279&amp;c=y)" rel="nofollow">http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/wires?id=124150279&amp;c=y)</a> &#8211; how do we figure that out ??? I am familiar with the leap year and even the 400 yr rule but a second. Also some years 2 leap seconds are added ? Is this arbitrary &#8211; why not in some systematic way like we have for days every 4th year ? </p>
<p>Thanks Alden J Pearl MD</p>
<p>PS Please keep up these &#034;brain hurting&#034; episodes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: todd</title>
		<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/comment-page-1/#comment-1379</link>
		<dc:creator>todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:42:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.astronomycast.com/?p=439#comment-1379</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve enjoyed this show since day one as well. Excellent work and one of them is canadian...naturally. I believe you are from the same area: I grew up is surrey BC and now live in Halifax.

Anyways, love the show.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve enjoyed this show since day one as well. Excellent work and one of them is canadian&#8230;naturally. I believe you are from the same area: I grew up is surrey BC and now live in Halifax.</p>
<p>Anyways, love the show.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Reynolds</title>
		<link>http://www.astronomycast.com/physics/relativity/ep-117-time/comment-page-1/#comment-1370</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Reynolds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 01:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.astronomycast.com/?p=439#comment-1370</guid>
		<description>Nice post. Thank you for the info. Keep it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post. Thank you for the info. Keep it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
