Re: [time-nuts] Pendulums Atomic Clocks Garvity
Hi Didier and all, This is because the gravitational force is perpendicular to the velocity (at least for a circular orbit), so the result is a change only in the direction of the velocity, not the magnitude. For an elliptical orbit, the satellite speeds up and slows down when the gravity force has a non-perpendicular component. This is the same thing that happens with the (v x B) magnetic force on a moving charged particle. -Dave D. Now, there is something else I would be missing under your scenario. When an object is subjected to acceleration, it gains speed. The product of force by speed is stored in the object in the form of kinetic energy. If the satellite is constantly being subjected to unbalanced forces and falls, it should be accelerating and accumulating energy, yet it does not. 10 years later, a satellite has no more kinetic energy than when it was launched (if all goes well...) Actually, satellites that are in elliptical orbits trade kinetic energy for potential energy, just like the old L-C network constantly trades electrostatic energy for magnetic energy. But the sum remains constant, except for friction on imperfect vacuum of space. So what is it that prevents the satellite that is constantly subjected to unbalanced forces to not gain speed and energy? ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] Pendulums Atomic Clocks Garvity
David, at German universities this an typical question for physics students in their written exam after their first year of study. If an body if moved by an force F along the differential distance ds then the work dw = F * ds is necessary to do that and is stored as kinetic or potential energy of the body where both F and ds are vectors and * denotes the scalar product of them. In the case of an circular motion F and ds are orthogonal to each other and the scalar product is 0 along the whole line of motion. Result: No work is used or necessary to keep the satellite on its orbit and so no additional energy ist stored in the satellite. Pretty much the same applies to your charged particle example. Regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von David Dameron Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2007 08:12 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] Pendulums Atomic Clocks Garvity Hi Didier and all, This is because the gravitational force is perpendicular to the velocity (at least for a circular orbit), so the result is a change only in the direction of the velocity, not the magnitude. For an elliptical orbit, the satellite speeds up and slows down when the gravity force has a non-perpendicular component. This is the same thing that happens with the (v x B) magnetic force on a moving charged particle. -Dave D. Now, there is something else I would be missing under your scenario. When an object is subjected to acceleration, it gains speed. The product of force by speed is stored in the object in the form of kinetic energy. If the satellite is constantly being subjected to unbalanced forces and falls, it should be accelerating and accumulating energy, yet it does not. 10 years later, a satellite has no more kinetic energy than when it was launched (if all goes well...) Actually, satellites that are in elliptical orbits trade kinetic energy for potential energy, just like the old L-C network constantly trades electrostatic energy for magnetic energy. But the sum remains constant, except for friction on imperfect vacuum of space. So what is it that prevents the satellite that is constantly subjected to unbalanced forces to not gain speed and energy? ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
[time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
Hello guys, some time ago we talked about curious humps in the ADEV of the SRS PRS-10 Rb at around 20s intervalls. I think I may have more info on that (and as usually that raises more questions): Below is a capture of the phase offset between a PRS10 1PPS output compared to the Jackson-Labs Fury 1PPS output as measured with a 53132A. The Fury output has been shifted by about 80ns to give a nice phase offset for the 53132A to measure. Besides the underlying counter noise, there clearly is a jump of about 0.5 - 1ns visible exactly once every 15 seconds! Indicated by arrows. Could this be the counter self-calibrating? This is too regular to be co-incident. Has anyone else seen this? I don't see this on a scope when comparing two 1PPS's so I do think it's the counter. 0.078,3 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,4 us 0.079,1 us == 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,0 us 0.078,0 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,0 us 0.078,9 us == 0.078,0 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,9 us == 0.078,2 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,0 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,3 us 0.079,0 us == 0.078,2 us 0.078,1 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,2 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,3 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,3 us 0.079,6 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,5 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,4 us 0.078,5 us 0.079,3 us 0.078,7 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,6 us 0.078,7 us 0.078,7 us 0.078,7 us 0.078,8 us 0.078,8 us 0.078,8 us 0.078,9 us 0.078,8 us 0.078,9 us 0.078,9 us 0.078,8 us 0.079,5 us ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
It`s just like the fly in the glass jar scenarmino : Just imagine a glass jar [with a lid] with a fly flying around inside the jar. The jar is being accelerated towards it`s inevitable demise when it hits the sun. Does the fly stay in the same position in the jar, or is it pushed towards the end of the jar furtheest from the sun. Now I don`t know the answer to this one..but I sure wouldn`t like to bee the fly. Affectionately yours,...Don Collie jnr. - Original Message - From: Dr Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity Bill Beam wrote: Not true. Very simple experiments will show occupants of the satellite that they are in a non-inertial reference frame. (Release a few test masses about the cabin and you will observe that they move/accelerate for no apparent reason, unless the satellite is in free fall which you'll know soon enough,) The experimenter must conclude that the satellite is undergoing acceleration due to the influence of an attractive (gravitational) field. Except when released at rest with respect to the satellites centre of mass the test masses will both drift towards the satellites centre of mass. The outermost test mass will have too slow an orbital speed to remain at the position it was released and the innermost test mass will have too large an orbital speed to remain at the position at which it was released. Bruce ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.1/822 - Release Date: 5/28/2007 11:40 AM ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
Ulrich, Yes, but your use of the term system instead of frame of reference confused me instead of helping. It sounded like you were talking about different cases, instead of the same case under different viewpoints. I did not understand what you meant. That's OK, I believe I got it now. Thanks Didier KO4BB -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ulrich Bangert Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 12:37 AM To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' Subject: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity Didier, my first posting to that topic contained the semtences: Centrifugal forces are so called fictitious forces which are only observed from within accelerated systems. Normal physics is done in inertial systems. Is that not pretty much what you have found out after all? 73s and my best regards Ulrich, DF6JB -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Didier Juges Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2007 02:35 An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity James, Where were you all week-end? Your explanations are so clear, it makes sense now. Thank you very much. I understand now that centrifugal forces are necessary to explain the behavior of objects when an accelerating frame of reference is used, but not necessary (actually counter-productive) to explain the behavior of the same objects when an inertial frame of reference is used. That solves my problem and the apparent contradiction that sometimes the centrifugal force is necessary and sometimes not, because I did not appreciate the effects of changing the frame of reference. Thanks a lot again. I had no idea time-nuts would drive me to brush-up on physics :-) Didier KO4BB James Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The reason that the frame of reference matters is that gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration. (This is an assumption that Einstein made when deriving his general theory of relativity. It seems to work.) An inertial frame of reference is a non-accelerating frame of reference. In an inertial frame of reference, Newton's laws of motion work -- if you use Newton's gravitational relationship, that the gravitational force (weight) that each of two bodies exerts on the other is proportional to both their masses, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. In an accelerating frame of reference (either linear acceleration, or rotational acceleration, or both) additional forces, technically called fictitious forces, must be introduced in order to explain the motions of bodies with Newtonian mechanics. The fictitious forces on a body are also proportional to the body's mass. (A body's mass is just a measure of its inertia: to accelerate at an acceleration a, a force F must be applied, and the mass m is just F/a.) .. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.1/822 - Release Date: 5/28/2007 11:40 AM ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
Hello Said, I have seen something similar with my 53132A. I was checking on the delay variation of an amplifier distributing 10 MHz, and noticed a regular sinusoidal pattern, about a third of a nanosecond peak-to-peak, with a period of about 70 seconds. This looked like interference from an off-frequency signal. I hadn't bothered to lock the counter to an external reference, and on measuring a Rubidium source against its internal oscillator, got a reading about 1.4 x 10^-9 high, which matched perfectly this 70-second period Locking the counter to an external reference, this beating went away. Attached is a small GIF that shows the counter readings for twenty minutes before and after applying the locking signal. (Readings were taken once a second, and to smooth the graph slightly, each point on the graph is obtained by averaging ten readings.) Could this be your problem, Said? Peter Vince Said asked: some time ago we talked about curious humps in the ADEV of the SRS PRS-10 Rb at around 20s intervalls. I think I may have more info on that (and as usually that raises more questions): Below is a capture of the phase offset between a PRS10 1PPS output compared to the Jackson-Labs Fury 1PPS output as measured with a 53132A. The Fury output has been shifted by about 80ns to give a nice phase offset for the 53132A to measure. Besides the underlying counter noise, there clearly is a jump of about 0.5 - 1ns visible exactly once every 15 seconds! Indicated by arrows. Could this be the counter self-calibrating? This is too regular to be co-incident. Has anyone else seen this? attachment: 53132aIntExt.gif___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Vince writes: I have seen something similar with my 53132A. I was checking on the delay variation of an amplifier distributing 10 MHz, and noticed a regular sinusoidal pattern, about a third of a nanosecond peak-to-peak, with a period of about 70 seconds. Almost any kind of interference will cause such anomalies and the closer the frequencies are to a multiple of each other, the longer the period will be. It is quite common for the frequency difference between the counters internal X-tal and the measued frequency to show up like that once you start to measure down in the nanosecond end of things. The HP5370 has a rather heavyhanded piece of electronics that eliminate this effect with a jitter based approach and as far as I have been able to measure, it works. normal counters don't have this, as they are not designed to measure in that domain of disturbances. The easiest way to determine if this is indeed the problem, is to feed the counter an external frequency which can be varied a bit up and down. If the period of the artifact changes accordingly: QED. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] OT: Not pendulums or atomic clocks or gravity
Try this low tech analysis on for size. Inertia at work: The ball is elastic and compresses sufficiently that all the kenetic energy is changed into potential energy; Center of mass having moved only slightly due to inertia. At this time the compression is concentrated between the center of mass and the face of the club, along a line normal to the surface. This potential energy is then converted back into motion (kenetic energy) and the direction of this motion is normal to the club surface. Very different than a light beam or wavefront reflecting off of a surface. Tom Buehl At 08:43 PM 5/29/2007 -0700, you wrote: The angle of incidence is relative to the surface normal, not the surface itself. It's 0 degrees as the club face contacts the ball, not 45. -- john, KE5FX -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Palfreyman, Jim L Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 8:36 PM To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] OT: Not pendulums or atomic clocks or gravity Since you have all enjoyed this discussion on rotating non-inertial frames of reference so much, here's another one for you. In golf, a typical pitching wedge has an angle of 45 degrees. Since angle of incidence equals angle of reflection why doesn't the ball bounce off the club, go straight up and hit you in the face? (A good golfer would hit it 100m.) Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Vince writes: I have seen something similar with my 53132A. I was checking on the delay variation of an amplifier distributing 10 MHz, and noticed a regular sinusoidal pattern, about a third of a nanosecond peak-to-peak, with a period of about 70 seconds. A manifestation of the effects of slowly sweeping through a range of start and stop interpolator values so that the interpolator integral and and differential non linearities become apparent? Strictly the difference between the nonlinearities of the start and stop interpolators becomes visible. The resultant variation of around 300ps pp are well within the specifications for the counter. Almost any kind of interference will cause such anomalies and the closer the frequencies are to a multiple of each other, the longer the period will be. It is quite common for the frequency difference between the counters internal X-tal and the measued frequency to show up like that once you start to measure down in the nanosecond end of things. The HP5370 has a rather heavyhanded piece of electronics that eliminate this effect with a jitter based approach and as far as I have been able to measure, it works. Not quite true the HP5370 has a whole host of anomalies like differential linearity errors of 100psec or more for certain time interval ranges, at least according to its designers. The identified causes are: Crosstalk between microstriplines used for each channel (effective only when the affected signals are simultaneously active near a trigger point) and modulation of the internal 200MHz reference by the mixer outputs (always present with a quasi period of ~5.02ns). normal counters don't have this, as they are not designed to measure in that domain of disturbances. The easiest way to determine if this is indeed the problem, is to feed the counter an external frequency which can be varied a bit up and down. If the period of the artifact changes accordingly: QED. Bruce ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
From: Dr Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 02:27:09 +1200 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Vince writes: I have seen something similar with my 53132A. I was checking on the delay variation of an amplifier distributing 10 MHz, and noticed a regular sinusoidal pattern, about a third of a nanosecond peak-to-peak, with a period of about 70 seconds. A manifestation of the effects of slowly sweeping through a range of start and stop interpolator values so that the interpolator integral and and differential non linearities become apparent? Yes. I have been pointing toward such tests earlier. One should recall that the deviations is not only from non-linear effects, but also from highly linear effects such as cross-talk between channels which help to cause biases in channels. Similar cross-talk towards the internal clocks should be expected. There can be many causes of such cross-talk, so due care needs to be considered throughout the design. Strictly the difference between the nonlinearities of the start and stop interpolators becomes visible. The resultant variation of around 300ps pp are well within the specifications for the counter. Almost any kind of interference will cause such anomalies and the closer the frequencies are to a multiple of each other, the longer the period will be. It is quite common for the frequency difference between the counters internal X-tal and the measued frequency to show up like that once you start to measure down in the nanosecond end of things. The HP5370 has a rather heavyhanded piece of electronics that eliminate this effect with a jitter based approach and as far as I have been able to measure, it works. Not quite true the HP5370 has a whole host of anomalies like differential linearity errors of 100psec or more for certain time interval ranges, at least according to its designers. The identified causes are: Crosstalk between microstriplines used for each channel (effective only when the affected signals are simultaneously active near a trigger point) and modulation of the internal 200MHz reference by the mixer outputs (always present with a quasi period of ~5.02ns). This matches my experience too, altought not with the 5370. I would also expect there to be some interaction with the interpolators. There always are. Ground-bounce is certainly a reason for crosstalk which causes such non- linearities. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 14:35:37 + Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dr Bruce Griffiths writes: The HP5370 has a rather heavyhanded piece of electronics that eliminate this effect with a jitter based approach and as far as I have been able to measure, it works. Not quite true the HP5370 has a whole host of anomalies like differential linearity errors of 100psec or more for certain time interval ranges, at least according to its designers. I did say as far as I have been able to measure, didn't I ? :-) You did, you did... :-) If you lock a low-noise oscillator to the reference of your counter, such that you have a fixed but slight frequency deviation and then start on one clock and stop on the other, you will very slowly pass through all phase-states over and over again. If the clocks are stable enougth the locking is mearly means to ensure the frequency offset over the measurement period. Using this you can predict the expected time difference for each measurement point with fair precission and can then compare that with the measured one and as a result you should be able to make a fairly decent measured vs. actual TI plot or if you so wish, a TIE plot for the instrument. The center point between stop-start worst injection and start-stop worst injection is not nessecarilly around 0 s in time interval. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
tvb wrote: I've not heard that these counters do some sort of dynamic self-calibration. Nor have I seen that sort of periodicity in a 53131 or 53132 counter. Nor have I. I have several 53131's and a 53132. The 53132 is always logging data against one of my Cs's and an M12T. -ch ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
On Wed, 30 May 2007 01:10:02 -0800, Bill Beam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gentlemen: Those of you who have never taken a university physics course are excused for confusion over centripital/centrifugal/psudo forces. Some of you who did take a university physics class spent too much time asleep in class. I did and I paid attention and I didn't smoke anything I wasn't supposed to but I don't remember this aspect. This is a learning experience. John --- John De Armond See my website for my current email address http://www.neon-john.com Cleveland, Occupied TN *fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism. -- The American Heritage Dictionary, 1983 ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
In a message dated 5/30/2007 09:28:02 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: tvb wrote: I've not heard that these counters do some sort of dynamic self-calibration. Nor have I seen that sort of periodicity in a 53131 or 53132 counter. Nor have I. I have several 53131's and a 53132. The 53132 is always logging data against one of my Cs's and an M12T. Ok, thanks for the feedback guys, time to try a different counter to see if the strict 15s periodicity is in one of my sources... bye, Said ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
In a message dated 5/30/2007 05:38:40 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: interference from an off-frequency signal. I hadn't bothered to lock the counter to an external reference, and on measuring a Rubidium source against its internal oscillator, got a reading about 1.4 x 10^-9 high, which matched perfectly this 70-second period Locking the counter to an external reference, this beating went away. Hi Peter, I was using the same PRS10 also as the counters' reference. Maybe not a good idea? I will try again with the internal ref, and my Cs as a ref. Glad you did see this as well, and fixed it! bye, Said ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
John, I did and I paid attention and I didn't smoke anything I wasn't supposed to... Just in case you forgot to mention: What was your favourite drink at these times? I really enjoy being part of time-nuts for this exclusive combination of severe scientific stuff with humor like that which is not so easy to be found at other places. Regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Neon John Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2007 21:18 An: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity On Wed, 30 May 2007 01:10:02 -0800, Bill Beam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gentlemen: Those of you who have never taken a university physics course are excused for confusion over centripital/centrifugal/psudo forces. Some of you who did take a university physics class spent too much time asleep in class. I did and I paid attention and I didn't smoke anything I wasn't supposed to but I don't remember this aspect. This is a learning experience. John --- John De Armond See my website for my current email address http://www.neon-john.com Cleveland, Occupied TN *fas-cism* (fash'iz'em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism. -- The American Heritage Dictionary, 1983 ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi- bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] PRS-10 findings
Hi Said, My hp53310 shows the same artifacts if the input frequency is nearly the reference frequency. If I use the reference as input frequency the noise is lower. When I adjust the time/div to more than 2 times the frame flyback time, I can see a disturbance at the fylback interval with an amplitude of a few hundred ps. The behaviour is with both internal and external reference. The hp53310 is the modulation domain analyzer which forms the basis of the 53131/53132. Henk On May 30, 2007, at 21:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 5/30/2007 05:38:40 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: interference from an off-frequency signal. I hadn't bothered to lock the counter to an external reference, and on measuring a Rubidium source against its internal oscillator, got a reading about 1.4 x 10^-9 high, which matched perfectly this 70-second period Locking the counter to an external reference, this beating went away. Hi Peter, I was using the same PRS10 also as the counters' reference. Maybe not a good idea? I will try again with the internal ref, and my Cs as a ref. Glad you did see this as well, and fixed it! bye, Said ** See what's free at http:// www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
In a message dated 5/30/2007 13:06:23 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Regards Ulrich Bangert Hi Ulrich, I am still using plotter daily, easier to use than Stable32. Some comments on Plotter: it cannot directly read-in RS-232 output from the 53132A (such as I posted yesterday). This is because of the Comma the HP unit inserts in the numbers. Any chance you can make Plotter comma compatible? Also, Plotter always comes up in scientific notation on the vertical scale, I always have to set it to #.6 mode manually. Any chance to make it come up in normal notation? thanks, Said ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
On Thu, 31 May 2007 01:52:34 +1200, Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote: Bill Beam wrote: Assume satellite in circular orbit. (Not really necessary.) Assume test mass's released at rest wrt satellite center of mass. Inner test mass released closer to Earth and outer released farther from Earth. Also assume no air currents, no relativity, no luminiferous ether, no static, no s- -t. It helps if this problem is solved in a proper (Earth based) inertial frame and to consider the total energy (kinetic plus potential) of the test masses. But there are no strictly inertial frames based on the Earth. The earth rotates around its axis (neglecting precession, nutation etc), it also orbits the sun which in turn ... An actual test of these predictions would be somewhat expensive to carry out. The damping due to the air in the shuttle or ISS (as well as a host of other small effects) would tend to damp out such motion. The question is how quickly? This contradicts the last assumption stated above. Clearly a satellite based frame is non inertial and therefore Newtons laws of motion are not valid. Gentlemen: Those of you who have never taken a university physics course are excused for confusion over centripital/centrifugal/psudo forces. Some of you who did take a university physics class spent too much time asleep in class. Regards, Bill Beam NL7F ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts Bill Beam NL7F -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.8.0/818 - Release Date: 5/25/2007 12:32 PM ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
Bill Beam wrote: Assume satellite in circular orbit. (Not really necessary.) Assume test mass's released at rest wrt satellite center of mass. Inner test mass released closer to Earth and outer released farther from Earth. Also assume no air currents, no relativity, no luminiferous ether, no static, no s- -t. It helps if this problem is solved in a proper (Earth based) inertial frame and to consider the total energy (kinetic plus potential) of the test masses. But there are no strictly inertial frames based on the Earth. The earth rotates around its axis (neglecting precession, nutation etc), it also orbits the sun which in turn ... An actual test of these predictions would be somewhat expensive to carry out. The damping due to the air in the shuttle or ISS (as well as a host of other small effects) would tend to damp out such motion. The question is how quickly? This contradicts the last assumption stated above. Yes, but if one wishes to experimentally test the predictions it is not always practical to use an SV with an internal vacuum. The question is really could this be done on the ISS or shuttle or would the effects of the internal atmosphere disturb/damp the motion too quickly? In other words what would actually happen to 2 such test masses within the space shuttle, for example? The other question is how large would the interior of the SV have to be to avoid the test masses colliding with internal surfaces? The other point that in practice the frames in which virtually all measurements are made are non inertial. Sure one can correct the results to an Inertial frame if one can find/identify one that is inertial to a sufficient approximation. However this is an elusive target which keeps shifting around as the precision of measurement increases. General relativity surely indicates that the concept of an Inertial frame has a strictly local existence/validity? Bill Beam NL7F ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] OT: Not pendulums or atomic clocks or gravity - the answer
Since this is off topic I better give you the answer. It is nothing to do with compression or friction, it's way simpler. The ball does reflect off at 45 degrees and go straight up *with respect to the club*. This is all to do with frames of reference (sound familiar?). The club is moving around 150 km/h as it hits the ball. To make it easier don't imagine the club rotating in a circle, but imagine a club head approaching a ball linearly along the ground at 150 km/h. As it hits the ball the ball will go straight up relative to the club head which is still moving at 150 km/h (well close, but let's not go there...) after the collision. Another way to look at it is a car driving at 150 km/h and hitting a basketball on the windscreen. Assuming a 45 degree windscreen the ball will go straight up relative to the windscreen. To the outside observer the ball will move forward with the car. To an observer in the car it will go straight up. Now what about the reason why scales don't work on carpet... Jim Palfreyman -Original Message- From: Palfreyman, Jim L Sent: Wednesday, 30 May 2007 11:36 AM To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] OT: Not pendulums or atomic clocks or gravity Since you have all enjoyed this discussion on rotating non-inertial frames of reference so much, here's another one for you. In golf, a typical pitching wedge has an angle of 45 degrees. Since angle of incidence equals angle of reflection why doesn't the ball bounce off the club, go straight up and hit you in the face? (A good golfer would hit it 100m.) Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
[time-nuts] FMT
Tonight at 02:30 utc. I expect QRM problems from N6WK, so I may have to move several KHz from my normal frequency. details here: http://pages.suddenlink.net/k5cm/ Connie K5CM ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity
Said, it cannot directly read-in RS-232 output from the 53132A (such as I posted yesterday). This is because of the Comma the HP unit inserts in the numbers. please send short file and I will look what I can do. Also, Plotter always comes up in scientific notation on the vertical scale, I always have to set it to #.6 mode manually. Any chance to make it come up in normal notation? This is more severe. Not that it were a problem to change the default scale to whatever. But: The scientic notation FITS ALL while #.6 fits only YOU. Perhaps I think about a way to store such things in the ini-file. Best regards Ulrich -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2007 22:43 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] FW: Pendulums Atomic Clocks Gravity In a message dated 5/30/2007 13:06:23 Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Regards Ulrich Bangert Hi Ulrich, I am still using plotter daily, easier to use than Stable32. Some comments on Plotter: it cannot directly read-in RS-232 output from the 53132A (such as I posted yesterday). This is because of the Comma the HP unit inserts in the numbers. Any chance you can make Plotter comma compatible? Also, Plotter always comes up in scientific notation on the vertical scale, I always have to set it to #.6 mode manually. Any chance to make it come up in normal notation? thanks, Said ** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts ___ time-nuts mailing list time-nuts@febo.com https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
