Notable correction

[oriel36]

The website of the man who designed the first atomic clock,Louis
Essen, no longer exists and was withdrawn by the internet provider so
that the Wikipediia article only contains one external reference site
for the man while his own has disappeared including his entertaining
and rightful opposition to the early 20th century ideology.

Every single one of you are guilty of not correcting a core
observation that is central to all timekeeping in relationship to
planetary dynamics and included in that other website on Essen -

"It was also the first clock whose timekeeping was significantly more
constant than the rotation of the Earth. Modern atomic clocks are even
more accurate than Caesium I and time is now defined in terms of atoms
rather than the Earth's motion."

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/onlinestuff/stories/atomic_clocks.aspx

The Earth's rotation was never a benchmark for accurate watches and
the 24 hour AM/PM system,the closest timekeeping comes to planetary
dynamics is contained in the proportion of rotations per annual
circuit to the nearest full rotation,in this case 1461 rotations to 4
orbital circuits.

The homocentric observation that a star in stellar circumpolar motion
returns to the same spot 3 minutes 56 seconds earlier using the 24
hour hour cycle within the 365/365/365/366 day format may be used as
a benchmark for determining the accuracy of a watch but it does not
prove rotation is constant and subsequently cannot be used as a
statement of fact that atomic clocks are now more accurate for
timekeeping than the rotation of the planet.

A simple late 17th century error that badly needs correcting or what
is effectively academic fraud - take your pick.