Talk:NIST-F1

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Time Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Measurement (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Measurement, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.MeasurementWikipedia:WikiProject MeasurementTemplate:WikiProject MeasurementMeasurement articles

Use the Country-Specific Spelling[edit]

If the subject matter involves a United States project, the correct US spelling should be used, particularly when all the links including this one[1] also spell it as "cesium." Yes, those in the UK spell it differently. Feel free to use your spelling in articles about your projects. Please stop "UK-nizing" articles about US projects.17:53, 16 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.70.218.190 (talk)

Actually its not "UK-nizing", its "Entire rest of the world-nizing". Try this simple test. Say this word out loud: "Buoy". Then say this word out loud: "Buoyancy". If you feel a bit silly afterwards the chances are your forefathers were really intrepid folks who did fantastic things, founded a truly amazing country, and were also just a little bit illiterate. This is nothing to be ashamed of. The language is called "English". It is spoken in many countries. It is also the international language. All international airline pilots must speak it. The fact that you people got it wrong and just wont admit it, is yet another reason why the rest of us just shake our heads and laugh.

If you look at the wikipedia page for "CAESIUM" (with a note about the alternate spelling), You will note that it was discovered in 1860 by two German chemists, Robert Bunsen and Gustav Kirchhoff. They did not name it "CESIUM". No amount of money can change this. The rest of us just laugh at your arrogance. The emperor has no clothes.

 Who didn't sign the above epithet? Request to delete 2 paragraphs above. AE7EC (talk) 06:25, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thought the Navy was the official time standard[edit]

Although NIST does figure into the UTC constellation, I thought is was the U.S. Naval Observatory which was tasked with keeping the U.S.'s offical time. In other words, I am disputing the veracity of the claim in the caption on the photo of NIST-F1 being the source of U.S. official time. Can anyone corroborate the caption's claim? -- Joe (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The US Naval Observatory is the master clock for the GPS system, but the NIST was given congressional mandate for weights and measures, so their clock is the official one. http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/ puts it plenty clear - they are the official ones. --Freeone3000 (talk) 02:55, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New time standard[edit]

There is a new standard NIST-F2. Should a new page be created and that linked to it, like the older standard, or should it be combined? What's appropriate? I'm new at this :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.116.171.76 (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy versus precision[edit]

This article uses the term accuracy in a number of places; while on the other hand, precision isn't mentioned at all. While I have little doubt that the whomever took the time to write an article about an atomic clock understands the difference between accuracy and precision I think it might be useful to include some information about the latter quality in relation to NIST-F1. It would also give way to the possibility of educating a few poor lost souls about the difference between the two measures. voxadam τ 17:48, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]