Hi Fountain's don't work very well in zero G….:)
Bob On May 6, 2013, at 12:23 AM, Magnus Danielson <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/06/2013 02:29 AM, Mike S wrote: >> On 5/4/2013 2:40 PM, Attila Kinali wrote: >>> Can anyone shed some light on why the GPS Cs beams have a worse stability >>> than the Rb vapor clocks? >> >> I don't know, but it makes me wonder about things like >> >> 1) How sensitive is each to C-field tuning - i.e. for the same change in >> C-field, by how much does each type change in relative frequency? (or >> maybe it's exactly the same, I know nothing about the Zeeman effect) I'd >> think there would be orbital changes in frequency, after all, it's >> orbiting a big magnet. > > Rubidium is more sensitive to C-field than Caesium. > >> 2) How tight a lock can be obtained on each? i.e. might the physical >> realizations of Rb clocks have a higher Q-factor? > > The Q-value depends on the observation time, and for a Cs-beam this > translates into beam-length assuming constant speed. Foutains has much better > Q since they have longer observation time. H-masers started as a beam with a > "bounce-box" to prolong the observation time. > > 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.
