Ben wrote:
> Dave wrote:
>
>>Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
>>
>>>Hi David,
>>>
>>>On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 20:52:30 +0100
>>>Dave <nospam@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>>I think the word "Americans" is appropiate there, but I will comment no
>>futher.
>
>
> No such thing is appropriate! It's highly inappropriate, derogatory and
> wildly OT, at best. I for one take great offense at the implication.

I accept that. I should have perhaps said "America", since whilst as a
country the USA uses more energy per person (on average) than any other
country, that is not to say all Americans do.

>>The errors induced in the test equipment will not occur with a change of
>>air inlet temperature that occur for 100's of ms or probably seconds.
>>Putting the CPUs on/offline will not cause rapid changes in room
>>temperature, so timing is not an issue.
>>
>>Sorting out an algorithm might be.
>>
>>
>>>Whether this would have any effect on the room temperature remains to
>>>be seen, but it sounds like a fun way to waste some time if you've
>>>got time to waste :-)
>
>
> The whole thing sounds a bit susceptible to the Heisenberg Principle in
> a macro way Hope you have a descent oscillator in whatever's keeping
> those ticks for you.

Yes. One is an atomic oscillator (rubidium, I own), the other is an oven
controlled quartz locked to the 1 pulse per second ticks from a GPS
receiver. The device measuring, which is only measuring the *difference*
between the two atomic sources, does not have to be that accurate. Since
it only measures time differences. It's an HP 8370B time interval
counter, which is about the best affordable solution for this. It cost
over 20k $'s when new.