I suppose you would just have to choose which time zone you wanted to be in, and take it from there.

Technically, if you took one step (or less) in any direction, you would be on a particular line of longitude, then it would take 24hrs 1.5 mins (approx) to get back round to the same point in space, relative to the Earth's rotation.

But as you say, as far as our 'two dimensional' method of time calculation goes, yes, you would not be 'turning' round an axis of the Earth, you would be 'spinning' in one spot.

So to tell the time you could just put a spot on the ground, off the point of the Pole, as your chosen time zone, and use that.  

(That really is one of the few curious things I have never pondered over.............lol ).

Another good one to try is standing ON the International Date Line, then skip from one side to the other yelling 'Monday! Tuesday! Monday!' etc.
I did this once to annoy a friend of mine, he thumped me after about 30 seconds! Some people really DON'T have a sense of humour Or maybe they don't like irritating plonkers.......
In answer to your question Paz, the Poles have a summer and a winter, time is relative there, as the sun is up for six months and wanders around the sky, then its dark for six months. So no idea.... But at a guess I'd say it'd be logical for everyone to use GMT.

Ozzy

Try this out...   I'm still trying to figure it out.

http://www.mindspring.com/~gwil/taq.html

or maybe this one...

http://www.gsp.com/support/virtual/admin/unix/tz/antarctica/

Quote:


Technically you are rightside-up. Up and down are only a state of mind made to simplify things. Earth is in space and in space there is no up or down. The only reason that we can differ the two here on Earth is due to our own gravity which is pulling us towards the center of the planet. No matter where you are, up is still up and down is still down.

If I may add another thing. The South Pole hasn't always been the South Pole. Several times in the history of the planet, the magnetic poles have reversed. We are currently entering another reversal stage. I guess Australia will become known as the "Land Up Up Top" and Canada will be known as the "Great White South". Of course this process is very slow. Another interesting thing about this phenomenon is during the process, North and South neutralize each other. This means that for a short time, Earth will have no magnetic field. Would be neat to watch birds flying in circles.

This is my last post to visit tonight with answers (that were in my email box).
So I can take some time and get real technical...................and stupid. 

If your at the South Pole, don't worry about 'everything being up hill'. Worry about falling off.....err......up...er 

As for 'wouldn't you get dizzy eventually'. Well, the Earth spins at approx. 1000 mph at the surface (relative to it's point in space) at the equator.
But as you go North or South, that speed decrease as the circumference of the 'line of latitude' that you are on does.
Until you reach a point say.......1 foot from the Pole. then, of course, it would take 24 hrs to do the circle with the 1 foot radius (2 ft diameter).
That's pretty slow. I don't think you'd get dizzy!      (I enjoyed that! )

As for Ozzy's 'now it's today, now it's yesterday' stuff. 
Kind of reminiscent of a famous 'stupid person' isn't it?.............."light goes on, light goes off........"  or   "bed goes up, bed goes down, bed goes up......"

Not that I mean anything by this last statement, at all. 

And the very act of observation alters that which is being observed...

Will

You started us on the quantum physics, I just joined in

Will

Definition of Quantum = Add a zero.

T Pratchett

Will

Now? 17.57 hrs at E1 S180 LOL

Will

Thats all well and good, but what about the north pole ?...............is it 12 hrs opposite due to the 23.5 degree inclination of the earths axis ?

Quote:

When this happens I want to be the first to get to one of the new poles....

Yo Geezer, what exactly is 'Zulu' time. I've seen the term used on 'Jag' the TV show, so I presumed it was 'Pentagon time' or 'Washington time'. Is it?

Secondly. A question. I'm told that because of the intense magnetic field at both Poles, aircraft and GPS instruments etc go haywire, once you near them.

If this is the case, how would you know if you were at the Pole? With no instruments and compasses not working etc. It would be difficult.

(This is actually a question I was asked in an IQ/Psycological test about twenty years ago. I remember I said "you could use a Sextant and the Stars".
I don't know if I was right on that particular question (but i did well enough).
Other than that I suppose, you could have a second party with radar to tell you when you were there.
That would work, I suppose.

Sorry, just pondering out loud.

The Mrs thinks I'm genuinely crazy because I talk to myself. I do, all the time. I answer myself too.
Well it's the only way I can be sure I'm getting an honest answer!...................

If my IQ/Psycological testers could see that remark, they might review their assessment...............lol 

zulu time is another name for GMT. thats why for instance when in flight sim it could be 10am local new york, but the ATIS will say 16:00zulu

It makes sense that UTC time is used on antarctica, but why wasn't it used by astronauts on the moon......???

My best guess would be because they just stuck with Eastern time and didn't want to bother with changing their clocks constantly while orbiting the earth???

Thanks for the info Craig and PolyN. I've never really paid any attention to the clocks and radios and beams etc. I don't have a manual, the FS was given to me so I don't have instructions about the lessons etc.

As far as the Astronauts are concerned, I don't think it matters what time it is when you leave Earth. It would be more for the benefit of 'Mission Control' and schedules etc. So whatever is convenient would work well enough.

Hey Polyn. I think you're going to win next years Competition with that Signature. I think it's GGRREEAATT.

I'm not into modern aircraft much at all, but I do recognise and love my F16. 

Quote:


Read up on solar (light) sails for interplanatery travel. It does have a force, albeit small. A few kilometer diameter sail could have a spacecraft going the biggest part of the speed of light in a few years.

So your saying my flashlight does nothing but shoot out particles???

Quote:


Apparently so mate. I'm not really that well up on light and the composition of same, but I'm led to believe it is a combination of rays or waves and particles.
I'm not sure, other than to say that it dose have 'mass' of some sort.

I'll have a read up on it and let you know. I'm interested myself anyway. 

The way to look at light though is this:

Some ways it can be explained as a wave and others as a particle and even sometimes as a wave and a particle at the same time.

Solar sails sound expensive and very impracticle.

I still struggle to understand the particle theory of light, if it is a particle - why doesnt the glass in front of lights, or as Andrew says in your flashlight stop the particles escaping?  But then the French scientist De Broglie introduced the revolutionary theory of Matter Waves, because it was observed that while light obeyed both wave and particle theory, matter (i.e. stuff u can see down to electrons and particles) obey wave laws.  Believe it or not, when you throw a tennis ball it moves with wave motion.  This is called wave-particle duality and it is a very complecated branch of physics but it nonetheless is very fascinating.

Don't you just lover pondering the questions of the universe?!?!

Nice clear explanation Professor!

I agree Ender Baron.  In fact, in Hollywood, they sell maps, and will even take you on tours!

Glad to be of some use. 

"You know why I built this thing?  It wasn't to . . . usher in a new era of peace.
"I don't want to go to the stars!  I don't even like to fly!  I take trains!
"I just wanted to retire somewhere nice.  Some tropical island . . . full of . . . naked women.
"You want to know what I see?  Dollar signs!  Money!  That's Zephram Cochrane!  That's his vision . . .

"Someone once said: Don't try to be a great man, just be a man.  Let history make its own judgements."

"That's rhetorical nonsense . . . Who said that?"

"You did.  Twenty years from now . . ."

--dialogue between Zephram Cochrane and Commander William Riker.  Star Trek: First Contact.




Yeah, I'm a diehard trekkie . . .

Actually, what you're saying makes sense.  I was talking about a manned one, that could carry someone out of the solar system and get them somewhere in a reasonable amount of time.  But a small one, with no payload and just some kind of recording device would work.  They just have to be ready for disappointment.  I would fully expect their first few attempts to fail misserably, before they get anything accomplished.

Ah, but to travel the cosmos, where light be your only companion and not but the stars to guide you . . .

This thread has gone weird.

Time
.
.
.
Quantam Physics
.
.
.
.
Time again
.
.
.
.
.
Star Trek? ? ?

Quote:


They have a life of ther own, mate.

That's half the attraction. You never know where you're going to end up............

Quote:


How about Stargate? Are you into that. It's a good series.
Actually, for the Trekkies, I was surprised to read that an 8th series has been scheduled for next year. That makes it the longest running Sci-fi series, except the X-files (which has really gotten a bit lame since Mulder left). 

Quote:


...so... 8)...!
...how come you believe in this bloke "GOD" and his band of Heavenly Angels then... ...!
Qantam physics and " ...'im up there..." seem far removed from one another... ...!
I think that this Thread proves that the World is not flat, and that "..'im up there" doesn't really exist.
LOL...LOL...LOL...

Cheers Poly... ...!
(...sorry mate...).... ...!
Paul.
(England).

P.S ...I'll convert you yet to an "Unbeliever"...LOL...LOL...LOL..!

Quote:

Being a bit sexist here, aren't ya?  Why couldn't it be a sentient woman?

Quote:


You are correct, sir!  The "Great Flood" did occur, but it most likely wasn't as the bible describes it.

Ancient Egyptian records show a valley in the Cradle of Civilization around 5000 BC.  The entire valley was flooded by a natural dam breaking and letting in the sea it had been holding back for many millions of years.  Apparently, it flooded the largest human population ever, which is what we now know as Atlantis.  This area was not as advanced as we suppose.  Simple wooden structures, but it was larger than anything humans had created at the time.  Hence the legacy of the advanced civilization known as "Atlantis".  I got all this information from a book titled "Pastwatch or The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" by Orson Scott Card, author of the "Ender's Game" series.  (Yeah, my name comes from this . . .)

All of this is conjecture, but makes very much sense if you read the book.

Quote:


This is actually quite accurate.  The specific asteroid was most likely the one that created the crater on the Yucatan Peninsula.


Quote:


I think you are right about this, for sure.  The job of priests in the early part of history was to explain to the common man the unexplainable.  The priests knew many of the things our scientists in the 20th century have "discovered" but they also knew there was no way to make the common serf understand these cosmic events.  So they created religions that attributed these amazing phenomena to occult figures.

Okay, if anyone disagrees, lay on!!

   Wow!
  This has turned into a very cool thread, some very interesting points being discussed.
  I don't even care what time it is at the South pole anymore, that's so yesterday.

Quote:

People make choices and they have to live by them , and yes its sad even the innocent pay for choices that others have made...
people love the good that comes from good choices that they have made.and say only good things to people. And when they make bad choices, blame god for the bad things that happen ..."from the choices they have made"..
just my feelins on it...  

My bit for the science vs. religion debate...

Science and Religion are the same thing.  That may sound absurd on the surface, but as I have studied it, it no longer does to me.

     As humans, we have created two major belief systems to answer our questions about life.  These two systems are science and religion.  Both of these systems purport to answer every question we could ever have, but neither of them can.  Science cannot tell me if I have a soul, and religion cannot tell me the distance to Alpha Centauri.  Because of this, no solution to this debate can come about, because neither one does their job.

   Now you may say, that science and religion cannot be the same, but if you look, the tenets of each are almost identical.  Religion requires absolute faith in God; science requires absolute faith in Scientific Method.  Religious facts are disseminated by a chosen few who are supposed to have some great insight into the nature of God that we don’t.  So does science.  Science tells us the speed of light is 186,262 mps.  Have you ever measured the speed of light?  I haven’t.  We are required to accept the word of a select few people who actually carried out the experiment.  True, you could back it up with fact, if you decided to quit your job, go back to school, get a PhD in Quantum Physics, and spend another 4-6 years doing so.  But that is not really feasible, so we must take the word of these priests of science that it is true.  Their decision may be overturned at a later time, but then we’re still being required to accept someone else’s word.

I’ve done a lot more thinking on this, but this is the bases for what I have come to believe…

Interesting thoughts, Pippin.

I'm always open to a new.........slant on the Religion versus Science debate. And yours would seem to make some sense.

Of course, as I said, my contention is the two could well be (an IMO, are) bonafide. They could serve to prove each others 'theories', as in the 'Noah's Ark' question.
Alternatively, religion, or events recorded and throughout history considered to be the realm of the 'supernatural' (i.e. miracles, strange happenings etc), could well end up being confirmation of the existence of what has been considered to be scientific 'thoery' up till that time it's explained.

I think there's room for a 'strict' Evolutionist to still be able to credit God with the 'installation of a soul' into the first two sentient Homo Sapiens. Also there's room for the Pope to acknowledge that Adam and Eve weren't created out of thin air, but through a process, overseen and brought about by God but in the 'long process' form of 'Evolution'.
Both could agree on this one happening being 'God's plan' and at the same time a firm, proven scientifically substantiated course of events.

Hence, our two 'thoeries' or 'beleifs' are that both Science and Religion are one in the same and can serve to be each others 'proponent'.

i'm sorry poly but i have seen to much scientific evidence to show that a planet and its inhabitants could never be built in 7 days, it is not at all possible.a planet takes millions of years to form, and this planet and its inhabitants have yet to completely evolve. i have also seen the damage some parts of religion can do to young people,

like i said i have no problem with religion. and there are def some things i cant explain.but again though i am a pure scientist at heart so i am a doubter of everything that has nothing to back it up
i do admit proper christians have helped  they spend their time helping others and have certainly taken alot of problems out of the world which is always a good thing.

have a great trip.
i cant remember who said it but theres a funny quote  regarding god.

"If triangles had a god it would have three sides"

as for being receptive i really cant. i will however go along with others where i need to, my ex was a christian and held a number of the belifes that go with it, i wont go through them as you know them, but i always did my best to go along with her wishes and actions.

Very well put .. Clap Clap...............

I don't know wheter the food is still edible but the current time where it is is 11.30hrs GMT.

Thank you.

Will

Many interesting thoughts, Paz.

I too, as you know, am a lover and Practitioner of R & R.
It's not in conflict with my faith, which incidentally is a private deal between me and God. I don't think he intended me personally to 'spread the word' from door to door. Not my cuppa tea. (Actually not the Catholic cuppa tea)........lol
But for the sake of a good discussion, and to clear up what I see as 'misconceptions' about one thing or another, I don't mind revealing that I am Catholic and have an active and current membership in the "Hey God's OK" club.............

What's not OK, as you point out, is the misguided, some times egotistical and downright evil, sometimes of those that would claim to guide us. Unfortunately, until recently, the churches have been at a loss as to what to do with these sicko's.
I can only speak for the Catholic Church, which has it sorted out. You cannot be a Poofter and a Priest at the same time (you can have the feelings - we can't help them - but you can't actively 'poof'). You can't actively 'poof' and recieve the 'sacraments' because you are in not doing the right thing.

But then you can't do the horizontal limbo with a lady either, unless she's your wife, because that's the wrong thing. (A rule I have occasionally forgotten [unmarried], whilst R&Ring. But then, unlike some, I don't mind admitting that God hasn't finished mith me yet, I'm a kind of 'work in progress'......  )

Priests can't be married. I think this may change in the next 50 or so. After all how can an unmarried man who has never had to worry about supporting anyone or housing anyone, or worrying where his next meal is coming from, tell a struggling couple how to run their life (in the fanily planning dept). The Church is aware of this........imbalance, and is working on the solution (In fact, again, in the Catholic Church, the Birth control question (prior to conceptoion only) is 'often' left to the couple as a 'conscientious decision' based on circumstance, which of course would discount 'selfish reasoning' like "we can't have kids until we travel round the world".

As for those ones that do nasty things to little boys, they are expelled (from the Catholic Church) if found guilty or confess, no questions. Out you go. Regrettably it was not always so.
These things tend to make headlines and everyone is aware of every single incident and detail. That's human nature (and the nature of the press - they have to sell papers). 

But fortunately, I know for sure, that there are infinitely more kind, giving and committed people (male and female, clergy and lay) doing wonderful things, and helping the sick, the poor, the war-torn, the lost and the needy.
These people and events, obviously don't get the coverage and recognition that they should, hence the reason for some people having the understandable 'misgivings' that can sometimes accompany the discovery or reading of the 'negative reports' they come across.

Fortunately, there's me to put them right..........................lol  (I kill me!  )

yes a good club indeed.

Way back when in this thread, Prof. Brensec wrote:
Quote:


This is really not technically accurate. As you might suspect in this very imperfect universe, the earth doesn't truly rotate on an axis, but actually has a 'wobble' in it's rotation (think I learned this from the Discovery channel some time ago).

For those of you on the religion topic, sorry for the diversion......you may carry on now.

Say, speaking of grits, that reminds me...........................

Nooooooooooo, never mind........................................

Hey Paz,

To everything you said........................LOL