Fiber has to follow the curvature of the earth I do not think neutrinos do. Bert In a message dated 9/25/2011 4:08:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
On 25/09/11 08:35, Javier Serrano wrote: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Magnus Danielson< > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I was about to ask for the specific papers of time calibrations, even if >> the overview presentation indicates that the verification steps I expect to >> be there have been done. Also the path calibrations needs to be described >> more in detail than in the paper. >> > > I'll discuss with Pablo to see how we can put more stuff on the web. > > >> >> First thought was that someone forgot to compensate for GPS antenna cable >> delays. >> > > We did not forget. The two GPS calibration campaigns (zero baseline and > portable receiver) were done with antenna and antenna cable included. I assumed so from the statements relating to time, in particular the PTB time transfer test proving a 2,3 ns difference. Which still doesn't satisfy my curiosity. A 60 ns offset between the sites would account for the "missing time". Similarly a 18 m shorter distance would also account for the "missing time". Due to the large distance I would start in that end to ensure it works. This article puts focus into precission time-transfer between two sites. >> >> Do you have direct fiber between the locations? >> > > You mean between CERN and Gran Sasso? No, but that's certainly something we > could explore for the future. A fiber-based time-transfer would be nice complementary as it would provide an independent timing path. Cheers, Magnus _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
