Interesting idea. It might be an interesting experiment to couple a large number of inexpensive xtals to see how it impacts effects such as sudden changes in a single xtal.
With sufficient monitoring of each one, you could even tune the coupling to amplify/attenuate the results of the 'good' and 'bad' ones over some interval. Of course, what effect this has on things like phase noise, drift, and so on is a whole different matter. Bob > On Apr 11, 2014, at 14:14, "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <rich...@karlquist.com> > wrote: > >> On 4/11/2014 11:04 AM, Hal Murray wrote: >> >> How many would you need? Is 3 enough? >> >> How well could you do with several low(er) cost oscillators relative to one >> good but expensive one? It might be an interesting experiment in a nutty >> sort of way. > > My guess would be 3 would be a minimum, so you > could have a majority vote. Len Cutler's group > actually built an experimental ensemble of 9 or > 10, but it didn't seem to come to fruition. > For this to make any sense, you would need to be > able to cherry pick 9 or 10 really good oscillators. > However, there was no way to get the production > line to sign on to this. > > David Allan had > this interesting concept to the effect that if > you had a sufficient number of wristwatches > (maybe 1000) and you averaged them together > you could somehow get a quality clock, or at > least 31.6 times better. Kind of like the > notion of 1000 monkeys with 1000 typewriters... > > Rick > _______________________________________________ > 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.
