At 06:38 PM 9/9/2011, unruh wrote...
The MT12+ also apparently has a delay of a few
10s of ns in sending out
the pulse. Are these uncertainties? If yo udo
not know about them, they
are. If you know about them you can subtract out
the systematic errors,
but you cannot do that for the random er
"...The organization of the measurements is very similar to the
setup applied at BIPM
and Besanqon in the experiment carried out in 1996 (Lewandowski et
al., 1997). The
Stanford SR-620 time-interval counter (Fig* 1) is started by the 1
pps pulse from the
local UTC clock driven by the O
On 2011-09-09, Chris Albertson wrote:
>>> What we are talking about when we say "accuracy" is the amount of
>>> uncertainty.
>>
>> No we mean how closely the gps absolute time agrees with the utc
>> absolute time (modulo leap seconds).
>
> Accuracy is always expressed as an uncertainty. For exam
>> What we are talking about when we say "accuracy" is the amount of
>> uncertainty.
>
> No we mean how closely the gps absolute time agrees with the utc
> absolute time (modulo leap seconds).
Accuracy is always expressed as an uncertainty. For example I might
say "the voltage is 6.32V plus or
On 2011-09-07, Chris Albertson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Greg Hennessy wrote:
>
>> I'm not even sure the USNO provided time sync to GPS is at the 2nS
>> level.
>
> This is not an accuracy issue. it is an intentional offset to account
> for the earth's slowing rotation rate. here a
Hello,
I noticed the -N switch today. Should ntpd be run with -N on a
dedicated time server?
___
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
