Yo Bob! On Mon, 21 May 2018 14:00:41 -0400 Bob kb8tq <kb...@n1k.org> wrote:
> >> Ok, are you trying to hold close to UTC or simply have a second
> >> that is as close to 1 second as possible?
> >
> > Yes. One follows the other.
>
> Not really, you can have a source of seconds that are all within 0.1
> ns of the right length but are offset from UTC by 200 ns. ( stable
> but not accurate)
>
> You can have a series of seconds that are all within 10 ns of UTC,
> but one may be 20 ns to short and the next is 20 ns to long.
> ( accurate but not stable )
>
> So, which of the two is more important?
UTC is most important (to me), but if one has perfect UTC, then one also
has perfect seconds.
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
g...@rellim.com Tel:+1 541 382 8588
Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
"If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin
pgp8XPhkHfA2F.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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.
