[time-nuts] Oscillator Phase Noise: A 50-Year Review
KA2WEU at aol.com
KA2WEU at aol.com
Sun Aug 7 12:32:02 EDT 2016
Here is another comment ;
this paper is too self-centered for it to be the reliable historical
report which we would like.
It seems that Edson did some great work before,
73 de Ulrich , and I agree with the statement
http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/vto.pdf
Vacuum tube oscillators
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
In a message dated 8/6/2016 9:02:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
time-nuts at febo.com writes:
Good morning,
yes I saw the reference but he did not point out what it was or
function,
This paper is more about people and events and very little since .......
Ulrich
In a message dated 8/6/2016 2:26:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
michaeljwouters at gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 9:34 AM, KA2WEU--- via time-nuts
<time-nuts at febo.com> wrote:
> Leeson produced a somewhat random selection of papers , omitting
important
> things like the sapphire based best in the word . This was not even
> referenced .
The reference [145] at the end of the sentence that mentions sapphire
oscillators also discusses a hybrid photonic-microwave oscillator that
incorporates a room-temperature sapphire oscillator so I think he
tried to cover both subjects with that single reference.
The paper has a misleading title. It suggests that it is a history of
the last 50 years, when it is about events roughly 50 years ago. The
abstract makes this clear though. So I didn't really expect to read
much about developments past 1970.
Cheers
Michael
On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 9:34 AM, KA2WEU--- via time-nuts
<time-nuts at febo.com> wrote:
> Some of the cited references are poor, modern non-linear mathematic is
kind
> of omitted . After all the oscillator phase noise speculation, I would
> have really liked to see at last a reference about the most modern
> measurements techniques and it validation. How do you calibrate a
phase
noise test
> system.
>
> Leeson produced a somewhat random selection of papers , omitting
important
> things like the sapphire based best in the word . This was not even
> referenced .
>
> I think he is really out of it .
>
> 73 de N1UL
>
>
>
> In a message dated 8/5/2016 7:11:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> john at miles.io writes:
>
>>
>> Very selected and incomplete references and the equally important
>> question
>> of measurements strangely not covered
>>
>> 73 de N 1 UL
>>
>
> I suppose he could write an equally-lengthy article on measurements
alone,
> but leaving out the post-1970s history entirely was a little
> disappointing. It was strange to hit "ctrl-f Rohde" and see only one
reference in the
> bibliography. Same for "Hewlett." "Rubiola" brings up one hit (but no
> citations) and "Stein" brings up none at all.
>
> -- john, KE5FX
> Miles Design LLC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at 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 at 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 at febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
More information about the time-nuts
mailing list