Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
IMO, a GPS and Rb is less needed than socks, but then I have cold feet. :)
-John
=============
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
I want a mini-RFID with a hand-held remote (or an iPhone app), so that
I could stick an RFID on (say) my car keys and then
click on the little button for "find car keys"
Surgically attaching that remote might be a problem, though.
Regards
Marshall
On Nov 12, 2010, at 5:39 PM, J. Forster wrote:
IMO, a GPS and Rb is less needed than socks, but then I have cold feet. :)
-John
=============
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
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
Your time nuts priorities obviously need to be re-calibrated...
GPS's and Rb's (both plural) are definitely on the list ahead of socks.
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 5:39 PM, J. Forster wrote:
IMO, a GPS and Rb is less needed than socks, but then I have cold feet. :)
-John
=============
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
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.
Maybe... if you put them on the floor under the desk and put your feet on
them.
-John
==============
Hi
Your time nuts priorities obviously need to be re-calibrated...
GPS's and Rb's (both plural) are definitely on the list ahead of socks.
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 5:39 PM, J. Forster wrote:
IMO, a GPS and Rb is less needed than socks, but then I have cold feet.
:)
-John
=============
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be
able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this
seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be
via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at
once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
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.
Hi
Your time nuts priorities obviously need to be re-calibrated...
GPS's and Rb's (both plural) are definitely on the list ahead of socks.
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 5:39 PM, J. Forster wrote:
IMO, a GPS and Rb is less needed than socks, but then I have cold feet.
:)
-John
=============
Hi
Socks? Obviously an un-needed item ...
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 3:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be
able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this
seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be
via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at
once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
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.
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
Socks, not gloves. AFAIK, socks are not handed.
-John
=============
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
Not ususally, anyway; my daughter has some with toes that are. Maybe high-end socks?
-Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Forster" jfor@quik.com
To: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 3:52:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Socks, not gloves. AFAIK, socks are not handed.
-John
=============
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
Well, how often do you loose your daughters socks? -
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of d.seiter@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 7:10 PM
To: jfor@quik.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Not ususally, anyway; my daughter has some with toes that are. Maybe high-end socks?
-Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Forster" jfor@quik.com
To: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 3:52:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Socks, not gloves. AFAIK, socks are not handed.
-John
=============
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
LOL- They don't get lost, it's mine that vanish and turn up randomly.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Feher" mfeher@eozinc.com
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 4:35:54 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Well, how often do you loose your daughters socks? -
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of d.seiter@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 7:10 PM
To: jfor@quik.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Not ususally, anyway; my daughter has some with toes that are. Maybe high-end socks?
-Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Forster" jfor@quik.com
To: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 3:52:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Socks, not gloves. AFAIK, socks are not handed.
-John
=============
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
Well, you know, one never knows. Thought maybe you liked them :). - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of d.seiter@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 7:44 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
LOL- They don't get lost, it's mine that vanish and turn up randomly.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Feher" mfeher@eozinc.com
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 4:35:54 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Well, how often do you loose your daughters socks? -
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf Of d.seiter@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 7:10 PM
To: jfor@quik.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Not ususally, anyway; my daughter has some with toes that are. Maybe high-end socks?
-Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. Forster" jfor@quik.com
To: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 3:52:06 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Socks, not gloves. AFAIK, socks are not handed.
-John
=============
On 13/11/2010, J. Forster jfor@quik.com wrote:
The sock problem has a simple, and obvious, solution.
When you buy socks, buy a several year supply, all identical. When you
no
longer have more than 1 pair, buy a new batch.
But what if you loose all the left or right foot socks (Murphy's Law
applies here), you'll end up buying more when just half of them are
lost.
Steve
QED.
-John
=============
The LW would explain missing single socks, pens, etc. The local
randomness is probably a quantum effect...
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Rooke" sar10538@gmail.com
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 2:11:06 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
While repairing my LCD monitor, I took off my glasses so as to be able
to see better close up as I'm VERY short sighted and even the
vari-focals my optician prescribes can no longer get me close enough
to solder properly. Without them on, I can focus VERY close but the
range is VERY short, being just a few inches. So I completed the work
involving a few stages without putting the glasses back on just to
save time but, when I went to grope around and try to find them, I
could not. So where did I put the blessed things, and after a period
of serious extended "looking" around, blind panic started to set in.
What the dickens had I done with them! So I ended up shuffling out of
the workshop, through the house, stumbling over the dogs, and up to
the bedroom to, eventually, find my spare pair. On my return to the
workshop I still could not find the glasses looked everywhere. A cup
of tea ensued and I took a less panicky search only to find they had
fallen down the back of some gear, or maybe it was the fairies at the
bottom of my garden which had done it. I concluded that in my
"blinded" state of putting them down in the first place, I had
obviously chosen an poor "safe" place.
After this I got to thinking and wondered if there is perhaps
something darker happening here. My current theory is that there is
something called a Lost Wormhole which moves around randomly and
removes items from there current place, setting them down in some
completely different dimension. So the chances of loosing something
increases in proportion to the time that the item is left somewhere
due to the increased probability of it being "borrowed" by the LW.
Now, all is not lost as the LW is a two way pipe and so eventually
your lost item will be dropped back somewhere in your vicinity but
probably not where you thought you had left it. To my mind, this seems
to fit my experience of the way the World seems to work and I'm sure
there is some law here.
For the humour challenged, this message is :) rated.
Please feel free to comment on my theory but perhaps this should be via
PM.
Thank you for your time,
Steve
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
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.
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.
Sigh. It used to be this was one of the most focused, on-topic email
reflectors available, instead of the typical
fill-your-inbox-with-offtopic-crap ones. How things have changed.
CALL FOR MODERATION.
Relax - we all need a little humbleness and humor every once in a while.
Besides, I am honestly beginning to doubt the usefulness of ADEV in today's
communications systems, and yet it seems we are stuck on it. Regards - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Mike S
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 8:10 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Sigh. It used to be this was one of the most focused, on-topic email
reflectors available, instead of the typical
fill-your-inbox-with-offtopic-crap ones. How things have changed.
CALL FOR MODERATION.
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.
Not only losing things......
I have a problem with screw drivers changing sex.
There is never a cross-point screw driver when you find a cross-point
screw,
just dozens of straight blade screwdrivers.
Next time, when it is a straight slot screw there are dozens of cross
point
screw drivers but no straight blade screw drivers.
cheers,
Neville Michie
The discussion is just heading toward the measurement of the time it takes for disappeared things to re appear.
At 13-11-2010, you wrote:
Sigh. It used to be this was one of the most focused, on-topic email reflectors available, instead of the typical fill-your-inbox-with-offtopic-crap ones. How things have changed.
CALL FOR MODERATION.
--
Raj, VU2ZAP
Bangalore, India.
Mike Feher wrote:
Relax - we all need a little humbleness and humor every once in a while.
Besides, I am honestly beginning to doubt the usefulness of ADEV in today's
communications systems, and yet it seems we are stuck on it. Regards - Mike
You just need to look at a different kind of communication system. If
you're working at 8 bps like I do, or you want to measure the distance
to a spacecraft around Saturn with an accuracy of millimeters, ADEV is
important.
Hi
You and a lot of other people. There have been a lot of papers using ADEV as an example of what not to do in the past two years.
Bob
On Nov 12, 2010, at 8:15 PM, Mike Feher wrote:
Relax - we all need a little humbleness and humor every once in a while.
Besides, I am honestly beginning to doubt the usefulness of ADEV in today's
communications systems, and yet it seems we are stuck on it. Regards - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Mike S
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 8:10 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Sigh. It used to be this was one of the most focused, on-topic email
reflectors available, instead of the typical
fill-your-inbox-with-offtopic-crap ones. How things have changed.
CALL FOR MODERATION.
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.
On 13 November 2010 16:14, Raj vu2zap@gmail.com wrote:
The discussion is just heading toward the measurement of the time it takes for disappeared things to re appear.
I think that my original post may have been sent to the wrong group, Raj :)
Cheers,
Steve
At 13-11-2010, you wrote:
Sigh. It used to be this was one of the most focused, on-topic email reflectors available, instead of the typical fill-your-inbox-with-offtopic-crap ones. How things have changed.
CALL FOR MODERATION.
--
Raj, VU2ZAP
Bangalore, India.
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.
--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
- Einstein
At 08:15 PM 11/12/2010, Mike Feher wrote...
Relax
GFY
Mike S,
We also used to be a polite group... until you came along.
-Chuck Harris
Mike S wrote:
At 08:15 PM 11/12/2010, Mike Feher wrote...
Relax
GFY
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is significant. In
fact, when David Allan & Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one. Due to
the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it can, and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates. However, you must admit that your application, while extremely
critical, is in the minority. I like to use the example of something like
DirecTV. Here, they use a down-converter that utilizes a free running DRO,
that is ridiculously noisy, and, varies all over in frequency, especially
over the temperature ranges it subjected to. In spite of all of that, one
gets a perfect pictures. Regards - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of jimlux
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 11:33 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
Mike Feher wrote:
Relax - we all need a little humbleness and humor every once in a while.
Besides, I am honestly beginning to doubt the usefulness of ADEV in
today's
communications systems, and yet it seems we are stuck on it. Regards -
Mike
You just need to look at a different kind of communication system. If
you're working at 8 bps like I do, or you want to measure the distance
to a spacecraft around Saturn with an accuracy of millimeters, ADEV is
important.
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.
This is interesting. I responded to a dismissive, condescending,
personal reply which was telling me how to behave with one using the
same style so the OP would understand it, yet you ignored the original
and choose to criticize me. You have an unusual definition of "polite."
But, it's not my list, and it's obviously not moderated.
At 07:45 AM 11/13/2010, Chuck Harris wrote...
Mike S,
We also used to be a polite group... until you came along.
-Chuck Harris
Mike S wrote:
At 08:15 PM 11/12/2010, Mike Feher wrote...
Relax
GFY
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.
On 11/13/2010 02:20 PM, Mike Feher wrote:
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is significant. In
fact, when David Allan& Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one.
ADEV can be trace back to 1966, but even prior to that similar estimates
was being used in the scientific research, but the Allan article of 1966
provides part of the critical analysis which makes the M-sample analysis
into the Allan-variance as we know it.
Their concerns where with oscillators and not data-communication which
has its own set of problems and measures.
Due to the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it can, and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates.
Data-rates is actually not particularly interesting, it is the dynamic
properties regardless of rate, which is only a scale-factor. The
property of phase-jumps is well covered in the MTIE measurement which is
used along-side the TDEV measurement for telecommunication systems.
MTIE provides the Maximum Time Interval Error... so for a window of
length tau, what is the maximum difference between high and low? This is
measured by taking the difference between max and min in a window, slide
it over the data and take the maximum difference. This relates very well
to buffer-size action and if converted over to a sine-tolerance curve
(using f=1/(pi*tau) ) also can be made to match up with PLL responses.
Come to think of it, I have not seen any good Wikipedia article on it.
Anyway, one really has to understand what kind of measurement is
adequate for the technical problem one is trying to address.
Cheers,
Magnus
Mike S,
How is your attempt at controlling the content of this group any
different from Mike F's asking you to be tolerant?
Any post where you wield to the F word (cloaked or otherwise) against
one of your fellow netizines, is not polite.
As to moderation: John Ackerman owns this group, guides it with a very
gentle hand, hosts, and administers the server the group lives on, pays
the power and phone bill.... In every sense of the word it is his baby.
He has made it clear that he too would prefer the group stay on topic,
but ever the gentleman that he is, he recognizes that the content of
this group is a gift from those that create it... and a polite person
accepts a gift in both the spirit, and the manner it which it is given.
I will present you with the same request Mike F did, only more bluntly:
Please be tolerant. If you don't like a thread, please spare us the
rebuke, just ignore it.
Although it is difficult, I will attempt to live by my own advice.
-Chuck Harris
Mike S wrote:
This is interesting. I responded to a dismissive, condescending,
personal reply which was telling me how to behave with one using the
same style so the OP would understand it, yet you ignored the original
and choose to criticize me. You have an unusual definition of "polite."
But, it's not my list, and it's obviously not moderated.
Hi
I see ADEV not as a solution to a system design problem, but an oscillator measurement issue. If you look at the measures being used in the 60's, most of them had serious statistical flaws. You could measure them several ways and get multiple results. What ADEV gave us is a measure that could be done repeatably. You still have to do it right, but if you do it repeats. If there is a systems rationale in the development of the measurement it's awfully well hidden in the early papers.
Bob
On Nov 13, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 11/13/2010 02:20 PM, Mike Feher wrote:
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is significant. In
fact, when David Allan& Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one.
ADEV can be trace back to 1966, but even prior to that similar estimates was being used in the scientific research, but the Allan article of 1966 provides part of the critical analysis which makes the M-sample analysis into the Allan-variance as we know it.
Their concerns where with oscillators and not data-communication which has its own set of problems and measures.
Due to the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it can, and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates.
Data-rates is actually not particularly interesting, it is the dynamic properties regardless of rate, which is only a scale-factor. The property of phase-jumps is well covered in the MTIE measurement which is used along-side the TDEV measurement for telecommunication systems.
MTIE provides the Maximum Time Interval Error... so for a window of length tau, what is the maximum difference between high and low? This is measured by taking the difference between max and min in a window, slide it over the data and take the maximum difference. This relates very well to buffer-size action and if converted over to a sine-tolerance curve (using f=1/(pi*tau) ) also can be made to match up with PLL responses.
Come to think of it, I have not seen any good Wikipedia article on it.
Anyway, one really has to understand what kind of measurement is adequate for the technical problem one is trying to address.
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.
I agree with all of the comments. My problem now is attempting to fight an
internal Gov't battle, where there is too much emphasis on ADEV, as an
indicator to overall system performance. Thanks for all the replies. Regards
- Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Bob Camp
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 9:06 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] ADEV
Hi
I see ADEV not as a solution to a system design problem, but an oscillator
measurement issue. If you look at the measures being used in the 60's, most
of them had serious statistical flaws. You could measure them several ways
and get multiple results. What ADEV gave us is a measure that could be done
repeatably. You still have to do it right, but if you do it repeats. If
there is a systems rationale in the development of the measurement it's
awfully well hidden in the early papers.
Bob
On Nov 13, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 11/13/2010 02:20 PM, Mike Feher wrote:
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is significant.
In
fact, when David Allan& Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using
this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one.
ADEV can be trace back to 1966, but even prior to that similar estimates
was being used in the scientific research, but the Allan article of 1966
provides part of the critical analysis which makes the M-sample analysis
into the Allan-variance as we know it.
Their concerns where with oscillators and not data-communication which has
its own set of problems and measures.
Due to the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a
large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it can,
and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions
that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates.
Data-rates is actually not particularly interesting, it is the dynamic
properties regardless of rate, which is only a scale-factor. The property of
phase-jumps is well covered in the MTIE measurement which is used along-side
the TDEV measurement for telecommunication systems.
MTIE provides the Maximum Time Interval Error... so for a window of length
tau, what is the maximum difference between high and low? This is measured
by taking the difference between max and min in a window, slide it over the
data and take the maximum difference. This relates very well to buffer-size
action and if converted over to a sine-tolerance curve (using f=1/(pi*tau) )
also can be made to match up with PLL responses.
Come to think of it, I have not seen any good Wikipedia article on it.
Anyway, one really has to understand what kind of measurement is adequate
for the technical problem one is trying to address.
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.
All --
I am becoming very worried about the future of this list. TVB and I
have deliberately tried to maintain a light touch, trusting that the
positive value of the technical conversation here would outweigh the
inevitable noise.
However, it seems like self-restraint is a disappearing quality here and
the inevitable result will be that the smart, knowledgeable people
who've contributed so much will tune out (and I have reason to believe
that some already have).
So, these are the ground rules from now on:
-
Cute or fun as they may be, there's no place here for threads that
aren't related to precise time and frequency and (closely) related
technical subjects. Please take them elsewhere. -
We all know that even on-topic threads will drift. As long as the
topic remains related to precise time and frequency and (closely)
related technical subjects, that's OK. But please, everyone, stay
focused. Every word you type is sent to about 1000 peoples' screens.
Will those thousand see your post as signal, or as noise? -
There's no place here for smart-assitude, nationalism, or
mean-spiritedness. Sarcasm and irony don't translate well through email. -
If someone violates #3, most of the group are smart enough to notice
it. It's hard to sit on your hands when you've been wronged, but this
isn't a schoolyard and there are no points for getting in the last word.
The group will think more of your silence than your response.
So what happens if these rules aren't followed? I don't have the time
or desire to be a policeman, and I don't have any plans to moderate the
list or take other drastic action. I'm an incurable optimist, so I hope
that you'll all take this message seriously and act in the best interest
of the time-nuts list.
But the real threat, and it's one you should all consider carefully, is
that if things here don't improve, those with the most to contribute are
likely to move somewhere else. They'll take all the signal, leaving
only the noise behind.
John
Hi Bob,
On 11/13/2010 03:05 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
I see ADEV not as a solution to a system design problem, but an oscillator measurement issue.
If you look at the measures being used in the 60's, most of them had serious statistical flaws.
You could measure them several ways and get multiple results. What ADEV gave us is a measure
that could be done repeatably. You still have to do it right, but if you do it repeats. If
there is a systems rationale in the development of the measurement it's awfully well hidden
in the early papers.
I completely agree, having spent quite some time in those early papers.
They had problems to handle the noise of oscillators, and having those
problems, how can you attack the system design problems? They had
obvious needs for it in developing doppler radars for instance, but also
for the space program. One of the big meetings on this topic was in the
NASA Goddard space center, and the result of that is found in the NASA
Special Publication 80 (SP-80):
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19660001092
Un the part 1 "User's viewpoint and requirements"
First article in there is "Short-term stability for a doppler radar:
Requirements, Measurements and Techniques" by D.B. Leeson and G.F. Johnsson.
Fifth article is "Satellite Range and Tracking Accuracy as a function of
Oscillator STability" by J.J. Caldwell Jr.
Sixth article is "Short-term Stability Requirements for Deep Space
Tracking and Communications systems" by R. L. Sydnor.
I think the system applications for short-term stability measurements
was quite clear, and was brought out specifically.
ADEV addresses the oscillator noise issues, but isn't particularly well
suited for the numerous of systematic effects that comes on top of the
oscillator noise in the system.
Cheers,
Magnus
At 09:01 AM 11/13/2010, Chuck Harris wrote...
How is your attempt at controlling the content of this group any
different from Mike F's asking you to be tolerant?
First, his was a demand, not a request. Second, his was personally
directed.
Third, I made a comment, addressed to no one in particular, about the
descent of this forum into an extended discussion about faeries
(amongst other crap), instead of time, which is its purpose. I didn't
call out anyone specifically, just provided a general observation. It
wasn't an attempt at control, I called for moderation, which is a
request for whoever is in control to make a judgement. You must be an
Internet newbie, as a call for moderation is entirely appropriate and
has a long history going back to USENET.
What I got was a response (obviously NOT from the moderator) which said
in meaning "Your observation doesn't matter, you're wrong to have such
feelings, so change the way you feel and STFU. People will talk about
what they want. Some of us don't have real lives, we desire humor and
social banter, and the only place we can get that is on technical
discussion lists."
If John Ackerman says it's fine to turn this list into
Facebook/Twitter, that's his call. But if so, I would suggest he change
the description from the current "time-nuts is a low volume, high SNR
list for the discussion of precise time and frequency measurement and
related topics," because that's not what it's going to be.
Mike, one way or another, the members of the list have formed their
judgments regarding your posts. John has asked that we let it go. Please
honor his request.
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Mike S mikes@flatsurface.com wrote:
At 09:01 AM 11/13/2010, Chuck Harris wrote...
How is your attempt at controlling the content of this group any
different from Mike F's asking you to be tolerant?
First, his was a demand, not a request. Second, his was personally
directed.
Third, I made a comment, addressed to no one in particular, about the
descent of this forum into an extended discussion about faeries (amongst
other crap), instead of time, which is its purpose. I didn't call out anyone
specifically, just provided a general observation. It wasn't an attempt at
control, I called for moderation, which is a request for whoever is in
control to make a judgement. You must be an Internet newbie, as a call for
moderation is entirely appropriate and has a long history going back to
USENET.
What I got was a response (obviously NOT from the moderator) which said in
meaning "Your observation doesn't matter, you're wrong to have such
feelings, so change the way you feel and STFU. People will talk about what
they want. Some of us don't have real lives, we desire humor and social
banter, and the only place we can get that is on technical discussion
lists."
If John Ackerman says it's fine to turn this list into Facebook/Twitter,
that's his call. But if so, I would suggest he change the description from
the current "time-nuts is a low volume, high SNR list for the discussion of
precise time and frequency measurement and related topics," because that's
not what it's going to be.
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.
Mike Feher wrote:
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is significant. In
fact, when David Allan & Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one. Due to
the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it can, and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates. However, you must admit that your application, while extremely
critical, is in the minority. I like to use the example of something like
DirecTV. Here, they use a down-converter that utilizes a free running DRO,
that is ridiculously noisy, and, varies all over in frequency, especially
over the temperature ranges it subjected to. In spite of all of that, one
gets a perfect pictures. Regards - Mike
no apologies necessary.. After all, I spend a small, but significant,
amount of time explaining why we'd care about such things, since we are
in the distinct minority of the radio comm world (trying to write nice
comments on failed SBIR proposal evaluations to explain why they missed
the big picture)
And, on the one hand, it's frustrating being the orphan child of the RF
user community: you can't get off the shelf test equipment. On the
other hand, it's cool, because then you have to build your test
equipment.
To the Ku-band downconverters.. They're pretty crummy (but have a
decent SNR to work with).. however, I've seen that there are two kinds..
a vanilla LNB and ones described as "crystal locked"... both are cheap
($20-30 for the former, maybe twice that for the latter)... what's the
difference? And, getting into time-nuts territory here, where's the
reference for the "locked" variety coming from? Up the coax? inside the
LNB? And, can it be retrofitted from a much quieter oscillator? I was
thinking that one could build a radio camera with a small array of
Ku-band dishes, if you could lock all the receivers together. They
are pretty low noise (20-30K)
Magnus Danielson wrote:
Hi Bob,
I think the system applications for short-term stability measurements
was quite clear, and was brought out specifically.
Basically, these are all systems where there is some "storage" or
"delay" and you are comparing a signal generated/recorded at some time t
with that signal at some time t+delta, where delta is in the seconds to
minutes range. (well, milliseconds in the radar case)...
(the really slow speed comm application is slightly different.. there,
it's more of a reciprocal mixing of close in noise and a frequency
stability in the hours/days sense issue.. although for one-way doppler
measurements ADEV is important)
ADEV addresses the oscillator noise issues, but isn't particularly well
suited for the numerous of systematic effects that comes on top of the
oscillator noise in the system.
yes. but some familiarity with how ADEV is measured/computed, and the
fact that there are "test sets" out there that make a plot of ADEV means
that you can look at a ADEV plot for the system, and if it deviates from
that for the underlying oscillators, you can make some educated guesses
about the system issues. Not that it's best, by any means, but at least
it exists.
When buying or building a complex system, one is often faced with the
problem of "how do we write a testable specification or requirement" to
show that the completed widget works. And, further, you generally don't
want to spend more developing the test than the thing you are buying.
It does happen, though..probably part of the game for developing at the
ragged edge of performance. However, if you can sort of back your way
into an analysis that shows that a performance of X on test Y (no matter
how unsuited philosophicaly) means that you will get performance Z on
important requirement Q, then all is good.
At work, we refer to the developing of a whole subproject to understand
and test how the primary object is working as "doing a science
project".. but that's because I work in an "engineering" area as opposed
to one of the "science" areas, where science projects are their lives.
By the time we get it, we're on a schedule and budget that doesn't allow
for much contemplation, reflection, and thinking about how to best do
things: planetary motion waits for no man, and the launch period is a
few weeks long, at best.
Hi
I don't see anybody arguing that systems work better when there's a high ADEV than a low ADEV. Most of the papers are heading in the direction of "it doesn't catch all of the problems I worry about". Based on what systems need and what ADEV measures, I don't find that a particularly surprising conclusion. The next step would be for people to come up with system related measures that do catch what they are after. Some have tried that, many have not. The next link in the chain would be getting (paying) vendors to run the tests on product. As far as I can tell - that's not happening at all. ADEV had the same issues early on. Until it became a mandatory specification, not a lot of people paid much attention to it.
Bob
On Nov 13, 2010, at 10:18 AM, jimlux wrote:
Magnus Danielson wrote:
Hi Bob,
I think the system applications for short-term stability measurements was quite clear, and was brought out specifically.
Basically, these are all systems where there is some "storage" or "delay" and you are comparing a signal generated/recorded at some time t with that signal at some time t+delta, where delta is in the seconds to minutes range. (well, milliseconds in the radar case)...
(the really slow speed comm application is slightly different.. there, it's more of a reciprocal mixing of close in noise and a frequency stability in the hours/days sense issue.. although for one-way doppler measurements ADEV is important)
ADEV addresses the oscillator noise issues, but isn't particularly well suited for the numerous of systematic effects that comes on top of the oscillator noise in the system.
yes. but some familiarity with how ADEV is measured/computed, and the fact that there are "test sets" out there that make a plot of ADEV means that you can look at a ADEV plot for the system, and if it deviates from that for the underlying oscillators, you can make some educated guesses about the system issues. Not that it's best, by any means, but at least it exists.
When buying or building a complex system, one is often faced with the problem of "how do we write a testable specification or requirement" to show that the completed widget works. And, further, you generally don't want to spend more developing the test than the thing you are buying. It does happen, though..probably part of the game for developing at the ragged edge of performance. However, if you can sort of back your way into an analysis that shows that a performance of X on test Y (no matter how unsuited philosophicaly) means that you will get performance Z on important requirement Q, then all is good.
At work, we refer to the developing of a whole subproject to understand and test how the primary object is working as "doing a science project".. but that's because I work in an "engineering" area as opposed to one of the "science" areas, where science projects are their lives. By the time we get it, we're on a schedule and budget that doesn't allow for much contemplation, reflection, and thinking about how to best do things: planetary motion waits for no man, and the launch period is a few weeks long, at best.
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.
On 11/13/2010 04:01 PM, jimlux wrote:
Mike Feher wrote:
I sure do agree, that with very low data rate systems it is
significant. In
fact, when David Allan & Fred Walls came up with the proposal of using
this
measurement as an FOM for oscillators over 30 years ago, digital
communication rates were slow, and, the measurement was a good one.
Due to
the filtering process within ADEV by collecting and integrating a large
number of samples, has a filtering effect of its own. Therefore, it
can, and
will, miss the fact that there may be instantaneous phase transitions
that
could cause havoc with high data rates and higher order PSK modulation
schemes. So, again, I apologize, as I should have mentioned higher data
rates. However, you must admit that your application, while extremely
critical, is in the minority. I like to use the example of something like
DirecTV. Here, they use a down-converter that utilizes a free running
DRO,
that is ridiculously noisy, and, varies all over in frequency, especially
over the temperature ranges it subjected to. In spite of all of that, one
gets a perfect pictures. Regards - Mike
no apologies necessary.. After all, I spend a small, but significant,
amount of time explaining why we'd care about such things, since we are
in the distinct minority of the radio comm world (trying to write nice
comments on failed SBIR proposal evaluations to explain why they missed
the big picture)
And, on the one hand, it's frustrating being the orphan child of the RF
user community: you can't get off the shelf test equipment. On the other
hand, it's cool, because then you have to build your test equipment.
Hmm. Should do more of that.
To the Ku-band downconverters.. They're pretty crummy (but have a decent
SNR to work with).. however, I've seen that there are two kinds.. a
vanilla LNB and ones described as "crystal locked"... both are cheap
($20-30 for the former, maybe twice that for the latter)... what's the
difference? And, getting into time-nuts territory here, where's the
reference for the "locked" variety coming from? Up the coax? inside the
LNB? And, can it be retrofitted from a much quieter oscillator? I was
thinking that one could build a radio camera with a small array of
Ku-band dishes, if you could lock all the receivers together. They are
pretty low noise (20-30K)
The key seek-term to add is "external reference" and it seems that 10
MHz sine seems to be the standard external reference frequency for LNBs
with external reference. I know it will be a tricky frequency for you to
score, but the things you do for science.
Best of luck.
Interesting approach.
Cheers,
Magnus
Magnus Danielson wrote:
One of the big meetings on this topic was in the
NASA Goddard space center, and the result of that is found in the NASA
Special Publication 80 (SP-80):
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19660001092
Un the part 1 "User's viewpoint and requirements"
First article in there is "Short-term stability for a doppler radar:
Requirements, Measurements and Techniques" by D.B. Leeson and G.F.
Johnsson.
Fifth article is "Satellite Range and Tracking Accuracy as a function of
Oscillator STability" by J.J. Caldwell Jr.
Sixth article is "Short-term Stability Requirements for Deep Space
Tracking and Communications systems" by R. L. Sydnor.
Thanks for this reference.. I had seen some of the papers before, but
this collects them all handy in one place.
The paper by Sydnor is quite handy, because it's basically the same way
we do things still (well, we don't punch the Doppler estimate on paper
tape, we've moved a tiny bit forward. And, most, but not all, of our
equipment is calibrated in Hz as opposed to cps)..
Hi Jim,
Is BPSK the modulation used on such an 8bps link for DSN?
If so, any idea what limit of C/N is used? And in what BW?
My interest in short-term stability has always been for more DX on the
mm-wave ham bands. My best results were running QRSS with <1Hz BW on
241GHz but have often wondered if BPSK would be better than OOK.
-Brian, WA1ZMS
Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
I don't see anybody arguing that systems work better when there's a
high ADEV than a low ADEV. Most of the papers are heading in the
direction of "it doesn't catch all of the problems I worry about".
Based on what systems need and what ADEV measures, I don't find that
a particularly surprising conclusion. The next step would be for
people to come up with system related measures that do catch what
they are after. Some have tried that, many have not. The next link in
the chain would be getting (paying) vendors to run the tests on
product. As far as I can tell - that's not happening at all. ADEV had
the same issues early on. Until it became a mandatory specification,
not a lot of people paid much attention to it.
Bob
Yes.. and if you read the discussion following that first batch of
papers in the report Magnus linked, you can see the same sort of thing..
everyone had some measure they had developed that was important to their
particular system, but none of them were the same, or even directly
interconvertible.
The problem faced by them (and us at JPL now)is that we're a very, very
low volume customer (a few units every few years).. We do actually
pay people to make the measurements, but sometimes, I think the
measurements we ask for aren't necessarily appropriate. It's expensive
and time consuming to do the analysis for a new measurement, and
particularly to validate that it's actually measuring something useful
and relevant, so there's a very strong tendency to "do what we did before"..
Sometimes the previous measurement used something that happened to
depend on an artifact of the system design so that you could test
something you can measure to represent something that's difficult to
measure (e.g. IP3 vs P1dB relationships presume a certain shape to the
nonlinearity). But if you've changed the underlying design, that
artifact may not exist.
This shows up a lot with test procedures/specifications for systems
based on all analog designs that are adopted unchanged for systems with
digital conversions. (look at all the various ways to specify
performance of high speed ADCs). For example, in my world, a common
specification is for performance at "best lock frequency" (BLF, that is,
the frequency at which you can acquire a carrier with the lowest SNR).
In an analog system, this is often where the input corresponds to the
rest frequency of the VCO with everything sort of in the middle of the
range. But a lot of modern systems have no BLF... their performance is
essentially flat over some band, and any small variations are not
indicative of, e.g. minimum loop stress, etc. The time spent to
determine BLF, and any assumptions about performance aren't necessarily
valid.
On the other hand, we don't necessarily engage in a "science project"
for each project to determine performance requirements (and
corresponding test methods) unique to the performance in that system.
There is a need for more generic performance numbers that have
moderately universal understanding.. If I tell you the P1dB for an
amplifier, and I tell you that my signals are 10dB below that, then, in
a short statement, I've actually told you a fair amount about how my
design works and the range over which it's likely to keep working.
That's because you and I have a common understanding of what a P1dB spec
"means"...
Over the past decades, I think a similar understanding has arisen with
phase noise specs and to a lesser extent Allan deviation. That is, given
a phase noise plot, a skilled practitioner can tell whether it's good or
bad in the context of a particular system.
On 11/13/2010 04:53 PM, jimlux wrote:
Magnus Danielson wrote:
One of the big meetings on this topic was in the
NASA Goddard space center, and the result of that is found in the NASA
Special Publication 80 (SP-80):
http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19660001092
Un the part 1 "User's viewpoint and requirements"
First article in there is "Short-term stability for a doppler radar:
Requirements, Measurements and Techniques" by D.B. Leeson and G.F.
Johnsson.
Fifth article is "Satellite Range and Tracking Accuracy as a function
of Oscillator STability" by J.J. Caldwell Jr.
Sixth article is "Short-term Stability Requirements for Deep Space
Tracking and Communications systems" by R. L. Sydnor.
Thanks for this reference.. I had seen some of the papers before, but
this collects them all handy in one place.
The paper by Sydnor is quite handy, because it's basically the same way
we do things still (well, we don't punch the Doppler estimate on paper
tape, we've moved a tiny bit forward. And, most, but not all, of our
equipment is calibrated in Hz as opposed to cps)..
When researching my contributions to the Allan variance Wikipedia
article I found that many of the articles referred back to papers from
that conference, so I dug around a little and came up with that
reference. It is online from NASA if you just care to use their
web-pages a little.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_variance
I took some pride of providing significant contributions to the field as
referenced articles, and also as far as possible provide linkage to them
in online form, if possible to get for free. This was indeed one of the
references I was quite happy to find. I have not read all the 300 pages,
but there is a lot of good material in there. For instance, the DMTD
technique has a precursor in the cross-correlation technique being
presented on page 111 by R. F. C. Vessot, L. F. Mueller and J. Varnier
in "A cross-correlation technique for mesuring the short-term properties
of stable oscillators". They measure the beat frequencies of two
H-masers 1,420 GHz as being mixed down to first 30 MHz and then 600 Hz.
Oh, and I still have a number of things to properly cover on the Allan
variance article for sake of completeness. Progress have just been slow.
Doing exercises like these is however very rewarding as one needs to
learn the things on a deeper level.
Cheers,
Magnus
And, on the one hand, it's frustrating being the orphan child of the RF
user community: you can't get off the shelf test equipment. On the other
hand, it's cool, because then you have to build your test equipment.
Hmm. Should do more of that.
Well, one does have to convince someone to pay you to do it..
To the Ku-band downconverters.. They're pretty crummy (but have a decent
SNR to work with).. however, I've seen that there are two kinds.. a
vanilla LNB and ones described as "crystal locked"... both are cheap
($20-30 for the former, maybe twice that for the latter)... what's the
difference? And, getting into time-nuts territory here, where's the
reference for the "locked" variety coming from? Up the coax? inside the
LNB? And, can it be retrofitted from a much quieter oscillator? I was
thinking that one could build a radio camera with a small array of
Ku-band dishes, if you could lock all the receivers together. They are
pretty low noise (20-30K)
The key seek-term to add is "external reference" and it seems that 10
MHz sine seems to be the standard external reference frequency for LNBs
with external reference. I know it will be a tricky frequency for you to
score, but the things you do for science.
Browsing the aisles of the local electronics mega-mart... I don't think
I've ever seen "external reference" in the commodity units. I figure
that the "crystal locked" units have a crystal in the LNB (as opposed to
just running the DRO open loop)..
But, presumably, one could modify the LNB to drive the reference with
something external (and somehow, I doubt it will be 10 MHz.. but anyone
able to modify LNBs will be able to make whatever is needed)
wa1zms@att.net wrote:
Hi Jim,
Is BPSK the modulation used on such an 8bps link for DSN?
BPSK, typically with a lot of residual carrier. And, at slow rates, the
data is modulated on a (e.g. 16 kHz) subcarrier, which is then phase
modulated on the main carrier with a mod index to create the desired
ratio between power in the data signal and power in the carrier. Typical
mod indices would be 0.2 to 1.3 radian (peak).
If so, any idea what limit of C/N is used? And in what BW?
For the SDST, which we've been using for the last 10-15 years, threshold
(the signal level at which the carrier can be acquired and tracked) is
<-156 dBm. Tracking loop BW is on the order of 20Hz for small signals.
NF is <2.5dB
You can read more at
nmp-techval-reports.jpl.nasa.gov/DS1/SDST_Integrated_Report.pdf
(actually, googling SDST will turn up a fair amount of data)
The challenge in operating is that you don't necessarily have a-priori
knowledge of where the SDST is listening (temperature and doppler
uncertainty, mostly).. so we sweep the uplink signal over a range that
hopefully covers where it is. So there's a tradeoff between loop
bandwidth being wide enough to allow a decent sweep rate and narrow
enough to allow working at low signal levels. Because of the long light
time delay, the sweep and acquisition process is open loop (that is, we
assume we swept across the appropriate frequency, that the SDST acquired
and is following, and we can send the data)
Newer radio designs do things like change the bandwidth, or use
parallel detection.
My interest in short-term stability has always been for more DX on the
mm-wave ham bands. My best results were running QRSS with <1Hz BW on
241GHz but have often wondered if BPSK would be better than OOK.
For a given transmitter power, BPSK has a higher average power than OOK.
The problem is that it takes a more sophisticated receiver than a
power detector. OOK has the virtue of simplicity.
-Brian, WA1ZMS
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.
On 11/13/2010 05:32 PM, jimlux wrote:
And, on the one hand, it's frustrating being the orphan child of the RF
user community: you can't get off the shelf test equipment. On the other
hand, it's cool, because then you have to build your test equipment.
Hmm. Should do more of that.
Well, one does have to convince someone to pay you to do it..
Once in a while, I end up being paid to do it. :)
But I do not play in Ku-band. Haven't had to... yet.
The key seek-term to add is "external reference" and it seems that 10
MHz sine seems to be the standard external reference frequency for
LNBs with external reference. I know it will be a tricky frequency for
you to score, but the things you do for science.
Browsing the aisles of the local electronics mega-mart... I don't think
I've ever seen "external reference" in the commodity units. I figure
that the "crystal locked" units have a crystal in the LNB (as opposed to
just running the DRO open loop)..
But, presumably, one could modify the LNB to drive the reference with
something external (and somehow, I doubt it will be 10 MHz.. but anyone
able to modify LNBs will be able to make whatever is needed)
There is really three types available from my quick search:
-
Open Loop L.O. LNBs
-
Crystal locked L.O. LNBs
-
External referenced locked L.O. LNBs
Searching the web using say Google should get you the part numbers you
would need for your short-hand.
Crystal locked would require modification, but modifying them for a 10
MHz reference would probably be a good choice.
Cheers,
Magnus
Reminds me of a story someone once told me....
This is how it goes:
I decide to water my garden.
As I turn on the hose in the driveway, I look over at my car and decide it
needs washing.
As I head towards the garage, I notice post on the porch table that I picked
up from the postman earlier.
I decide to go through it before I wash the car.
I put my car keys on the table, put the junk mail in the recycling box under
the table, and notice that the recycling box is full.
So, I decide to put the bills back on the table and take out the recycling
first.
But then I think, since I'm going to be near the post-box when I take out
the recycling paper anyway, I may as well pay the bills first.
I take my cheque book off the table and notice that there is only one cheque
left.
My extra cheques are in the desk in my study, so I go into the house to my
desk where I find the cup of coffee I'd been drinking.
I'm going to look for my cheques but first I need to push the coffee aside
so that I don't accidentally knock it over.
The coffee is getting cold, and I decide to make another cup.
As I head toward the kitchen with the cold coffee, a vase of flowers on the
worktop catches my eye - the flowers need water.
I put the coffee on the worktop and discover my reading glasses that I've
been searching for all morning.
I decide I better put them back on my desk, but first I'm going to water the
flowers.
I put the glasses back down on the worktop, fill a container with water and
suddenly spot the TV remote control. Someone left it on the kitchen table.
I realise that tonight when we go to watch TV, I'll be looking for the
remote, but I won't remember that it's on the kitchen table, so I decide to
put it back where it belongs, but first I'll water the flowers.
I pour some water in the flowers, but quite a bit of it spills on the floor.
So, I put the remote back on the table, get some towels and wipe up the
spill.
Then, I head down the hall trying to remember what I was planning to do.
At the end of the day:
The car isn't washed. The bills aren't paid. There is a cold cup of coffee
sitting on the kitchen work-surface. The flowers don't have enough water.
There is still only one cheque in my cheque book, I can't find the remote, I
can't find my glasses, and I don't remember what I did with the car keys.
Then, when I try to figure out why nothing got done today, I'm really
baffled because I know I was busy all bloody day and I'm really tired.
:-)
Rob Kimberley
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Mike S
Sent: 13 November 2010 10:57 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
At 08:15 PM 11/12/2010, Mike Feher wrote...
Relax
GFY
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.
It's called a sequential vortex...
Don
Rob Kimberley
Reminds me of a story someone once told me....
This is how it goes:
I decide to water my garden.
As I turn on the hose in the driveway, I look over at my car and decide it
needs washing.
As I head towards the garage, I notice post on the porch table that I
picked
up from the postman earlier.
I decide to go through it before I wash the car.
I put my car keys on the table, put the junk mail in the recycling box
under
the table, and notice that the recycling box is full.
So, I decide to put the bills back on the table and take out the recycling
first.
But then I think, since I'm going to be near the post-box when I take out
the recycling paper anyway, I may as well pay the bills first.
I take my cheque book off the table and notice that there is only one
cheque
left.
My extra cheques are in the desk in my study, so I go into the house to my
desk where I find the cup of coffee I'd been drinking.
I'm going to look for my cheques but first I need to push the coffee aside
so that I don't accidentally knock it over.
The coffee is getting cold, and I decide to make another cup.
As I head toward the kitchen with the cold coffee, a vase of flowers on
the
worktop catches my eye - the flowers need water.
I put the coffee on the worktop and discover my reading glasses that I've
been searching for all morning.
I decide I better put them back on my desk, but first I'm going to water
the
flowers.
I put the glasses back down on the worktop, fill a container with water
and
suddenly spot the TV remote control. Someone left it on the kitchen
table.
I realise that tonight when we go to watch TV, I'll be looking for the
remote, but I won't remember that it's on the kitchen table, so I decide
to
put it back where it belongs, but first I'll water the flowers.
I pour some water in the flowers, but quite a bit of it spills on the
floor.
So, I put the remote back on the table, get some towels and wipe up the
spill.
Then, I head down the hall trying to remember what I was planning to do.
At the end of the day:
The car isn't washed. The bills aren't paid. There is a cold cup of coffee
sitting on the kitchen work-surface. The flowers don't have enough water.
There is still only one cheque in my cheque book, I can't find the remote,
I
can't find my glasses, and I don't remember what I did with the car keys.
Then, when I try to figure out why nothing got done today, I'm really
baffled because I know I was busy all bloody day and I'm really tired.
:-)
Rob Kimberley
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Mike S
Sent: 13 November 2010 10:57 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT loosing things
At 08:15 PM 11/12/2010, Mike Feher wrote...
Relax
GFY
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.
--
"Neither the voice of authority nor the weight of reason and argument are
as significant as experiment, for thence comes quiet to the mind."
R. Bacon
Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL
Six Mile Systems LLP
17850 Six Mile Road
POB 134
Huson, MT, 59846
VOX 406-626-4304
www.lightningforensics.com
www.sixmilesystems.com
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 07:01:26AM -0800, jimlux wrote:
To the Ku-band downconverters.. They're pretty crummy (but have a
decent SNR to work with).. however, I've seen that there are two kinds..
a vanilla LNB and ones described as "crystal locked"... both are cheap
($20-30 for the former, maybe twice that for the latter)... what's the
difference? And, getting into time-nuts territory here, where's the
reference for the "locked" variety coming from? Up the coax? inside the
LNB? And, can it be retrofitted from a much quieter oscillator? I was
thinking that one could build a radio camera with a small array of
Ku-band dishes, if you could lock all the receivers together. They
are pretty low noise (20-30K)
There are three kinds of LNBs in common use in the VSAT world...
1. Open loop unlocked DROs, often with around a MHz or two or
more error due to temperature and calibration and drift over time. More
expensive higher grade ones are tighter spec'd, but rarely much less
than 250-500 KHz over time and temp. Most all DTH dishes use these,
often with rather loose frequency specs since the DTH carriers are wide,
fast signals.
2. Closed loop DROs phase locked to a crystal or I believe
about as common, a UHF or higher frequency oscillator phase locked to a
crystal reference with some degree of multiplication to the final LO
frequency (maybe not much these days with fast prescaler/divider chips).
Crystal in this case is - depending on price - just a plain XO or either
a TXCO or in certain cases a OXCO. More expensive ones have better
stability specs. Generally these sell for 5-10 times what a cheap DRO
LNB for the mass market might go for. And can be as good as 1 PPM or
so.
PLL LNBs are mostly used for data or audio transmissions on
narrower, lower bit rate carriers than TV but also used for many critical
professional TV broadcast and similar applications.
3. External reference LNBs with 10 MHz (pretty universal) going
up the cable that also carries power and brings the L band signal down.
I'm not entirely sure how many of these designs simply bandpass filter
and then limit the 10 MHz and use that directly as a PLL reference and
how many phase lock a VCXO to the 10 MHz coming in. Otherwise similar
(and often derived from designs for) the internal reference PLL types
in 2 above.
These ER types are more apt to be used for more exotic
specialized applications where very high frequency accuracy or some
degree of phase coherence with other equipment or LNBs is useful.
Obviously with the high multiplication factor, one needs a quiet
reference inside the PLL bandwidth (and that is pretty wide to ensure
reliable lock) - one suspects that issues with degradation due to
mechanically induced noise and phase shift in the cables can be a
problem.
--
Dave Emery N1PRE/AE, die@dieconsulting.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass 02493
"An empty zombie mind with a forlorn barely readable weatherbeaten
'For Rent' sign still vainly flapping outside on the weed encrusted pole - in
celebration of what could have been, but wasn't and is not to be now either."
David I. Emery wrote:
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 07:01:26AM -0800, jimlux wrote:
To the Ku-band downconverters.. They're pretty crummy (but have a
decent SNR to work with).. however, I've seen that there are two kinds..
a vanilla LNB and ones described as "crystal locked"... both are cheap
($20-30 for the former, maybe twice that for the latter)... what's the
difference? And, getting into time-nuts territory here, where's the
reference for the "locked" variety coming from? Up the coax? inside the
LNB? And, can it be retrofitted from a much quieter oscillator? I was
thinking that one could build a radio camera with a small array of
Ku-band dishes, if you could lock all the receivers together. They
are pretty low noise (20-30K)
There are three kinds of LNBs in common use in the VSAT world...
1. Open loop unlocked DROs, often with around a MHz or two or
more error due to temperature and calibration and drift over time. More
expensive higher grade ones are tighter spec'd, but rarely much less
than 250-500 KHz over time and temp. Most all DTH dishes use these,
often with rather loose frequency specs since the DTH carriers are wide,
fast signals.
2. Closed loop DROs phase locked to a crystal or I believe
about as common, a UHF or higher frequency oscillator phase locked to a
crystal reference with some degree of multiplication to the final LO
frequency (maybe not much these days with fast prescaler/divider chips).
Crystal in this case is - depending on price - just a plain XO or either
a TXCO or in certain cases a OXCO. More expensive ones have better
stability specs. Generally these sell for 5-10 times what a cheap DRO
LNB for the mass market might go for. And can be as good as 1 PPM or
so.
Bummer.. so much for making myself a radio camera with scavenged Ku-band
DBS dishes/feeds (when people around here subscribe, they just junk
the existing, almost identical, assembly)..
I was willing to spend a few tens of dollars/element.. But $100/element
is pushing it out of the "hmm, interesting project for not much money,
can I accumulate some more junk in the garage" category.
PLL LNBs are mostly used for data or audio transmissions on
narrower, lower bit rate carriers than TV but also used for many critical
professional TV broadcast and similar applications.
3. External reference LNBs with 10 MHz (pretty universal) going
up the cable that also carries power and brings the L band signal down.
I'm not entirely sure how many of these designs simply bandpass filter
and then limit the 10 MHz and use that directly as a PLL reference and
how many phase lock a VCXO to the 10 MHz coming in. Otherwise similar
(and often derived from designs for) the internal reference PLL types
in 2 above.
And, I'll bet those are fairly pricey.. (after all, it needs another
connector, and that's a price sensitive application..)
Hmm.. I wonder if one could do the pilot tone technique.. I can radiate
a weak Ku band signal, in band, and record what I see from the LNB, then
post process to "close the loop" in software. Have to think about that
some more.. The Ku band beacon/pilot is easy (a comb), so what I'd need
is a multichannel "softrock" type receiver (which has other uses) that
can deal with the L-band IF from the cheap LNBs. I wonder if the LO of
the cheap LNBs are within, say, 50kHz of each other.. Then I could use a
common L-band LO.. But based on the discussion above, probably not.
Someone was asking about SC cut crystals to play with.
I have a few dozen 10.23 MHz SC cut crystals that are
interchangeable with 10811 10 MHz crystals, except for
the frequency difference. They were made for a GPS
version of the 10811 that never saw the light of day.
Any interest in these?
Rick Karlquist
N6RK
Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Someone was asking about SC cut crystals to play with.
I have a few dozen 10.23 MHz SC cut crystals that are
interchangeable with 10811 10 MHz crystals, except for
the frequency difference. They were made for a GPS
version of the 10811 that never saw the light of day.
Any interest in these?
Rick Karlquist
N6RK
Yes
Bruce
On 11/14/2010 7:24 PM, David I. Emery wrote:
-
External reference LNBs with 10 MHz (pretty universal) going
up the cable that also carries power and brings the L band signal down.
I'm not entirely sure how many of these designs simply bandpass filter
and then limit the 10 MHz and use that directly as a PLL reference and
how many phase lock a VCXO to the 10 MHz coming in. Otherwise similar
(and often derived from designs for) the internal reference PLL types
in 2 above.These ER types are more apt to be used for more exotic
specialized applications where very high frequency accuracy or some
degree of phase coherence with other equipment or LNBs is useful.Obviously with the high multiplication factor, one needs a quiet
reference inside the PLL bandwidth (and that is pretty wide to ensure
reliable lock) - one suspects that issues with degradation due to
mechanically induced noise and phase shift in the cables can be a
problem.
I picked up an LNB a about 10 years back that used this external
reference method. The LO in the thing was a DRO that locked to a 10 MHz
signal coming up the cable. The LO in this one locked to 10.750 GHz.
Experimenting, I found that the DRO adjustment screw could be turned and
it would lock every 10 MHz. I found it would lock as low as 10.690. I
assume it would tune up about that far too.
I needed an LO in the 10 GHz area, so I hacked mine to use it just as a
LO, not using any of the receive chain. Here's a page where I described
the LNB and what I did with it.
http://www.xertech.net/Projects/sat_lo.html
Maybe the description there will help someone. If nothing else, it show
pictures of what one external ref type LNB looks like.
Rick,
On 11/15/2010 06:25 AM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Someone was asking about SC cut crystals to play with.
I have a few dozen 10.23 MHz SC cut crystals that are
interchangeable with 10811 10 MHz crystals, except for
the frequency difference. They were made for a GPS
version of the 10811 that never saw the light of day.
Any interest in these?
Vigorous hand-waving. Yes.
Cheers,
Magnus
10 MHz locked LNBs do not use a separate connector. Everything goes down/up
the single main coax. The typical L-band down-converted frequency and the 10
MHz are easily separated, as is the DC. These are definitely not
inexpensive. Regards - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of jimlux
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 11:49 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] ADEV
David I. Emery wrote:
3. External reference LNBs with 10 MHz (pretty universal) going
up the cable that also carries power and brings the L band signal down.
I'm not entirely sure how many of these designs simply bandpass filter
and then limit the 10 MHz and use that directly as a PLL reference and
how many phase lock a VCXO to the 10 MHz coming in. Otherwise similar
(and often derived from designs for) the internal reference PLL types
in 2 above.
And, I'll bet those are fairly pricey.. (after all, it needs another
connector, and that's a price sensitive application..)
Someone was asking about SC cut crystals to play with.
I have a few dozen 10.23 MHz SC cut crystals that are
interchangeable with 10811 10 MHz crystals, except for
the frequency difference. They were made for a GPS
version of the 10811 that never saw the light of day.
Any interest in these?
Absolutely!
JDB.
[still working on that DIY GPSDO design]
LART. 250 MIPS under one Watt. Free hardware design files.
http://www.lartmaker.nl/
At 11:25 PM 11/14/2010, Richard (Rick) Karlquist wrote:
Someone was asking about SC cut crystals to play with.
I have a few dozen 10.23 MHz SC cut crystals that are
interchangeable with 10811 10 MHz crystals, except for
the frequency difference. They were made for a GPS
version of the 10811 that never saw the light of day.
Any interest in these?
Yep.
Rex wrote:
On 11/14/2010 7:24 PM, David I. Emery wrote:
-
External reference LNBs with 10 MHz (pretty universal) going
up the cable that also carries power and brings the L band signal down.
I'm not entirely sure how many of these designs simply bandpass filter
and then limit the 10 MHz and use that directly as a PLL reference and
how many phase lock a VCXO to the 10 MHz coming in. Otherwise similar
(and often derived from designs for) the internal reference PLL types
in 2 above.These ER types are more apt to be used for more exotic
specialized applications where very high frequency accuracy or some
degree of phase coherence with other equipment or LNBs is useful.Obviously with the high multiplication factor, one needs a quiet
reference inside the PLL bandwidth (and that is pretty wide to ensure
reliable lock) - one suspects that issues with degradation due to
mechanically induced noise and phase shift in the cables can be a
problem.
I picked up an LNB a about 10 years back that used this external
reference method. The LO in the thing was a DRO that locked to a 10 MHz
signal coming up the cable. The LO in this one locked to 10.750 GHz.
Experimenting, I found that the DRO adjustment screw could be turned and
it would lock every 10 MHz. I found it would lock as low as 10.690. I
assume it would tune up about that far too.
I needed an LO in the 10 GHz area, so I hacked mine to use it just as a
LO, not using any of the receive chain. Here's a page where I described
the LNB and what I did with it.
http://www.xertech.net/Projects/sat_lo.html
Maybe the description there will help someone. If nothing else, it show
pictures of what one external ref type LNB looks like.
Interesting.. NORSAT makes lots of those sort of devices for VSAT (Very
Small Aperture Terminal) applications (e.g. satellite internet).. I've
seen a few of them at work being used in that kind of application.
Those would make life easier for my scheme.
They're not quite so common as the LNB for Ku-band TV (at least I've not
seen them at Best Buy/Radio Shack kinds of places), nor have I seen them
on neighbors houses or out at the curb on trash day.
But I'm starting to think the pilot tone technique might be easier... At
first glance, if one considers two alternatives:
LO locked to reference, down converting RF to baseband and digitizing
and
LO not locked, but with in-band pilot tone, down converting RF to
baseband and digitizing, then essentially mixing with the downconverted
pilot tone
should produce comparable results. In the first, you're controlling the
LO (at least inside the loop bandwidth), and in the second, you're
really measuring it, then taking out its changes.
Assuming that the pilot tone amplitude is small enough that it doesn't
cause nonlinearity problems in the LNB, and that it's in band, it should
be comparable.
But, maybe there's a SNR of the reference issue? In a PLL, you're
comparing a very strong signal to a very strong reference, so the noise
floor of both is very small, while in the pilot tone, the "reference" is
strong, but not as strong, relative to the noise flor.
Mike Feher wrote:
10 MHz locked LNBs do not use a separate connector. Everything goes down/up
the single main coax. The typical L-band down-converted frequency and the 10
MHz are easily separated, as is the DC. These are definitely not
inexpensive. Regards - Mike
Ah.. but the question is really not whether the "new" price is cheap,
but whether there's some reason why someone would be doing a massive
refit, and dumping lots of these on the market surplus.
Well, that I do not know. The majority of Ku & Ka LNBs for home TV use are
using free running DRO's. I have a bunch of them, and never ran across any
locked ones, except for some of the ones used for internet service. My real
experience is what we use in military satcom terminals at Ku and Ka bands,
with apertures from 0.6 to 9.2 meters, and they are all locked to an
external 10 MHz reference. I doubt if you will see any major dumping of
those. Especially now, because of strict ITAR. Even if one can buy it
directly from the manufacturer, once the military has owned it, they will
probably dispose of it in such a way that we will not see them on ebay.
Regards - Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of jimlux
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 9:21 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: [time-nuts] ext ref LNB Re: ADEV
Mike Feher wrote:
10 MHz locked LNBs do not use a separate connector. Everything goes
down/up
the single main coax. The typical L-band down-converted frequency and the
10
MHz are easily separated, as is the DC. These are definitely not
inexpensive. Regards - Mike
Ah.. but the question is really not whether the "new" price is cheap,
but whether there's some reason why someone would be doing a massive
refit, and dumping lots of these on the market surplus.
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.
Mike Feher wrote:
Well, that I do not know. The majority of Ku & Ka LNBs for home TV use are
using free running DRO's. I have a bunch of them, and never ran across any
locked ones, except for some of the ones used for internet service. My real
experience is what we use in military satcom terminals at Ku and Ka bands,
with apertures from 0.6 to 9.2 meters, and they are all locked to an
external 10 MHz reference. I doubt if you will see any major dumping of
those. Especially now, because of strict ITAR. Even if one can buy it
directly from the manufacturer, once the military has owned it, they will
probably dispose of it in such a way that we will not see them on ebay.
Regards - Mike
I doubt the LNB is export controlled.. It's unlikely to have an
exotically low noise temperature, they're not cryogenic, they don't use
components with dual-use, it's just part of a receiver. If you go to
the NORSAT website, for instance, they don't make much mention of export
controls (yeah, I'm sure the invoice/quote would have export
boilerplate on it "the contents of this have not been reviewed... use,
sale, distribution may require license...")
http://www.norsat.com/lnb/blog
And I note that the datasheet's pretty sketchy on the external reference
LNBs.. They give phase noise as follows (for Ku band, 10.75 GHz LO):
-75dBc/Hz @ 1kHz
-85 @ 10k
-95 @ 100k
But they don't say whether that's added to the reference noise, or
that's the "outside the loop" noise, or what..
What's interesting is that the Ka-band LNB (for 18-19 GHz, which is low
Ka, to my thinking.. I think 30 when I think Ka).. the noise is actually
lower
-65 @ 1k
-75 @ 10k
-95 @ 100k
-100 @ 1M
The military Ka band is 20.2 to 21.2 on receive and 30 to 31 on transmit.
Norsat of course has been making these for about 15 years, one of the first.
Back when I was working on Milstar 25 years ago, with the same receive
frequency, even the NF was classified. No, it does not make sense, but, that
was the way it was. I just had to deal with some ITAR related issues, where,
COTS equipment is being used, yet, it is now built for, or owned by the
military, and, while the hardware is not classified, it is restricted, even
as to who may work on it. I am just saying, do not hold your breath to see
them coming on the military surplus market. Regards- Mike
Mike B. Feher, EOZ Inc.
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960 office
908-901-9193 cell
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of jimlux
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:16 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] ext ref LNB Re: ADEV
Mike Feher wrote:
Well, that I do not know. The majority of Ku & Ka LNBs for home TV use are
using free running DRO's. I have a bunch of them, and never ran across any
locked ones, except for some of the ones used for internet service. My
real
experience is what we use in military satcom terminals at Ku and Ka bands,
with apertures from 0.6 to 9.2 meters, and they are all locked to an
external 10 MHz reference. I doubt if you will see any major dumping of
those. Especially now, because of strict ITAR. Even if one can buy it
directly from the manufacturer, once the military has owned it, they will
probably dispose of it in such a way that we will not see them on ebay.
Regards - Mike
I doubt the LNB is export controlled.. It's unlikely to have an
exotically low noise temperature, they're not cryogenic, they don't use
components with dual-use, it's just part of a receiver. If you go to
the NORSAT website, for instance, they don't make much mention of export
controls (yeah, I'm sure the invoice/quote would have export
boilerplate on it "the contents of this have not been reviewed... use,
sale, distribution may require license...")
http://www.norsat.com/lnb/blog
And I note that the datasheet's pretty sketchy on the external reference
LNBs.. They give phase noise as follows (for Ku band, 10.75 GHz LO):
-75dBc/Hz @ 1kHz
-85 @ 10k
-95 @ 100k
But they don't say whether that's added to the reference noise, or
that's the "outside the loop" noise, or what..
What's interesting is that the Ka-band LNB (for 18-19 GHz, which is low
Ka, to my thinking.. I think 30 when I think Ka).. the noise is actually
lower
-65 @ 1k
-75 @ 10k
-95 @ 100k
-100 @ 1M
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.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 06:20:55AM -0800, jimlux wrote:
Mike Feher wrote:
10 MHz locked LNBs do not use a separate connector. Everything goes down/up
the single main coax. The typical L-band down-converted frequency and the
10
MHz are easily separated, as is the DC. These are definitely not
inexpensive. Regards - Mike
Ah.. but the question is really not whether the "new" price is cheap,
but whether there's some reason why someone would be doing a massive
refit, and dumping lots of these on the market surplus.
FWIW, I have purchased C, US FSS Ku and Euro FSS Ku ER
LNBs on Ebay for well under $100 NOS in box with spec sheets.
Not yet seen Ka ones. Did buy an X band.
Sellers had a few (eg two or three), never seen large
quantities... but surplus ER LNBs command LOWER prices because of the need
for the external reference and so forth...
You would, naturally enough need a feedhorn (these are mostly
WR90 for Ku)...
Your pilot tone concept is interesting... I am not sure
how large your array might be and what issues would be involved
in distributing the pilot tone to it... nor exactly what the
noise spectrum (ADEV) of a cheapie DRO LNB might look like and
what would be required to generate the necessary LO phase estimates
from the pilot as translated by the unstable LO...
--
Dave Emery N1PRE/AE, die@dieconsulting.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass 02493
"An empty zombie mind with a forlorn barely readable weatherbeaten
'For Rent' sign still vainly flapping outside on the weed encrusted pole - in
celebration of what could have been, but wasn't and is not to be now either."