Boosteur Inactif
Groupe: Visiteur
. 00 ' ' .
[url=https://rankar.co.kr/][/url]
[url=https://rankar.co.kr/][/url]
0%
Boosteur Inactif
Groupe: Visiteur
Onion dark website <a href="http://github.com/darkwebwebsites/darkwebwebsites ">darknet markets 2025 </a>
0%
Boosteur Inactif
Groupe: Visiteur
˜змƒ‡илисŒ о‚ п‹ли и …аоса? šлининговая компания в Санк‚-Ÿе‚е€бƒ€ге п€едлагае‚ п€о„ессионалŒн‹е ƒслƒги по ƒбо€ке для ваˆего дома и о„иса. œ‹ п€именяем ‚олŒко экологи‡ески безопасн‹е с€едс‚ва и га€ан‚и€ƒем идеалŒн‹й по€ядок! ”вигай‚есŒ к https://klining-uslugi24.ru - Убо€ка €емон‚ ƒбо€ка после €емон‚а Ÿо‡емƒ с‚ои‚ в‹б€а‚Œ нас? žпе€а‚ивное и пе€воклассное в‹полнение зада‡, пе€сонализи€ованное о‚ноˆение к каждомƒ клиен‚ƒ и конкƒ€ен‚н‹е †ен‹. Ÿо€ƒ‡и‚е клининг п€о„ессионалам и полƒ‡ай‚е ƒдоволŒс‚вие о‚ свежес‚и без лиˆни… ƒсилий!
0%
Boosteur Inactif
Groupe: Visiteur
Lunar clockwork
What scientists know for certain is that they need to get precision timekeeping instruments to the moon.
[url=https://kra30c.cc]kraken вой‚и[/url]
Exactly who pays for lunar clocks, which type of clocks will go, and where they€™ll be positioned are all questions that remain up in the air, Gramling said.
€œWe have to work all of this out,€ she said. €œI don€™t think we know yet. I think it will be an amalgamation of several different things.€
https://kra30c.cc
к€акен онион
Atomic clocks, Gramling noted, are great for long-term stability, and crystal oscillators have an advantage for short-term stability.
€œYou never trust one clock,€ Gramling added. €œAnd you never trust two clocks.€
Clocks of various types could be placed inside satellites that orbit the moon or perhaps at the precise locations on the lunar surface that astronauts will one day visit.
As for price, an atomic clock worthy of space travel could cost around a few million dollars, according Gramling, with crystal oscillators coming in substantially cheaper.
But, Patla said, you get what you pay for.
€œThe very cheap oscillators may be off by milliseconds or even 10s of milliseconds,€ he added. €œAnd that is important because for navigation purposes €” we need to have the clocks synchronized to 10s of nanoseconds.€
A network of clocks on the moon could work in concert to inform the new lunar time scale, just as atomic clocks do for UTC on Earth.
(There will not, Gramling added, be different time zones on the moon. €œThere have been conversations about creating different zones, with the answer: €˜No,€™€ she said. €œBut that could change in the future.€)
What scientists know for certain is that they need to get precision timekeeping instruments to the moon.
[url=https://kra30c.cc]kraken вой‚и[/url]
Exactly who pays for lunar clocks, which type of clocks will go, and where they€™ll be positioned are all questions that remain up in the air, Gramling said.
€œWe have to work all of this out,€ she said. €œI don€™t think we know yet. I think it will be an amalgamation of several different things.€
https://kra30c.cc
к€акен онион
Atomic clocks, Gramling noted, are great for long-term stability, and crystal oscillators have an advantage for short-term stability.
€œYou never trust one clock,€ Gramling added. €œAnd you never trust two clocks.€
Clocks of various types could be placed inside satellites that orbit the moon or perhaps at the precise locations on the lunar surface that astronauts will one day visit.
As for price, an atomic clock worthy of space travel could cost around a few million dollars, according Gramling, with crystal oscillators coming in substantially cheaper.
But, Patla said, you get what you pay for.
€œThe very cheap oscillators may be off by milliseconds or even 10s of milliseconds,€ he added. €œAnd that is important because for navigation purposes €” we need to have the clocks synchronized to 10s of nanoseconds.€
A network of clocks on the moon could work in concert to inform the new lunar time scale, just as atomic clocks do for UTC on Earth.
(There will not, Gramling added, be different time zones on the moon. €œThere have been conversations about creating different zones, with the answer: €˜No,€™€ she said. €œBut that could change in the future.€)
0%