I find it very curious that the 'master clock' computer is very clearly a desktop class machine rather than something in a sever rack with controlled environmentals, power, etc.
Bob On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Javier Serrano < javier.serrano.par...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:42 PM, J. Forster <j...@quikus.com> wrote: > > There are failures and there are failures. > > A negative result is a failure that is worth reporting. > > A failure due to an improperly mated connector... not so much. > > That is saying to anyone who wants to do a similar experiment in the > future that they need at least two redundant systems. I believe that > is quite a valuable lesson. > > Concerning the OCXO, one has to bear in mind that this experiment was > not meant to measure time of flight, but rather neutrino oscillations. > The message for me here is that it's good to publish all your designs, > including gateware sources, as soon as possible, but I don't know how > compatible that is with today's highly competitive scientific world. > > So I think there is an important lesson behind each one of the two > issues. Of course this is easy to see from outside and after the fact. > > Cheers, > > Javier > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
