Andy Burns wrote:
With digital delays, the answer has to be negative.
Chris
In message <[email protected]> at Mon, 12 Feb
2024 18:39:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Andy Burns wrote:
With digital delays, the answer has to be negative.
Chris
Not for time precision, no (although if you listen to them on FM [or I presume AM], they're close enough to set most clocks and watches).
But as a cultural meme, I'd be sad to see them go.
In uk.tech.broadcast J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:
In message <[email protected]> at Mon, 12 Feb
2024 18:39:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Andy Burns wrote:
With digital delays, the answer has to be negative.
Chris
Not for time precision, no (although if you listen to them on FM [or I
presume AM], they're close enough to set most clocks and watches).
But as a cultural meme, I'd be sad to see them go.
They just signify 'here is the news' at this point, like the Big Ben bongs >for News at Ten, or the 45 seconds of pompous flummery on the BBC News >Channel.
Theo
Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2024 18:07, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001w0yw>
I do.
Because?
Chris
J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:
In message <[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb
2024 13:18:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2024 18:07, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001w0yw>
I do.
Because?
People who want to abolish them give me the pip ... (-:
(Or, in general, who want to abolish/change something just for the sake
of it where keeping it involves minimal effort/expense.)
The problem is that the pips on DAB or live stream are misleading. It’s wrong to broadcast a time signal that can be very many seconds off. Not everyone is aware of the limitations.
On 13/02/2024 15:53, Tweed wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:
In message <[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb
2024 13:18:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2024 18:07, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001w0yw>
I do.
Because?
People who want to abolish them give me the pip ... (-:
(Or, in general, who want to abolish/change something just for the sake
of it where keeping it involves minimal effort/expense.)
The problem is that the pips on DAB or live stream are misleading. It’s
wrong to broadcast a time signal that can be very many seconds off. Not
everyone is aware of the limitations.
I use the (usually 8am R4) pips on FM to check/set clocks & watches as required.
The problem is that the pips on DAB or live stream are misleading. It’s wrong to broadcast a time signal that can be very many seconds off. Not everyone is aware of the limitations.
Mark Carver wrote:
Max Demian wrote:
I use the (usually 8am R4) pips on FM to check/set clocks & watches
as required.
The +/-10 second accuracy is good enough for domestic use.
Most homes have at least one mobile phone, which I find are within +/- 1 second of any "good" time source I compare them to ...
Max Demian wrote:
I use the (usually 8am R4) pips on FM to check/set clocks & watches as
required.
The +/-10 second accuracy is good enough for domestic use.
J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:
In message <[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb
2024 13:18:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2024 18:07, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001w0yw>
I do.
Because?
Chris
People who want to abolish them give me the pip ... (-:
(Or, in general, who want to abolish/change something just for the sake
of it where keeping it involves minimal effort/expense.)
The problem is that the pips on DAB or live stream are misleading. It’s >wrong to broadcast a time signal that can be very many seconds off. Not >everyone is aware of the limitations.
J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:
In message <[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb
2024 13:18:46, Chris J Dixon <[email protected]> writes
Max Demian wrote:
On 12/02/2024 18:07, Andy Burns wrote:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001w0yw>
I do.
Because?
Chris
People who want to abolish them give me the pip ... (-:
(Or, in general, who want to abolish/change something just for the sake
of it where keeping it involves minimal effort/expense.)
The problem is that the pips on DAB or live stream are misleading. It’s >wrong to broadcast a time signal that can be very many seconds off. Not >everyone is aware of the limitations.
Are you suggesting that the BBC live in the past? grin.
There was a very funny skit on what might be going on during the run in to
news bulletins many years ago. The idea seemed to be that it gave just
enough time for the staff to stop snogging each other and sort their
makeup out.
Brian
Why are not all clocks radio clocks so they set themselves. It surely cannot >be that expensive, even some cheap watches do it.
Brian
Bad example, actually there is quite a leeway on many rocket launches as >modern computers can calculate in real time to get the spacecraft to the >right place nowadays.
I was just thinking as to when good time keeping might be needed and how to >get it. Certainly out of doors, GPS Satellites are the place to go, since
the system reads their clocks as part of the position computing. Brian
Why are not all clocks radio clocks so they set themselves. It surely cannot be that expensive, even some cheap watches do it.
On 13/02/2024 19:26, Brian Gaff wrote:
Why are not all clocks radio clocks so they set themselves. It surely cannot >> be that expensive, even some cheap watches do it.
Cost.
On 13/02/2024 16:32, Max Demian wrote:
I use the (usually 8am R4) pips on FM to check/set clocks & watches asThe +/-10 second accuracy is good enough for domestic use.
required.
It's a different matter if you're NASA, firing a burn to propel
something in the right direction towards Pluto
In message <uqgfot$27k20$[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb 2024 19:26:20,
Brian Gaff <[email protected]> writes
Why are not all clocks radio clocks so they set themselves. It surely cannot >be that expensive, even some cheap watches do it.
Brian
Same reason not all (weighing - bathroom or kitchen) scales/clocks, and
many other appliances, don't have speech output. Though it wouldn't cost _much_, the manufacturers won't do it if it costs _any_ more, and they
don't think they'd get enough extra sales to justify it.
(I agree: I have a radio-locked one in my kitchen I bought from Lidl
many years ago. Runs for several years on a single AA [and yes, it is genuinely radio-locked, not just claiming to be]; can't have been that expensive.)
On 14/02/2024 13:13, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
I bought one from Argos a few years ago, it was radio-locked but the
hands could be anything up to a quarter of a minute out. Utterly
useless, so I returned it as "unfit for purpose".
I had a number of digital ones from Argos that lasted for years bjt
several are now faulty - I think there was one originally that I could
never get off Berlin Time!
I bought one from Argos a few years ago, it was radio-locked but the
hands could be anything up to a quarter of a minute out. Utterly
useless, so I returned it as "unfit for purpose".
J. P. Gilliver <[email protected]> wrote:[]
(I agree: I have a radio-locked one in my kitchen I bought from Lidl
many years ago. Runs for several years on a single AA [and yes, it is
genuinely radio-locked, not just claiming to be]; can't have been that
expensive.)
I bought one from Argos a few years ago, it was radio-locked but the
hands could be anything up to a quarter of a minute out. Utterly
useless, so I returned it as "unfit for purpose".
Ah, my Lidl one is LCD, not hands. Auriol model 4-LD3010-3 (Lidl IAN
56184), bought for 4.99 on 17.03.11 (so 13 years ago!). [I'm an
inveterate box and receipt keeper!] Even has a temperature readout!
I had a number of digital ones from Argos that lasted for years bjt
several are now faulty - I think there was one originally that I could
never get off Berlin Time!
A couple of years ago I bought analogue ones and they are lasting well,
easy to read and keep good time.
Every digital display radio controlled clock that I’ve owned has a seconds display.
What I find odd is that it is not possible to buy a cheap WiFi connected clock that uses ntp to get the time.
I was just thinking about time signals and clocks generally. I guess you could have some kind of internal radio pips.
Brian Gaff wrote:
I was just thinking about time signals and clocks generally. I guess you
could have some kind of internal radio pips.
I think the News24 approach, i.e. having some pip-like noises in the
jingle that plays up to the start of the program roughly on the hour,
works well enough ...
Andy Burns writes:
I think the News24 approach, i.e. having some pip-like noises in theI'm pretty sure the news24 countdown - even allowing for the varying transmission delays - is only a jingle, not actually started so that it reaches zero on the hour anywhere.
jingle that plays up to the start of the program roughly on the hour,
works well enough ...
On 28/02/2024 01:41, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
The pips on analogue radio FM are probably the most accurate.
Certainly the most accurate easily accessible way of setting the time.
The pips on analogue radio FM are probably the most accurate.
On 28/02/2024 07:40, JMB99 wrote:
On 28/02/2024 01:41, J. P. Gilliver wrote:If a smartphone with a GPS receiver built in is available, the time
The pips on analogue radio FM are probably the most accurate.
Certainly the most accurate easily accessible way of setting the time.
shown on that is within the error caused by the speed of light from
orbit. (If three or more satellites are within line of sight, that
error can be eliminated)
My phones, even the first digital phone I had, display network time,
which in turn is derived from GPS or NPL time.
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I
wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the >different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it
would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
In message <uqgf8n$27gpm$[email protected]> at Tue, 13 Feb 2024 19:17:42,[]
Brian Gaff <[email protected]> writes
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by
the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I
wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the
different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it
would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail. Like nearly all
BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies"
or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight
on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips. But
I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a
London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of
the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by the bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it
would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a
London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of
the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely
remember hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the
timing of the pips so that a typical listener in the home counties,
say 50 km from a London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the
most accurate signal.� Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that >>would get a time signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in
more distant parts of the UK would necessarily get it a few
milliseconds late, but there really wasn't much they could do about
that at reasonable cost.�� Does anyone else remember that or is my
memory playing tricks?
How many set their watch to an accuracy of 1 millisecond?
I suspect that if you stopped some people in the street, their watches
would be many minutes out.
On 28/02/2024 07:40, JMB99 wrote:
On 28/02/2024 01:41, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
The pips on analogue radio FM are probably the most accurate.
Certainly the most accurate easily accessible way of setting the time.If a smartphone with a GPS receiver built in is available, the time
shown on that is within the error caused by the speed of light from
orbit. (If three or more satellites are within line of sight, that error
can be eliminated)
My phones, even the first digital phone I had, display network time,
which in turn is derived from GPS or NPL time.
My smartphone shows the time and it looks accurate, but how do I know
this is from the GPS satellites rather than synchronised via the
internet or cellphone system?
I'd defy anyone to be _able_ to set it to closer than 100, more like 500
(-:
As another has said, distance from speaker in the room probably gives
more variation!
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:A far more significant factor, is how far away you are from the radio's >loudspeaker !
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by
the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I >>> wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the >>> different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it
would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
� Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very
good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail.�� Like nearly all
BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies"
or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight
on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips.�� But
I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always
seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember
hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a
London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal.� Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time
signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of
the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost.�� Does
anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
My smartphone shows the time and it looks accurate, but how do I know
this is from the GPS satellites rather than synchronised via the
internet or cellphone system?
Max Demian wrote:
My smartphone shows the time and it looks accurate, but how do I know
this is from the GPS satellites rather than synchronised via the
internet or cellphone system?
If a phone has GPS it *could* get time from satellites, but that might
take a lot of time and energy, far more likely the phone will use the
time information sent by the network* instead.
[*] Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and--
it's allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I
generally find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who have clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
A phone isn’t going to get GPS time indoors. I imagine the cellular networks have very accurate time these days. It’s quite hard not to, as the easy way is to use NTP within the core. Mind you, I’ve noticed an increasing number of cell sites sporting GPS antennas, so there must be a need now either for very accurate time or perhaps they are being used as a frequency standard (or both).
Proper GPS receivers indicate whether they are receiving a sign and
usually how long since they last updated.
I have never seen a mobile phone indicate when it last updated.
Andy Burns wrote:
Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and it's
allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I generally
find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
I got the impression that each data packet contained an origination and
time code to make assembly easier when packets are received out of order
due to factors such as base station switching?
https://time.is/
time.is is an interesting website. Claimed accuracy:
Time.is is synchronized with an atomic clock - the most accurate time
source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of 0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and
how busy your computer is.
It also measures the delta between what it thinks the time is and your device’s system time.
My iPhone: 0.105 seconds, my iPad 0.126 seconds.
Max Demian wrote:
My smartphone shows the time and it looks accurate, but how do I know
this is from the GPS satellites rather than synchronised via the
internet or cellphone system?
If a phone has GPS it *could* get time from satellites, but that might
take a lot of time and energy, far more likely the phone will use the
time information sent by the network* instead.
[*] Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and it's allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I generally
find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
Andy Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and it's
allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I generally
find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
I got the impression that each data packet contained an origination and
time code to make assembly easier when packets are received out of order >>> due to factors such as base station switching?
That's a different "network clock" not an absolute time as in UTC+/-TZ
The delta between base-station clocks is used when moving from cell-to-cell. >>
https://time.is/
time.is is an interesting website. Claimed accuracy:
Time.is is synchronized with an atomic clock - the most accurate time
source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of 0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and
how busy your computer is.
It also measures the delta between what it thinks the time is and your device’s system time.
My iPhone: 0.105 seconds, my iPad 0.126 seconds.
A phone isn’t going to get GPS time indoors. I imagine the cellular[]
In article <[email protected]>, Mark Carver
<[email protected]> scribeth thus
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:A far more significant factor, is how far away you are from the radio's
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by >>>> the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I >>>> wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the >>>> different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it >>>> would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very >>> good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail. Like nearly all >>> BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies" >>> or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight
on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips. But >>> I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always >>> seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember
hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a
London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time >>> signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of >>> the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does >>> anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
loudspeaker !
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who have clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
Jeff Layman <[email protected]d> wrote:
On 29/02/2024 10:55, Tweed wrote:
Andy Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and it's >>>>>> allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I generally >>>>>> find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
I got the impression that each data packet contained an origination and >>>>> time code to make assembly easier when packets are received out of order >>>>> due to factors such as base station switching?
That's a different "network clock" not an absolute time as in UTC+/-TZ >>>>
The delta between base-station clocks is used when moving from cell-to-cell.
https://time.is/
time.is is an interesting website. Claimed accuracy:
Time.is is synchronized with an atomic clock - the most accurate time
source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of >>> 0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and >>> how busy your computer is.
It also measures the delta between what it thinks the time is and your
device’s system time.
My iPhone: 0.105 seconds, my iPad 0.126 seconds.
How does it know where you are? I don't use my home location at any
time, and often applications assume I'm in Rochdale (as my ISP is Zen,
who are based in Rochdale). I'm actually about 250 miles away.
Time.is reports:
"Your time is exact!
The difference from Time.is was +0.001 seconds (±0.070 seconds).
Time in Liverpool, United Kingdom now:
11:26:31"
Why Liverpool, when it's about 40 miles from Rochdale (and,
incidentally, not in the direction I live)?
It uses geolocation of your IP address. Geolocation is hit and miss at the best of times. I’m geolocated to the headquarters of my niche ISP. When I was on Virgin Media I seemed to move around the country as VM moved and traded blocks of IP addresses.
https://www.geolocation.com/en_us amongst many similar sites will return where “they” think you are.
On 29/02/2024 10:55, Tweed wrote:
https://time.is/It tells me that mine is 0.028 seconds out, but is not clear whether it
time.is is an interesting website. Claimed accuracy:
Time.is is synchronized with an atomic clock - the most accurate time
source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of
0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and
how busy your computer is.
It also measures the delta between what it thinks the time is and your
device’s system time.
My iPhone: 0.105 seconds, my iPad 0.126 seconds.
takes into account the ping time when calculating it.
Ping times of time.is from here ranged between 28 and 42 milliseconds.
In message <[email protected]> at Thu, 29 Feb 2024
02:44:42, Andy Burns <[email protected]> writes
Max Demian wrote:I think a lot of 'phones with a GPS receiver built in have the ability
My smartphone shows the time and it looks accurate, but how do I know
this is from the GPS satellites rather than synchronised via the
internet or cellphone system?
If a phone has GPS it *could* get time from satellites, but that might
take a lot of time and energy, far more likely the phone will use the
time information sent by the network* instead.
to turn it off (to save battery I think is the main reason - it's receive-only, so not a privacy issue directly [though depending on the
local laws in your country it may be interrogatable for where you are]);
I would assume that, if the GPS receiver is on, any time the 'phone
displays is from the GPS.
[*] Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and
it's allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I
generally find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
In article <[email protected]>, Mark Carver
<[email protected]> scribeth thus
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:A far more significant factor, is how far away you are from the radio's
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by >>>> the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I >>>> wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the >>>> different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it >>>> would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very >>> good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail. Like nearly all >>> BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies" >>> or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight
on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips. But >>> I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always >>> seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember
hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a
London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time >>> signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of >>> the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does >>> anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
loudspeaker !
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who have clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
If you want it "that" accurate Rubidium standards are on fleabay from
time to time;!..
Jeff Layman <[email protected]d> wrote:
On 29/02/2024 11:41, Tweed wrote:
Jeff Layman <[email protected]d> wrote:
On 29/02/2024 10:55, Tweed wrote:
Andy Burns <[email protected]> wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Sending the date/time/timezone is optional for the network, and it's >>>>>>>> allowed to have an accuracy in the order of minutes, but I generally >>>>>>>> find it's accurate when compared to GPS/MSF master clocks.
I got the impression that each data packet contained an origination and >>>>>>> time code to make assembly easier when packets are received out of order
due to factors such as base station switching?
That's a different "network clock" not an absolute time as in UTC+/-TZ >>>>>>
The delta between base-station clocks is used when moving from cell-to-cell.
https://time.is/
time.is is an interesting website. Claimed accuracy:
Time.is is synchronized with an atomic clock - the most accurate time >>>>> source in the world. The displayed time will normally have a precision of >>>>> 0.02-0.10 seconds. The precision depends on your internet connection and >>>>> how busy your computer is.
It also measures the delta between what it thinks the time is and your >>>>> device’s system time.
My iPhone: 0.105 seconds, my iPad 0.126 seconds.
How does it know where you are? I don't use my home location at any
time, and often applications assume I'm in Rochdale (as my ISP is Zen, >>>> who are based in Rochdale). I'm actually about 250 miles away.
Time.is reports:
"Your time is exact!
The difference from Time.is was +0.001 seconds (±0.070 seconds).
Time in Liverpool, United Kingdom now:
11:26:31"
Why Liverpool, when it's about 40 miles from Rochdale (and,
incidentally, not in the direction I live)?
It uses geolocation of your IP address. Geolocation is hit and miss at the >>> best of times. I’m geolocated to the headquarters of my niche ISP. When I >>> was on Virgin Media I seemed to move around the country as VM moved and
traded blocks of IP addresses.
That could be the reason.
https://www.geolocation.com/en_us amongst many similar sites will return >>> where “they” think you are.
I have "location" turned off in my browser's settings, and it's not
going back on, so that site doesn't work.
You can decline the invitation to turn on browser location. The site still works.
On 29/02/2024 00:31, tony sayer wrote:
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who haveThey used to say that radio listeners in Australia heard the chime of
clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
If you want it "that" accurate Rubidium standards are on fleabay from
time to time;!..
Big Ben before someone outdoors in Lambeth!
On 29/02/2024 14:59, Mike Headon wrote:
They used to say that radio listeners in Australia heard the chime of
Big Ben before someone outdoors in Lambeth!
Marginal. If you stand on the South Bank next to Westminster Bridge, the speed of sound delay is about 750 milliseconds.
Transmission delay to and from geostationary orbit is about half a
second plus landline delay at each end, not forgetting that at least two satellites are involved due to imitations of coverage. Using landline
all the way is even slower. You may do slightly better using the
Starlink constellation, which are all in very low orbits and can link
with each other, with a ping time to a ground station of about 50 ms.
tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
In article <[email protected]>, Mark Carver
<[email protected]> scribeth thus
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:A far more significant factor, is how far away you are from the radio's
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by >>>>> the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I >>>>> wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the >>>>> different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it >>>>> would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very >>>> good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail. Like nearly all >>>> BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies" >>>> or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight >>>> on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips. But >>>> I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always >>>> seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember >>>> hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the
pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a >>>> London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time >>>> signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of >>>> the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does >>>> anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
loudspeaker !
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who have
clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
If you want it "that" accurate Rubidium standards are on fleabay from
time to time;!..
Rubidium standards don’t tell the time.
i have a Leo Bodnar GPS frequency standard works very well and
you can output whatever frequency you want from it:)..
https://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=107
In article <urpch5$dk50$[email protected]>, Tweed <[email protected]> scribeth thus
tony sayer <[email protected]> wrote:
In article <[email protected]>, Mark Carver
<[email protected]> scribeth thus
On 28/02/2024 12:17, Clive Page wrote:
On 13/02/2024 19:17, Brian Gaff wrote:A far more significant factor, is how far away you are from the radio's >>>> loudspeaker !
Yes well they were stopped some time back and I think are generated by >>>>>> the
bbc themselves with a countdown up to them to aid program producers. So I
wonder if there was some way that the delay could be accounted for on the
different media delivery systems. I'd imagine if a sat were involved it >>>>>> would be the longest delay. However D
aB and internet can be worse sometimes but it seems to vary.
Brian
The programme which prompted this thread was, I thought, not really very >>>>> good, and almost totally lacking in technical detail. Like nearly all >>>>> BBC programmes it was, I guess, produced by graduates in "media studies" >>>>> or something like that.
About the only detail that was new to me was the claim than at midnight >>>>> on a date when a leap second was introduced there would be 7 pips. But
I don't know of any BBC programme that uses pips at midnight - it always >>>>> seems to be the chimes of Big Ben.
There was nothing about this in the programme, but I'm vaguely remember >>>>> hearing many years ago that the BBC used to adjust the timing of the >>>>> pips so that a typical listener in the home counties, say 50 km from a >>>>> London area transmitter like Wrotham, would get the most accurate
signal. Anyone living nearer the transmitter than that would get a time >>>>> signal a fraction of a millisecond early, those in more distant parts of >>>>> the UK would necessarily get it a few milliseconds late, but there
really wasn't much they could do about that at reasonable cost. Does >>>>> anyone else remember that or is my memory playing tricks?
A far more important factor is how many females there are there who have >>> clocks from five to ten minutes fast, or slow even, known that!..
If you want it "that" accurate Rubidium standards are on fleabay from
time to time;!..
Rubidium standards don’t tell the time.
No course not my mistake! accurate frequency is more important to me !
For which i have a Leo Bodnar GPS frequency standard works very well and
you can output whatever frequency you want from it:)..
https://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=107
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 10:30:56 |
| Calls: | 12,100 |
| Files: | 15,003 |
| Messages: | 6,517,978 |