Neutrino timing
Good morning,
Recently physicists using a neutrino beam from Geneva Switzerland to the Gran Sasso
in Italy have reported a measurement of neutrino velocity that is faster than the speed of
light. The effect over a 730 km path length is reported as 60 ns, which means that precise
timing is required at both ends of the beam to have sensitivity to this effect. The reported
result, if true, has major implications for the fundamental understanding of physics.
Thus, it is important to carry out independent checks of this measurement.
A similar beam exists between Fermi National Accelerator Lab in Batavia IL and the University
of Minnesota's Underground Laboratory at Soudan in northeastern Minnesota. This U.S. beam has
been used to make a similar measurement, but the GPS timing equipment that was used
(Truetime XL-AK, Model 600-101-015) resulted in an estimated uncertainty of about 70 ns
in the neutrino time-of-flight, too large to test the recently reported effect. I am one of a
group of physicists working with the neutrino beam in the U.S.
Although we are also talking with professionals at USNO and NIST, I am interested in possible
suggestions from the "Time Nut" community with respect to the following:
(a) the possibility of retrospectively improving the existing timing data recorded since 2005 using
the Truetime XL-AK, and
(b) a quick, low-cost improvement in the timing instrumentation that can be made right away,
pending arrangements for techniques such as Two-Way Satellite synchronization.
In addition, if there are any "Time Nuts" in the Minnesota area who would like to get more involved in this project,
please feel free to contact me at marshak@umn.edu
Thank you very much.
Marvin Marshak
Marvin L. Marshak
College of Science and Engineering Professor
Morse-Alumni Professor
University of Minnesota
116 Church Street SE
Minneapolis MN 55455 612-624-1312 612-624-4578 (fax)
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5 to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Marvin Marshak
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 11:53 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] Neutrino timing
Good morning,
Recently physicists using a neutrino beam from Geneva Switzerland to the
Gran Sasso
in Italy have reported a measurement of neutrino velocity that is faster
than the speed of
light. The effect over a 730 km path length is reported as 60 ns, which
means that precise
timing is required at both ends of the beam to have sensitivity to this
effect. The reported
result, if true, has major implications for the fundamental understanding of
physics.
Thus, it is important to carry out independent checks of this measurement.
A similar beam exists between Fermi National Accelerator Lab in Batavia IL
and the University
of Minnesota's Underground Laboratory at Soudan in northeastern Minnesota.
This U.S. beam has
been used to make a similar measurement, but the GPS timing equipment that
was used
(Truetime XL-AK, Model 600-101-015) resulted in an estimated uncertainty of
about 70 ns
in the neutrino time-of-flight, too large to test the recently reported
effect. I am one of a
group of physicists working with the neutrino beam in the U.S.
Although we are also talking with professionals at USNO and NIST, I am
interested in possible
suggestions from the "Time Nut" community with respect to the following:
(a) the possibility of retrospectively improving the existing timing
data recorded since 2005 using
the Truetime XL-AK, and
(b) a quick, low-cost improvement in the timing instrumentation that
can be made right away,
pending arrangements for techniques such as Two-Way Satellite
synchronization.
In addition, if there are any "Time Nuts" in the Minnesota area who would
like to get more involved in this project,
please feel free to contact me at marshak@umn.edu
Thank you very much.
Marvin Marshak
Marvin L. Marshak
College of Science and Engineering Professor
Morse-Alumni Professor
University of Minnesota
116 Church Street SE
Minneapolis MN 55455 612-624-1312 612-624-4578 (fax)
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.
Le 24/10/2011 19:03, Bob Camp a écrit :
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5 to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Better to take three.
Boy I have to say that I agree with Bob. Nice and simple, but a boring drive
and heavens who has budgets for the tickets?
Looked at a map and though I could see either a dark fiber type connection
$$$$$, or radio at 400 miles. Transmitter reference at 200 miles could give
a common view. They grow really tall TV towers in the midwest. Certainly 50
MHz and reasonable power would be stable. I wonder about jitter in the
various technologies of the radio recvr. But with a CS/Rb ref. the system
could be quite good. Way back when ran a repeater at 145 Mhz for data with
directive antennas in Michigan. Ant at 60'. Very stable coverage at 140
Miles.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:22 PM, mike cook michael.cook@sfr.fr wrote:
Le 24/10/2011 19:03, Bob Camp a écrit :
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you
drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5 to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Better to take three.
_____________**
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
mailman/listinfo/time-nutshttps://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
That will only work at the time you get there, which may not be the time of the experiment.
I think they need a more permanent solution.
Didier KO4BB
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless thingy while I do other things...
-----Original Message-----
From: "Bob Camp" lists@rtty.us
Sender: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 13:03:58
To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'time-nuts@febo.com
Reply-To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Neutrino timing
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5 to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Marvin Marshak
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 11:53 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] Neutrino timing
Good morning,
Recently physicists using a neutrino beam from Geneva Switzerland to the
Gran Sasso
in Italy have reported a measurement of neutrino velocity that is faster
than the speed of
light. The effect over a 730 km path length is reported as 60 ns, which
means that precise
timing is required at both ends of the beam to have sensitivity to this
effect. The reported
result, if true, has major implications for the fundamental understanding of
physics.
Thus, it is important to carry out independent checks of this measurement.
A similar beam exists between Fermi National Accelerator Lab in Batavia IL
and the University
of Minnesota's Underground Laboratory at Soudan in northeastern Minnesota.
This U.S. beam has
been used to make a similar measurement, but the GPS timing equipment that
was used
(Truetime XL-AK, Model 600-101-015) resulted in an estimated uncertainty of
about 70 ns
in the neutrino time-of-flight, too large to test the recently reported
effect. I am one of a
group of physicists working with the neutrino beam in the U.S.
Although we are also talking with professionals at USNO and NIST, I am
interested in possible
suggestions from the "Time Nut" community with respect to the following:
(a) the possibility of retrospectively improving the existing timing
data recorded since 2005 using
the Truetime XL-AK, and
(b) a quick, low-cost improvement in the timing instrumentation that
can be made right away,
pending arrangements for techniques such as Two-Way Satellite
synchronization.
In addition, if there are any "Time Nuts" in the Minnesota area who would
like to get more involved in this project,
please feel free to contact me at marshak@umn.edu
Thank you very much.
Marvin Marshak
Marvin L. Marshak
College of Science and Engineering Professor
Morse-Alumni Professor
University of Minnesota
116 Church Street SE
Minneapolis MN 55455 612-624-1312 612-624-4578 (fax)
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.
Although we are also talking with professionals at USNO and NIST, I am interested in possible
suggestions from the "Time Nut" community with respect to the following:
(a) the possibility of retrospectively improving the existing timing data recorded since 2005 using
the Truetime XL-AK, and
(b) a quick, low-cost improvement in the timing instrumentation that can be made right away,
pending arrangements for techniques such as Two-Way Satellite synchronization.
In addition, if there are any "Time Nuts" in the Minnesota area who would like to get more involved in this project,
please feel free to contact me at marshak@umn.edu
Thank you very much.
Marvin Marshak
Hi Marvin,
Thanks for contacting the list about this.
We've discussed the topic somewhat a month ago, as well as a
number of emails off-list with the folks at CERN/LNGS.
NIST should be able to lend you one or two of their calibrated
common view systems. USNO has a traveling TWSTT van and
you can find out when it is next in the midwest. Let me know if
you need contact info for either lab.
How soon would you like to do the synchronization? Our kids
are in school right now but we have a Thanksgiving break soon.
Using the same clocks as http://leapsecond.com/great2005/ I
can calibrate the MINOS path to 2 ns.
/tvb
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 10:52:51 -0500
Marvin Marshak marshak@umn.edu wrote:
A similar beam exists between Fermi National Accelerator Lab in Batavia IL and the University
of Minnesota's Underground Laboratory at Soudan in northeastern Minnesota. This U.S. beam has
been used to make a similar measurement, but the GPS timing equipment that was used
(Truetime XL-AK, Model 600-101-015) resulted in an estimated uncertainty of about 70 ns
in the neutrino time-of-flight, too large to test the recently reported effect. I am one of a
group of physicists working with the neutrino beam in the U.S.
Although we are also talking with professionals at USNO and NIST, I am interested in possible
suggestions from the "Time Nut" community with respect to the following:
I and probably most others are not familiar with your measurement setup.
Could you at least provide a link to a paper that describes how your
time transfer/synchronisation setup looks like?
Also, what data have you recorded during your experiments?
What of this data is still available?
(a) the possibility of retrospectively improving the existing timing data recorded since 2005 using
the Truetime XL-AK, and
I currently only see one possibility to improve the timing data if you have
recorded the satelite phase data at both sites with each time stamp.
I know that with this, you can get a damn good precision in positioning
(a group at the ETH in Zürich uses this to get sub cm positioning with
standard LEA6-T modules, without any assisting technologies). I'm quite
sure this could be translated to timing presission as well.
(b) a quick, low-cost improvement in the timing instrumentation that can be made right away,
pending arrangements for techniques such as Two-Way Satellite synchronization.
Without knowing your exact setup, it's hard to say. But first i'd try to
improve the oscilator stability in the XL-AK (ie use a rubidium). Maybe
it would also need a firmware change to really make use of this enhancement.
Attila Kinali
--
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no
use without that foundation.
-- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
Perhaps take advantage of one of the numerous AM radio stations in the midwest that happen to be about half way between?
After some initial calibration that should be repeatable.
Tom Frank
On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:12 PM, paul swed wrote:
Boy I have to say that I agree with Bob. Nice and simple, but a boring drive
and heavens who has budgets for the tickets?
Looked at a map and though I could see either a dark fiber type connection
$$$$$, or radio at 400 miles. Transmitter reference at 200 miles could give
a common view. They grow really tall TV towers in the midwest. Certainly 50
MHz and reasonable power would be stable. I wonder about jitter in the
various technologies of the radio recvr. But with a CS/Rb ref. the system
could be quite good. Way back when ran a repeater at 145 Mhz for data with
directive antennas in Michigan. Ant at 60'. Very stable coverage at 140
Miles.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:22 PM, mike cook michael.cook@sfr.fr wrote:
Le 24/10/2011 19:03, Bob Camp a écrit :
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you
drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5 to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Better to take three.
_____________**
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
mailman/listinfo/time-nutshttps://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.
Agree with your thoughts on the AM's. Though as I suggested in a thread on
other topics sometimes there depth of modulation could be an issue.
By using the higher frequency and the TV tower you could control the
carrier completely.
Its a small antenna and reasonable power. More importantly low jitter. That
somehow might be important here. ;-)
Regards
Paul.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Thomas A Frank ka2cdk@cox.net wrote:
Perhaps take advantage of one of the numerous AM radio stations in the
midwest that happen to be about half way between?
After some initial calibration that should be repeatable.
Tom Frank
On Oct 24, 2011, at 2:12 PM, paul swed wrote:
Boy I have to say that I agree with Bob. Nice and simple, but a boring
drive
and heavens who has budgets for the tickets?
Looked at a map and though I could see either a dark fiber type
connection
$$$$$, or radio at 400 miles. Transmitter reference at 200 miles could
give
a common view. They grow really tall TV towers in the midwest. Certainly
50
MHz and reasonable power would be stable. I wonder about jitter in the
various technologies of the radio recvr. But with a CS/Rb ref. the system
could be quite good. Way back when ran a repeater at 145 Mhz for data
with
directive antennas in Michigan. Ant at 60'. Very stable coverage at 140
Miles.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 1:22 PM, mike cook michael.cook@sfr.fr wrote:
Le 24/10/2011 19:03, Bob Camp a écrit :
Hi
The "quick and dirty" way to improve the timing is pretty old school.
Toss a modern Cesium clock in the back of a car along with a bunch of
batteries. Drive it back and forth between Batavia and Soudan. If you
drive
fast, that should be about an 8 hour trip. A good Cesium should hold 5
to
10X better than the GPS is now doing.
Better to take three.
_____________**
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
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.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thomas A Frank ka2cdk@cox.net
Date: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Neutrino timing
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement time-nuts@febo.com
Perhaps take advantage of one of the numerous AM radio stations in the midwest that happen to be about half way between?
Lets way we could build a 5,000 foot tower, nearly a mile high. Such
a tower would have a direct line of sight out to only about 90 miles.
Yes it could transmit to greater distance but that is because the
radio wave bends, either ground waves or by refraction in the
atmosphere. Either way the path length is not predictable. And worse
there is likely some multi path too.
That is one of my projects, I'm slowly building tools to receive WWVB
(60KHz) and compare to "true" time. The goal is to learn something
about the atmosphere from how the propagation delay changes. But I
already know the delay changes and is "noisy"
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California