On 23/09/11 05:40, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
On 9/22/2011 5:17 PM, ws at Yahoo wrote:
Within minutes the frequency changed more than the spec
For humidity to get thru something like that it takes weeks or more it
does it at all.
That fast of reaction, Sure sounds like some other effect
Interesting... one co-author, at least, is member of this list :)
Regards,
Javier
El 23/09/2011 06:51, Jim Palfreyman escribió:
For those of you who may be interested, here's the paper.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1109/1109.4897.pdf
___
Well that's good Javier - at least we know the timing's good.
Who?
On Friday, 23 September 2011, Javier Herrero jherr...@hvsistemas.es wrote:
Interesting... one co-author, at least, is member of this list :)
Regards,
Javier
El 23/09/2011 06:51, Jim Palfreyman escribió:
For those of you
I was just wondering, what real use is the kind of accuracy most of the list
members strive for, and there is the answer.
On 9/23/2011 7:09 AM, Jim Palfreyman wrote:
Well that's good Javier - at least we know the timing's good.
Who?
On Friday, 23 September 2011, Javier
The other Javier in the list, Javier Serrano from CERN
El 23/09/2011 13:09, Jim Palfreyman escribió:
Well that's good Javier - at least we know the timing's good.
Who?
On Friday, 23 September 2011, Javier Herrerojherr...@hvsistemas.es wrote:
Interesting... one co-author, at least, is member
In message 4e7c6bb7.1020...@hvsistemas.es, Javier Herrero writes:
BTW: Just something to think about:
There are three quantities involved here, and most of the coverage
and quite a lot of physicists overlook that:
1. Speed of neutrinos
2. Speed of photons
3. Constant 'c' From relativity.
nr 2 = nr 3 is an assumption? I was thinking that it is a definition :)
Regards,
Javier
El 23/09/2011 13:33, Poul-Henning Kamp escribió:
In message4e7c6bb7.1020...@hvsistemas.es, Javier Herrero writes:
BTW: Just something to think about:
There are three quantities involved here, and most
In message 4e7c7556.6090...@hvsistemas.es, Javier Herrero writes:
nr 2 = nr 3 is an assumption? I was thinking that it is a definition :)
No, not really.
Maxwells equations talk about electromagnetic waves in empty space
under the assumption that they have zero rest-mass, but we have
never
Quoted
There are three quantities involved here, and most of the coverage
and quite a lot of physicists overlook that:
1. Speed of neutrinos
2. Speed of photons
3. Constant 'c' From relativity.
Until now the assumption have been that 2 = 3, but this is only
Well one point to add to all this.
Some time-nuts are hams, some are not.
You comment Used in hamshack suggests you are a ham.
RF interference from your radios will be a problem.
It can modulate the EFC and upset things. Granted it will normal up after a
while.
So do consider a metal box and do
On 9/23/11 4:15 AM, Peter Gottlieb wrote:
I was just wondering, what real use is the kind of accuracy most of the
list members strive for, and there is the answer.
I can give you some other day to day practical uses of what gets
discussed on this list:
- radio science in deep space
Here's topic that I hope will provoke some useful discussion (and maybe
the problem has already been solved?)
I'm working with a software defined radio (SDR) for spacecraft which
conforms to a new architecture standard for such radios ( referred to as
STRS) (and I'm also one of the authors
In message 4e7c9fa6.1000...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
The standard currently defines a time API with some simple features to
set and get time, nominally defined in terms of a transformation from
some base clock (i.e. there's a default transformation of the form
reported time = k1 * raw
I have made plots of the effects of everything I can find that effects the
freq of a HP10811.
Most things are much slower than minutes, more like an hour time constant,
such as anything effecting the outside case's temperature
OR the effect is much faster than minutes, things such as voltage
I'm missing the PRS10 in this list. I have been wanting to buy one for a long
time, but didn't because it has been a solution to no problem for all this time.
But now I have bought a spectrum analyzer, a Rohde Schwarz FSIQ3, with
tracking generator and lots of options. It would be nice to have
I checked my neutrino detector yesterday and detected some of those faster than
light neutrions tomorrow ;-)
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
I read this in the newspaper today. The author of course did not
understand the science.
If this result is confirmed it really changes things. but I'm more
willing to bet they find some hidden error in the experiment. I hope
they don't Physics needs to be shaken up.
Now I wish I had taken
El 23/09/2011 18:40, Chris Albertson escribió:
If this result is confirmed it really changes things. but I'm more
willing to bet they find some hidden error in the experiment. I hope
they don't Physics needs to be shaken up.
Now I wish I had taken classes like differential geometry and
I think you are right, often the internal, free running osc will give you
better results. You can use the GPS or rubidium to calibrate the internal one
just before you need some more accurate absolute frequency measurements on the
SA.
It will depend on what measurement you are making, and
On 9/23/11 8:35 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Take a look at FreeBSD's timecounters, what you are asking for
sounds pretty much like what I did 15 years:
http://phk.freebsd.dk/pubs/timecounter.pdf
I used a 32.64 internal format, to avoid rounding errors, particularly
in your k1 term.
In message 4e7cbca1.9010...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
What I'd like to do is take the next step beyond what you promulgated
with a representation of time and the conversion between count and time
with a linear equation.
I'd like to propose a standard description of a higher order model of
On 9/23/11 10:04 AM, Jose Camara wrote:
I think you are right, often the internal, free running osc will give you
better results. You can use the GPS or rubidium to calibrate the internal one
just before you need some more accurate absolute frequency measurements on the
SA.
It will depend on
On 9/23/11 10:13 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message4e7cbca1.9010...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
What I'd like to do is take the next step beyond what you promulgated
with a representation of time and the conversion between count and time
with a linear equation.
I'd like to propose a
On 9/23/11 10:25 AM, Jim Lux wrote:
One aspect of why at least a standardized second order model would be
nice is that it allows you to make smooth non-discontinuous changes in
rate. the transformation from count to time would be discontinuous in
rate of rate (i.e. it would go from zero, to
I'd like to propose a standard description of a higher order model of
time and the transformation between raw clock and time (in some agreed
upon time scale).
A good time transform will let you transform between time scales at
points in the far future and far past. For example what was the
Hi Jim:
Do you know how the HP/Agilent 4395A stacks up as a SA? I really like
the true RMS power detection and the 1 Hz RBW (not video).
Tom
Thanks and indeed worthy of actual print
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Magnus Danielson
mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 09/20/2011 06:55 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
I ran across a wonderful paper containing long-term (5 years!)
measurements of quartz frequency drift. A good read for
Fun to guess. Time must be running backwards. Or maybe they have
negative mass. If truly faster than C, SOMETHING nonsensical must be
true.
Indeed.. How would they know where to have been tomorrow?
___
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Javier Herrero jherr...@hvsistemas.es wrote:
El 23/09/2011 18:40, Chris Albertson escribió:
If this result is confirmed it really changes things. but I'm more
willing to bet they find some hidden error in the experiment. I hope
they don't Physics needs to
I'm old enough to not pay much attention to these 'scientific breakthroughs'
announced across the sports or comics page. Remember cold fusion?
Often a 'scientist' gets drunk and spills out nonsense to a reporter barely
catching up with the spelling of the buzzwords, and suddenly the Earth isn't
Worse yet, top posters will reply at the bottom and vice-versa !!! :-)
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On
Behalf Of David VanHorn
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 11:14 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
On 9/23/11 10:50 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
I'd like to propose a standard description of a higher order model of
time and the transformation between raw clock and time (in some agreed
upon time scale).
A good time transform will let you transform between time scales at
points in the far
On 9/23/11 10:54 AM, Brooke Clarke wrote:
Hi Jim:
Do you know how the HP/Agilent 4395A stacks up as a SA? I really like
the true RMS power detection and the 1 Hz RBW (not video).
Maybe I've missed something but... have they tried this experiment with
anything else than neutrinos? Or, is it possible to repeat the experiment
with any other thing? OK, the neutrino is faster than light but the others?
Can we test over the same distance, same detectors (or the appropriate
Hi Azelio:
Rock.
Have Fun,
Brooke Clarke
http://www.PRC68.com
http://www.End2PartyGovernment.com/
Azelio Boriani wrote:
Maybe I've missed something but... have they tried this experiment with
anything else than neutrinos? Or, is it possible to repeat the experiment
with any other thing? OK,
Hi again:
What is the speed of light in rock?
Have Fun,
Brooke Clarke
http://www.PRC68.com
http://www.End2PartyGovernment.com/
Brooke Clarke wrote:
Hi Azelio:
Rock.
Have Fun,
Brooke Clarke
http://www.PRC68.com
http://www.End2PartyGovernment.com/
Azelio Boriani wrote:
Maybe I've missed
What is the speed of light in rock?
C
Don
Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL
Six Mile Systems LLP
17850 Six Mile Road
POB 134
Huson, MT, 59846
VOX 406-626-4304
www.lightningforensics.com
www.sixmilesystems.com
___
time-nuts mailing list --
Hi Don:
I don't think so, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractive_index
Have Fun,
Brooke Clarke
http://www.PRC68.com
http://www.End2PartyGovernment.com/
Don Latham wrote:
What is the speed of light in rock?
C
Don
Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL
Six Mile Systems LLP
17850 Six Mile Road
POB
On 9/23/2011 3:23 PM, Brooke Clarke wrote:
Hi again:
What is the speed of light in rock?
Outside of a cave the answer is C.
Inside a cave, it's too dark to read my watch.
(With apologies to Grocho Marx)
___
time-nuts mailing list --
The article is actually pretty fascinating regarding how it was all done.
Light can't go through rock (very far), neither can most other particles (some
farther than others). Neutrinos can pass through earth and the sun unimpeded.
It is neat apparently they set up a fiber optic link to test
On 9/23/11 1:23 PM, Brooke Clarke wrote:
Hi again:
What is the speed of light in rock?
that's a really interesting question, because it's not like a EM wave
propagating, where the dielectric constant is what you care about.
OTOH, I suppose that since EM waves are also photons, there must
In message 4e7cdeb0.8070...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
Actually, the really annoying one is where I have a good clock that's
stable, but I need to keep adjusting time to match someone else's
terrible clock. Most clock disciplining/time propagation models assume
your bad clock is following
Do quantum entanglement experiments with photons qualify? (Admittedly it's a
different situation, but the coupling is apparently faster than c?)
-Greg
- Original Message -
From: Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
In message CAL8XPmO_T-R1y=qumswtunhdnme0seti+6xtdgww4jdvz2j...@mail.gmail.com
, Azelio Boriani writes:
More: are neutrinos supposed to travel from CERN to Gran Sasso via what?
Via solid rock.
Is there a 730Km long empty pipe [...]
No, and you'd need one to actually try the same distance with
Seems like a lot of unknowns. You would have to
have sensors monitoring the sensors.
Do you lose too much by just maintaining a lifetime worst-case number, or
maybe some kind of probability function?
On 9/23/2011 3:45 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
And then it gets nasty:
Vehicle
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:51:26 +1000
From: Jim Palfreyman jim77...@gmail.com
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] Fast than light neutrino
Message-ID:
CALH-g5ZABVtfCR0=h3ywjtjc23kowwk59sf3_qcie0ig6_x...@mail.gmail.com
Just a thought: would it be possible that the bedrock act as a
negative-index composite material for neutrinos: that would make them faster
than light, but since it's not in vacuum, they would still be politically
correct ???
Jean-Louis
- Original Message -
From: Poul-Henning Kamp
As always, the answer is 'it depends'. :)
Solid rock? Liquid rock? Gaseous rock? Plasma? :)
Wavelength?
A nice light rock like calcite it probably isn't too tough to measure.
Si02 is pretty easy too, I'm sure.
For classic basaltic or feldspathic rocks, I suspect you are going to
need something
WarrenS wrote:
I have to wonder if the unit being tested had its high impedance oven
control points lifted off the PCB board and on Teflon standoffs like the
production units?
ws
It was a production unit, no modifications whatsoever.
The oven change is an interesting theory; I never
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 9/23/11 10:50 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
Yes, in the general case, but in the spacecraft case, I think we're more
concerned about smoothness and such over time spans of days, maybe weeks and
months.
More about
Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 23/09/11 05:40, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Blowing on the case? Did you consider the increased cooling that higher
humidity provides?
Cheers,
Magnus
Against, the frequency change we saw was considerably more
than what we got from changing the temperature
OK, thanks for your replies. So we have: neutrinos traveling through bedrock
compared to photons/EM waves traveling through empty space. Neutrinos are
60nS early at the finish line, 730534m after the start. 60nS for light (in
empty space) is 18m: are they sure where the start line is? The decay
Maybe you have a bad joint in the tuning circuit and the humidity makes
the actual tuning voltage vary.
-John
===
Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 23/09/11 05:40, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Blowing on the case? Did you consider the increased cooling that higher
humidity
On 23/09/11 23:25, Rick Karlquist wrote:
Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 23/09/11 05:40, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Blowing on the case? Did you consider the increased cooling that higher
humidity provides?
Cheers,
Magnus
Against, the frequency change we saw was considerably more
than
On 9/23/11 1:45 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message4e7cdeb0.8070...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
Actually, the really annoying one is where I have a good clock that's
stable, but I need to keep adjusting time to match someone else's
terrible clock. Most clock disciplining/time
At 04:23 PM 9/23/2011, Brooke Clarke wrote...
What is the speed of light in rock?
Well, for quartzite (fused quartz), it's c/1.4585. HTH!
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
On 9/23/11 2:00 PM, Chris Howard wrote:
Seems like a lot of unknowns. You would have to
have sensors monitoring the sensors.
I think the clock model (insofar as variations in the oscillator) are
outside the scope, as long as the effect of that variation can be
represented cleanly.
For
On 9/23/11 2:24 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Jim Luxjim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 9/23/11 10:50 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
Yes, in the general case, but in the spacecraft case, I think we're more
concerned about smoothness and such over time spans of days,
Yes.. And there's no standard form that I've been able to discern for how
those polynomials are specified. It's
vehicle/spacecraft/instrument/software tool specific.
So if you're writing a program to handle it automatically, you need to code
up something special each time. These days, we
In message 4e7d0353.2040...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
But as we move towards constellations of spacecraft with LONG light time
to earth, that whole time correlation process needs to be done
autonomously. So the process of converting local count to time in
some universally agreed scale
On 9/23/11 4:01 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message4e7d0353.2040...@earthlink.net, Jim Lux writes:
But as we move towards constellations of spacecraft with LONG light time
to earth, that whole time correlation process needs to be done
autonomously. So the process of converting local count
Update 4 of the Mystery Passive Maser Project is now available at:
http://www.leapsecond.com/maser/
Enjoy!
Corby Dawson
60-Year-Old Mom Looks 27
Mom Reveals Free Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
Faster than in reggae but slower than in hip-hop.
Brian
--
From: Don Latham d...@montana.com
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 1:26 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Fast than
Looks like they're going to talk about it again in December:
http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=6%7C386
--
newell N5TNL
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and
http://www.rhymeswithorange.com/2011/09/september-20-2011/
PS: If you are ever trying to explain DDS to a non geek, consider leap years.
The 100 and 400 year corrections are making the adder wider and still wider.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
65 matches
Mail list logo
