HM
Hal Murray
Tue, Jan 12, 2010 7:27 PM
It is not impossible that for a sample of 100,000 secondary
standards, that the errors would be all be off in the same direction,
compared to the standard's value.
Now, granted, this would be a small probability indeed. But it is
possible to toss a coin fifty times and have fifty "heads". The smart
bet is that it won't.
You need to consider systematic errors.
50 heads is simple if you are using a 2 headed coin. Yes, that's an extreme
example.
But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the temperature
changes.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
aa8k@comcast.net said:
> It is not impossible that for a sample of 100,000 secondary
> standards, that the errors would be all be off in the same direction,
> compared to the standard's value.
> Now, granted, this would be a small probability indeed. But it is
> possible to toss a coin fifty times and have fifty "heads". The smart
> bet is that it won't.
You need to consider systematic errors.
50 heads is simple if you are using a 2 headed coin. Yes, that's an extreme
example.
But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the temperature
changes.
--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
BH
Bill Hawkins
Tue, Jan 12, 2010 8:03 PM
I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
So, how much would the temperature gradient have to be to break
the lock?
Ah, maybe it isn't gravity, but the common floor support.
What a great day for thought experiments.
Bill Hawkins
-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Murray
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:28 PM
But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the
temperature
changes.
I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
So, how much would the temperature gradient have to be to break
the lock?
Ah, maybe it isn't gravity, but the common floor support.
What a great day for thought experiments.
Bill Hawkins
-----Original Message-----
From: Hal Murray
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:28 PM
But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the
temperature
changes.
JF
J. Forster
Tue, Jan 12, 2010 8:06 PM
Hmmm... gravity locking. I wonder if you could actually power a torsion
pendulum that way?
-John
==================
I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
So, how much would the temperature gradient have to be to break
the lock?
Ah, maybe it isn't gravity, but the common floor support.
What a great day for thought experiments.
Bill Hawkins
Hmmm... gravity locking. I wonder if you could actually power a torsion
pendulum that way?
-John
==================
> I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
> their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
> the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
>
> So, how much would the temperature gradient have to be to break
> the lock?
>
> Ah, maybe it isn't gravity, but the common floor support.
>
> What a great day for thought experiments.
>
> Bill Hawkins
MD
Magnus Danielson
Tue, Jan 12, 2010 10:53 PM
I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
Gravity-lock? Wouldn't just the ordinary sound-waves be sufficient?
With a pendulum there will be mechanical bending and torsion as it
swings here and there... here and there... far more likely than the
gravity shift of the swings.
Regardless, even for well balanced, counter-swinging and whatever,
putting distance between two clocks will reduce both acoustical and
gravity coupling between them. Acoustical damping adapted to the
pendulum rate would also help, both as a transmitter and as a receiver,
just as with any EMC case.
Cheers,
Magnus
Bill Hawkins wrote:
> I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
> their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
> the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
Gravity-lock? Wouldn't just the ordinary sound-waves be sufficient?
With a pendulum there will be mechanical bending and torsion as it
swings here and there... here and there... far more likely than the
gravity shift of the swings.
Regardless, even for well balanced, counter-swinging and whatever,
putting distance between two clocks will reduce both acoustical and
gravity coupling between them. Acoustical damping adapted to the
pendulum rate would also help, both as a transmitter and as a receiver,
just as with any EMC case.
Cheers,
Magnus
BC
Bob Camp
Tue, Jan 12, 2010 11:17 PM
Hi
For open box pendulums, the air swishing around in the cave should be very effective at locking every single one of them up.
For something like a vacuum enclosed clock you would need lock modes that are a bit more crazy.
Bob
On Jan 12, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
Gravity-lock? Wouldn't just the ordinary sound-waves be sufficient?
With a pendulum there will be mechanical bending and torsion as it swings here and there... here and there... far more likely than the gravity shift of the swings.
Regardless, even for well balanced, counter-swinging and whatever, putting distance between two clocks will reduce both acoustical and gravity coupling between them. Acoustical damping adapted to the pendulum rate would also help, both as a transmitter and as a receiver, just as with any EMC case.
Cheers,
Magnus
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.
Hi
For open box pendulums, the air swishing around in the cave should be very effective at locking every single one of them up.
For something like a vacuum enclosed clock you would need lock modes that are a bit more crazy.
Bob
On Jan 12, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
> Bill Hawkins wrote:
>> I'm picturing 100,000 pendula in a cave, all gravity locked to
>> their neighbors. (How small would they have to be to fit into
>> the main cave at Carlsbad Caverns, New Mexico?)
>
> Gravity-lock? Wouldn't just the ordinary sound-waves be sufficient?
>
> With a pendulum there will be mechanical bending and torsion as it swings here and there... here and there... far more likely than the gravity shift of the swings.
>
> Regardless, even for well balanced, counter-swinging and whatever, putting distance between two clocks will reduce both acoustical and gravity coupling between them. Acoustical damping adapted to the pendulum rate would also help, both as a transmitter and as a receiver, just as with any EMC case.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
JF
J. Forster
Wed, Jan 13, 2010 12:45 AM
World Clock:
<http://www.poodwaddle.com/worldclock.swf>
-John
==================
MD
Magnus Danielson
Wed, Jan 13, 2010 12:58 AM
Hi
For open box pendulums, the air swishing around in the cave should be very effective at locking every single one of them up.
For something like a vacuum enclosed clock you would need lock modes that are a bit more crazy.
Vacuum enclosure still allows acoustical coupling through the support
mechanics. Consider a speaker element, it pushes a bit of air away along
with push its cone in that direction. However, the force has a counter
fource to the underlying ground. While the movement is smaller, due to
its higher acoustical impedance, it is still there. Similar for a
pendulum, as it swings, the support mecanics feels a shift in force with
the rate of the swing, so counter-acting force is need for not moving
around. Maybe the best illustration would be the placement of a pendulum
on top of a piece of ice over wet ice.
So, by saying acoustical, I by no means imply the waves in air.
Cheers,
Magnus
Bob Camp wrote:
> Hi
>
> For open box pendulums, the air swishing around in the cave should be very effective at locking every single one of them up.
>
> For something like a vacuum enclosed clock you would need lock modes that are a bit more crazy.
Vacuum enclosure still allows acoustical coupling through the support
mechanics. Consider a speaker element, it pushes a bit of air away along
with push its cone in that direction. However, the force has a counter
fource to the underlying ground. While the movement is smaller, due to
its higher acoustical impedance, it is still there. Similar for a
pendulum, as it swings, the support mecanics feels a shift in force with
the rate of the swing, so counter-acting force is need for not moving
around. Maybe the best illustration would be the placement of a pendulum
on top of a piece of ice over wet ice.
So, by saying acoustical, I by no means imply the waves in air.
Cheers,
Magnus
MD
Magnus Danielson
Wed, Jan 13, 2010 1:15 AM
It is not impossible that for a sample of 100,000 secondary
standards, that the errors would be all be off in the same direction,
compared to the standard's value.
Now, granted, this would be a small probability indeed. But it is
possible to toss a coin fifty times and have fifty "heads". The smart
bet is that it won't.
You need to consider systematic errors.
50 heads is simple if you are using a 2 headed coin. Yes, that's an extreme
example.
Consider lead-head and aluminium-back-sided coins. Systematic bias.
Consider that the same coin is used for many tosses, the lead would wear
off over time, so you have an aging mechanism which shifts the statistics.
But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the temperature
changes.
Temperature gradients always occur from one end of the cave?
Cheers,
Magnus
Hal Murray wrote:
> aa8k@comcast.net said:
>> It is not impossible that for a sample of 100,000 secondary
>> standards, that the errors would be all be off in the same direction,
>> compared to the standard's value.
>
>> Now, granted, this would be a small probability indeed. But it is
>> possible to toss a coin fifty times and have fifty "heads". The smart
>> bet is that it won't.
>
> You need to consider systematic errors.
>
> 50 heads is simple if you are using a 2 headed coin. Yes, that's an extreme
> example.
Consider lead-head and aluminium-back-sided coins. Systematic bias.
Consider that the same coin is used for many tosses, the lead would wear
off over time, so you have an aging mechanism which shifts the statistics.
> But consider 100,000 pendulums that are all right-on and then the temperature
> changes.
Temperature gradients always occur from one end of the cave?
Cheers,
Magnus
