Hi all,
I'm new to this list, but papers like the recent Yb Science or the Sr
PRL from last year will almost always have freely available draft versions
on the ArXiv. It's usually easiest to search for the PI's name to find all
the things they have ever uploaded.
The Yb clock is probably less expensive to run than the Cs clock....
but that's probably just cause Andrew has a smaller staff than the Cs
fountains. The two reasons they can't just switch over to a Yb standard
are: 1) they don't have an accuracy table yet and 2) switching the standard
just doesn't seem like it's going to happen any time soon. There are a
variety of reasons why they don't switch, but mostly it's because there
are very few applications, at this specific moment that, that require
better standards.
That being said, based upon relativistic geodesy alone, optical lattice
clocks will make a big difference in taking those measurements. The
averaging time of OLCs is just so much better than the single-ion based
standards (which are still the most accurate standards in the world... At
least for now ).
- Ben
On Aug 23, 2013 7:54 PM, "Tom Van Baak (lab)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> All NIST papers are available for free. Makes you happy to be a taxpayer.
> The one you're talking about is at:
> http://tf.boulder.nist.gov/general/pdf/2688.pdf
>
> /tvb (iPhone4)
>
> On Aug 23, 2013, at 3:03 PM, "John Miles" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Don't you just love paying to access research that your taxes already
> paid
> > for? Gives you a warm, fuzzy feeling all over. :-P
> >
> > -- john, KE5FX
> > Miles Design LLC
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> >> Behalf Of David McGaw
> >> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 11:06 AM
> >> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
> >> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Yb clock - NPR Story on Atomic Clocks
> >>
> >> Here is an announcement article:
> >>
> >> http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2013/08/21/science.1240420.full
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/23/13 10:51 AM, Frank Stellmach wrote:
> >>> Wow, this new type of clock is not even 100 times more longterm stable
> >>> than the Cs fountain clock, it's even short-term stable as a H-maser,
> >>> obviously.
> >>>
> >>> In the NIST article: http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/clock-082213.cfm
> >>> it's told, that the 1s instability is the same as the 400,000 sec or 5
> >>> days stability of the Cs fountain clock, ie. 1e-15..1e-16, I assume.
> >>>
> >>> Perhaps NIST can provide the Allan deviation already.
> >>>
> >>> Frank
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
>
_______________________________________________
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.
