>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Jim Palfreyman
>>> wrote:
>>>
Well I think there's a mistake or two here...
https://www.inverse.com/article/20497-john-patterson-atomic-ce
But, MARS!
-Bill
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with O
Anyne want to list all of the errors? I suppose that article is for
an audience with no understanding of Physics?
Ronald
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
a
I’m really glad that the article was edited for clarity.
Don
> On Oct 18, 2016, at 5:12 AM, Clint Jay wrote:
>
> I am peeking in as a mere amateur and that article hurts my brain, I cannot
> imagine how hard some folk here must be battering their heads against their
> desks.
>
> Oh, and it's n
I am peeking in as a mere amateur and that article hurts my brain, I cannot
imagine how hard some folk here must be battering their heads against their
desks.
Oh, and it's not the first either, this one was a year prior...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_
If I saw a chess playing machine that had a bunch of gears and levers, AND
A LITTLE HUMAN INSIDE, and the proprietor was bragging about how well the
human had been trained relative to the military, I would spend all my time
wondering how much of the work the human was doing. Even if the combination
It hurts to read this. John K1AE
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Jim Palfreyman
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 9:46 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: [time-nuts] Atomic Watch
Well I think there
"Whereas other clocks fall victim to relativistic effects at high speeds,
cesium clocks do not. The frequency remains the same, and so the time remains
accurate.”
Well, to the wearer, it probably does. :)
It’s ironic they said that given that they flew cesium clocks in the
Hafele–Keating exper
Well I think there's a mistake or two here...
https://www.inverse.com/article/20497-john-patterson-atomic-ce
___
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 ins
NB Note Bene literally "note well" per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nota_bene
I think of NB as "keep in mind"
From: Sarah White
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Sent: Wed, May 1, 2013 6:14:56 PM
Subject: Re: [tim
Yes, you're right: the radioactive decay is not involved. Anyway the CSAC
is not a primary reference (even if the Cs in used) as pointed out here
when the CSAC was first introduced. Nor a special permission has to be
asked to "wear" the CSAC.
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Sarah White wrote:
>
On 5/1/2013 4:02 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <51815556.4050...@partiallystapled.com>, Michael Tharp writes:
>> On 5/1/2013 11:40, Sarah White wrote:
>
>> Symmetricom doesn't go out of their way to say how the damn thing
>> actually works, [...]
>
> NIST has documented that in a LOT
On 05/01/2013 10:02 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<51815556.4050...@partiallystapled.com>, Michael Tharp writes:
On 5/1/2013 11:40, Sarah White wrote:
Symmetricom doesn't go out of their way to say how the damn thing
actually works, [...]
NIST has documented that in a LOT of detail
That is incorrect. There is a good presentation online with lots of technical
details. More details than you would find from other vendors.
Search for:
Lutwak CSAC Stanford
There are no HAZMAT or ITAR restrictions on the CSAC contrary to what this
mis-informed author claimed.
Bye,
Said
Se
On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Michael Tharp wrote:
((...snip...))
> As for the article, The Register is not an outlet known for precise
> reporting. Take it as a journalistic liberty.
>
> NB: Your tweet is not visible to me, so it's somewhat difficult to
> fact-check :-)
>
> -- m. tharp
I deleted the t
On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:48:06 -0400
Michael Tharp wrote:
> On 5/1/2013 11:40, Sarah White wrote:
> > I tweeted the author of this article, trying to point out that (as I
> > understand) "radioactive decay" is not relevant in any way for cesium
> > frequency standard/reference thingies:
> >
> > htt
In message <51815556.4050...@partiallystapled.com>, Michael Tharp writes:
>On 5/1/2013 11:40, Sarah White wrote:
>Symmetricom doesn't go out of their way to say how the damn thing
>actually works, [...]
NIST has documented that in a LOT of detail, they're the ones who
came up with it.
--
Poul-
You are not wrong. I noticed the error myself. There no radioactive decay
involved. These devices were discussed in detail a while back here.
Lots of drooling and wringing of empty wallets.
Le 1 mai 2013 à 17:40, Sarah White a écrit :
> On 5/1/2013 8:43 AM, Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB) wrote:
>>
On 5/1/2013 11:40, Sarah White wrote:
I tweeted the author of this article, trying to point out that (as I
understand) "radioactive decay" is not relevant in any way for cesium
frequency standard/reference thingies:
https://twitter.com/kuzetsa/status/329618223916011520
If someone more authorita
On 5/1/2013 11:40 AM, Sarah White wrote:
> On 5/1/2013 8:43 AM, Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB) wrote:
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_movement/
>>
>
> Stephen, fellow time nuts,
>
> [DISCLAIMER] I should really know better than to attempt internet
> discussi
You are correct - radioactive decay has nothing to do with atomic clocks.
David
On 5/1/13 11:40 AM, Sarah White wrote:
On 5/1/2013 8:43 AM, Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB) wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_movement/
Stephen, fellow time nuts,
[DISCLA
On 5/1/2013 8:43 AM, Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB) wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_movement/
>
Stephen, fellow time nuts,
[DISCLAIMER] I should really know better than to attempt internet
discussions or comments first thing after waking up. Didn't st
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/05/01/hoptroff_shows_first_atomic_watch_movement/
--
Stephen Tompsett (G8LYB)
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow th
22 matches
Mail list logo
