It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by spoonbender
time is inconsequential
as its a human thing on earth
if not on earth time don't matter
do it
Originally posted by muse7
The proper motion of stars would only mean that we are moving through space, but that would not be a good thing to use for time measurement
Also considering it would take stars hundreds of thousands of years to just move a couple of degrees in the sky.edit on 5/6/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)edit on 5/6/2012 by muse7 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by muse7
How would we measure time? Our whole time measurement is based on the Earth's orbit around the sun.
Since 1967, the second has been defined to be: the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.
Originally posted by orionthehunter
Without a star for a heat source, a rogue planet would likely be lifeless and extremely cold.
If there were a steady heat source, such as a persistent volcanic heat source, then life might evolve.
As far as measuring time goes, we Earthlings would probably use whatever unit of time makes most sense and convert it for anyone interested. If we lived in a different star system not on a rogue planet, then we would likely use that planet's solar revolution cycle as a year. Proxima Centauri star system years might be years faster or slower than Earth years. If there were no star to use as a measurement of time, then we might use moon months or so many moon months to make a year. In this case the moon might be whatever satellite might be in orbit around the rogue planet. If we traveled to a rogue planet with constant darkness, then we humans might just bring our own clocks and stay with Earth time based clocks as a time measurement system.