4 ms·

I didnt mean that the second wouldnt have to be redefined at all only that if it was defined in metric, it wouldnt be any more or less prone to adjustment (whic

I didnt mean that the second wouldnt have to be redefined at all only that if it was defined in metric, it wouldnt be any more or less prone to adjustment (which I though was the first comments point) than our current system which is inaccurate. So if our current system still has to be adjusted periodically to fit nature, then what is the real impact of changing the duration of a second? Besides the obvious: breaking every clock on earth LOL

claudius 13y ago
Breaking clocks is boring, but how about breaking SI? We would have to: - redefine the speed of light - redefine the unit of distance - redefine the unit of work - redefine the unit of the electrical current - redefine the unit of light flux The mole, kilogramm and kelvin should be fine, but well. Furthermore, if we wanted to keep a meter the length it currently is, the acceleration due to the gravitation field of the earth would change (currently 9.81 m/s²), along with the kinetic energy of a mass of one kilogram travelling at 1 m/s (currently 1/2 J) and roughly fifty trillion other things. Really, no. No. NO.