| ??? 06/25/03 11:25 Read: times |
#49278 - RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Now I'm confused!
The Brooks Shera article, excellent as it is, is only concerned with frequency, not 'absolute time'. If it is just high accuracy/high stability frequency you're after, there are cheaper and easier ways of obtaining that. However, if you do need 'absolute time', the article is of little use. Could you expand a little on your application, if only to satisfy my curiosity? Rob. PS I sent you that article a few months ago! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Happy birthday, Steve | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: +/- 50nSec precise clock. | 01/01/70 00:00 |



