🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Nov8.174608.24504@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> 
pratt@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Vaughan R. Pratt) writes:
[Scenario deleted.]
>Given these circumstances, which parameter would you prefer to say had
>changed, light speed, bar length, or clock frequency?  Or would you
>prefer to say that there was no basis for choosing among these?

I once went to a talk by someone who had worked on especially accurate
measures of time, and he remarked that it was conceivable that we
could end up at some point in the future with more than one measure of
"time", if there were two ways of measuring it which were both
reasonably consistent with ordinary timepieces, and both
self-consistent to a greater precision than previously available, but
not consistent with each other. I would agree that it is conceivable
that one would have two measures of time, neither one with a greater
claim to being "time", although it seems unlikely.

Keith Ramsay
ramsay@unixg.ubc.ca