Christopher Hoover asked:
one issue remains: i have to crank the magnetic field setting almost to
its high limit (9.91/10.00) to get 5 MHz out; lower settings give a
frequency that is too low. i presume this is unusual.
i have a rudimentary understanding of the rubidium
Since we can now make DDS's with arbitrary frequency resolution, could
you make an Rb oscillator without the magnetic field adjustment?
Wouldn't that reduce a source of error in frequency? Then we'd be
left with the ideal resonance frequency, right?
Are there any other influences on the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Matt
Ettus writes:
Since we can now make DDS's with arbitrary frequency resolution, could
you make an Rb oscillator without the magnetic field adjustment?
Wouldn't that reduce a source of error in frequency? Then we'd be
left with the ideal resonance frequency,
From: Dave Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] How Rubidiums make their frequency
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:13:08 +1200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Matt Ettus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Discussion of precise time and frequency
Hi..
In his message, Paul-Henning Kamp writes that a
drift-free standard has not been yet designed...
But Isn't Cesium drift-free? Since the SI second is
standardized as de duration of 9192631770 oscillation
of the hyperfine transition of the atom 133Cs?
If Cesium drifts, theren should be a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Normand Martel
writes:
Hi..
In his message, Paul-Henning Kamp writes that a
drift-free standard has not been yet designed...
I said drift-free Rubidium :-)
And also, something else i don't understand: Why do
the newer GPS satellites rely on Rb standards rather
