To me when someone tells me a time of day the first thing I visualize is
the clock hands and not numbers. I suspect the present gen visualize
numbers. They must have trouble with 60 minutes in the hour.. a quarter
past six and such..

At 10-07-2011, you wrote:

--
Raj, VU2ZAP
Bangalore, India.

My comment was a bit tongue in cheek.
Novelty value only. I'm sure about a day wearing that would be enough for
most mortals.
:-)

Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Steve Rooke
Sent: 10 July 2011 10:28 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Am I the only Time Nut who doesn't wear a watch?

You'd need one for both wrists and learn to look at the time on alternate
watches or you'll end up with lop sided upper arm muscle growth. Who needs
dumbbells when you can work out just by looking at the time :)

I wonder what the average time for the novelty to wear out is on one of
these.

Steve
PS. Well, it is time related.

On 10 July 2011 17:47, Robert Darlington rdarlington@gmail.com wrote:

father.

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Then there is this little number...

http://forums.watchnet.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=415170&rid=0

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Rob Kimberley
rk@timing-consultants.comwrote:

Wow!

On 11 July 2011 03:20, William H. Fite omniryx@gmail.com wrote:

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

Curious concept... with ball bearings and cam belts... eeer...
transmission belts ;)

El 10/07/2011 17:20, William H. Fite escribió:

On 7/10/2011 6:33 AM, Raj wrote:

I'm 48 years old and prefer digital. Why? Analog clocks are such that a
little "play" is found with the minute hand. That means that if you
calibrate it to be accurate (within the limitation of the movement) on
one side of the hour it will "lose" or "gain" a minute on the other side
due to the play in that needle on the gauge. Digital completely
eliminates the play found with the minute needle. Note that the play
comes into, well, play, if the clock is mounted vertically on a wall and
is a decent large size. An analog watch will not have the problem nor
will a clock with 3 separate stepper engines for each of the 3 needed
gauge needles. (or at least 2 steppers and gears for the hour needle
with direct drive for the second and minute needles)

The typical wall clock will have one stepper engine and and gears for
the minute and hour needles on the gauge with direct drive for the
seconds needle. Therein lies a source of the play with the minutes
needle. What's a measly minute off? Well, we all know! :) If you want a
watch with some bling to it, try a Citizen Skyhawk series analog watch.
These gems are radio controlled so it'll be less than half a second off
at any time and are a little blingy (and a little expensive like $300).

On 7/10/2011 5:04 AM, Javier Herrero wrote:

Put that bloke in the engineroom of a ship and he'd be COMPLETELY lost
looking at the dash. :)

I'd love to find a Smiths analogue clock to match the gauges in the dash of my old British car!

On Jul 16, 2011, at 10:56, Michael Poulos poulosmd@gmail.com wrote:

On 7/9/2011 10:18 PM, Raj wrote:

Watch it. Those clocks on the cell phones are consistently slow compared
to a WWVB watch. The time clocks where I work which have a phone
connection to an (real deal) atomic clock are one second slow compared
to my WWVB watch. At the end of the day I supply a countdown taking into
account the one second off. The second off is due to digital delay in
the system. It's about like having my own time clock except I can't
punch in or out with the watch. Can't have EVERYTHING!

But you are right about the plentiful number of clocks around, most
being less than a minute off, usually slow. For years I didn't wear a
watch until I got a WWVB watch. I was never happy with watches until I
got that one due to inaccuracy. I want my watch to be exact. (OK, less
than half a second off)

Javier shouldn't have been surprised!  This level of understanding from the
so-called smartest people who have ever lived, is quite common.  Not too
long ago I was checking the references of a young man who had just earned a
master's degree in mechanical engineering.  I was assured by one of his
professors that "you can ask him to do just about anything."  And when
asked to analyze deflection of a beam he presented me with an 18 page
mathematical analysis.  A few weeks later I found him in the tool room with
a puzzled expression on his face.  "Do you have a question?"  "Lee, how do
they put threads on the inside of a hole?"

Lee  (the person who does have an HP3801 but who uses the average presented
by three Big Ben Alarm clocks for "working" time)
----- Original Message -----
From: "bownes" bownes@gmail.com
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
time-nuts@febo.com
Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Am I the only Time Nut who doesn't wear a watch?