Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 1:37 PM:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then, for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt clock
adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of the
pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring resistance
shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum. The fact that
the swing is shorter and the second order circular error will create a
tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The real change is
from the added spring constant changing the first order effect in the
pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational constant is
effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter amplitude
and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.

I understand perfectly and explained it for you in excruciating detail. The
change in phase of the Shortt clock slave pendulum is due to the FIRST ORDER
change in the effective gravitational constant in the pendulum equation by
engaging the leaf spring. While the reduced amplitude of the swing *will*
cause a SECOND ORDER effect in the motion of the pendulum, it will be MUCH
SMALLER than the FIRST ORDER effect.

What part of this do you not understand or not agree with?

--

Rick C

On 06/08/2017 18:37, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular
error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then, for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt
clock adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of
the pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring
resistance shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum.
The fact that the swing is shorter and the second order circular error
will create a tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The
real change is from the added spring constant changing the first order
effect in the pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational
constant is effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter
amplitude and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.



Nothing in any of rick's posts he does understand the above, or anything
else. Plus, what you have posted is exactly what I explained to you
earlier.

It is clear you are on the edge of resorting to your normal abuse.

On 06/08/2017 18:52, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 1:37 PM:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular
error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then, for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt clock
adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of the
pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring
resistance
shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum. The fact
that
the swing is shorter and the second order circular error will create a
tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The real change is
from the added spring constant changing the first order effect in the
pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational constant is
effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter amplitude
and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.

I understand perfectly and explained it for you in excruciating detail.
The change in phase of the Shortt clock slave pendulum is due to the
FIRST ORDER change in the effective gravitational constant in the
pendulum equation by engaging the leaf spring. While the reduced
amplitude of the swing *will* cause a SECOND ORDER effect in the motion
of the pendulum, it will be MUCH SMALLER than the FIRST ORDER effect.

What part of this do you not understand or not agree with?


It's not that I do not understand nor disagree with you, it's that
you're off on a complete tangent to what I was suggesting, and
do not realise it.

On 06/08/2017 19:15, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
On 06/08/2017 18:52, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 1:37 PM:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the
Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular
error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then, for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt clock
adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of the
pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring
resistance
shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum. The fact
that
the swing is shorter and the second order circular error will create a
tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The real change is
from the added spring constant changing the first order effect in the
pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational constant is
effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter
amplitude
and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.

I understand perfectly and explained it for you in excruciating
detail. The change in phase of the Shortt clock slave pendulum is due
to the FIRST ORDER change in the effective gravitational constant in
the pendulum equation by engaging the leaf spring. While the reduced
amplitude of the swing *will* cause a SECOND ORDER effect in the
motion of the pendulum, it will be MUCH SMALLER than the FIRST ORDER
effect.

What part of this do you not understand or not agree with?


It's not that I do not understand nor disagree with you, it's that
you're off on a complete tangent to what I was suggesting, and
do not realise it.



No he isn't, you are not keeping up.

On 06/08/2017 19:16, Brian Reay wrote:
On 06/08/2017 19:15, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
On 06/08/2017 18:52, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 1:37 PM:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the
Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular
error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit
occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then,
for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt
clock
adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of the
pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring
resistance
shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum. The fact
that
the swing is shorter and the second order circular error will create a
tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The real
change is
from the added spring constant changing the first order effect in the
pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational constant is
effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular
error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter
amplitude
and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.

I understand perfectly and explained it for you in excruciating
detail. The change in phase of the Shortt clock slave pendulum is due
to the FIRST ORDER change in the effective gravitational constant in
the pendulum equation by engaging the leaf spring. While the reduced
amplitude of the swing *will* cause a SECOND ORDER effect in the
motion of the pendulum, it will be MUCH SMALLER than the FIRST ORDER
effect.

What part of this do you not understand or not agree with?


It's not that I do not understand nor disagree with you, it's that
you're off on a complete tangent to what I was suggesting, and
do not realise it.



No he isn't, you are not keeping up.

If he's not keeping up then he needs Viagra.

mm0fmf wrote:
On 06/08/2017 19:16, Brian Reay wrote:
On 06/08/2017 19:15, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
On 06/08/2017 18:52, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 1:37 PM:
On 06/08/2017 17:18, rickman wrote:
Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote on 8/6/2017 5:26 AM:
On 05/08/2017 23:25, rickman wrote:
You seem to be completely misunderstanding the operation of the
Shortt
clock. The slave pendulum has no need for correction of circular
error.

I'm sorry, but you totally misunderstood what I was saying, which was
that because all pendulums exhibit circular error, when the hit
occurs
in the hit and miss synchroniser and foreshortens the swing, then,
for
that half-cycle, and only that half cycle, the frequency is
changed, as it must be.

Just as in the electronic PLL, instantaneous changes of phase have
instantaneous changes of frequency, no matter how short lived,
associated with them.

What you say about frequency vs. phase is true and how the Shortt
clock
adjusts phase, but it has nothing to do with circular error of the
pendulum. The correction of the phase is from the added spring
resistance
shortening the time as well as the travel of the pendulum. The fact
that
the swing is shorter and the second order circular error will create a
tiny error in the timing is pretty much irrelevant. The real
change is
from the added spring constant changing the first order effect in the
pendulum equation. The coefficient of the gravitational constant is
effectively changed by the spring.

Is that more clear?


You continue to misunderstand. Any pendulum swinging with circular
error
speeds up for shorter amplitude; speeding up means increased frequency.
Therefore, for the half cycle inwhich there is a hit, a shorter
amplitude
and hence instantaneous higher frequency exists.

I understand perfectly and explained it for you in excruciating
detail. The change in phase of the Shortt clock slave pendulum is due
to the FIRST ORDER change in the effective gravitational constant in
the pendulum equation by engaging the leaf spring. While the reduced
amplitude of the swing *will* cause a SECOND ORDER effect in the
motion of the pendulum, it will be MUCH SMALLER than the FIRST ORDER
effect.

What part of this do you not understand or not agree with?


It's not that I do not understand nor disagree with you, it's that
you're off on a complete tangent to what I was suggesting, and
do not realise it.



No he isn't, you are not keeping up.

If he's not keeping up then he needs Viagra.


I expect that Mrs Evans has been putting bromide in his tea since shortly
after they got married.

--
STC / M0TEY /
http://twitter.com/ukradioamateur

On 08/06/17 17:34, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:


It relates to the abysmal lack of technical acumen amongst those
who are today's would-br radio amateurs, most of whom are
really CBers-masquerading-as-radio-hams, identifiable by their
M3 and M6 callsigns past and present.


Perhaps you are right, but does that matter ?. Might not all have
the tech ability of the past, but just as keen on operating and
the social aspects of the hobby. We can't all be tech experts, but
there are still plenty of deep tech areas for those interested.

Seems a bit of an elitist attitude really, speaking as one who
built his first one valve set at 11 and always more interested
in the tech side than operating...

Chris

On 06/08/2017 19:58, Chris wrote:
On 08/06/17 17:34, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:


It relates to the abysmal lack of technical acumen amongst those
who are today's would-br radio amateurs, most of whom are
really CBers-masquerading-as-radio-hams, identifiable by their
M3 and M6 callsigns past and present.


Perhaps you are right, but does that matter ?. Might not all have
the tech ability of the past, but just as keen on operating and
the social aspects of the hobby. We can't all be tech experts, but
there are still plenty of deep tech areas for those interested.

Seems a bit of an elitist attitude really, speaking as one who
built his first one valve set at 11 and always more interested
in the tech side than operating...

Elitism, yes, and something to be jealously guarded.

AIUI, there are already countries where only commercially
available rigs may be used, and by flooding this country
with technical numbskulls risks the powers-that-would-be
perceiving we all as operators only.

Amateur radio is primarily a technical pursuit with operation
being a trivially simple follow-on; so trivially simple, in fact,
that it is a nonsense to examine based upon operating. The 5-year-old
with her smartphone does not have to pass an exam on her operating
capability!

As to your last comment, Yes, more technician than operative,
I still maintain a logbook, with all test
and CQ calls logged, and yet after 47 years I'm only just half way
through my 2nd log book.

On 06/08/2017 20:18, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
Amateur radio is primarily a technical pursuit with operation
being a trivially simple follow-on; so trivially simple, in fact,
that it is a nonsense to examine based upon operating.

If operating is so trivially simple why couldn't you tune the PA in the
radio you bought? Even CBers can do that.

mm0fmf wrote:

On 06/08/2017 20:18, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
Amateur radio is primarily a technical pursuit with operation
being a trivially simple follow-on; so trivially simple, in fact,
that it is a nonsense to examine based upon operating.

If operating is so trivially simple why couldn't you tune the PA in the
radio you bought? Even CBers can do that.

Do you need to trade silly (and, yes, typically junior school stuff)
abuse rehearsed from interminable local arguments all over the Internet?
Why not keep this childish repetitive stuff for ukra where it "belongs"?
You *are* an adult, aren't you? Gareth's silly comments are quite
obviously silly comments without you clutttering the place up arguing
with him about it. If you think his comments about operating being too
easy and of no interest are inaccurate, why not say so, at least it will
soon be obvious he is in a minority of one? I for instance have very
little interest in operating but agree that it is an essential and
worthy part of the hobby (and not so easy as Gareth thinks) so why not
stick to the actual issue when discussing it internationally and outside
of the AR groups?



--

Roger Hayter