Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Let's not jump the gun. (Score 1) 250

I suppose I mean that, from my perspective, I have all the functions that Aero would provide. If I so chose, this could include streaming to multiple users since several mythfrontend instances can talk simultaneously to the backend over a network. I do note the difference, however, in Aero being run by a company, not by the user.

Comment Re:Eventually... (Score 1) 169

Citation for the parent: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/329/5999/

n.b. the work [1] by Müller, Chu et al is related, but different, and the interpretation is strongly contested (e.g. [2])
[1] http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2010/02/17/gravitational_redshift/
[2] http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7311/full/nature09340.html

Comment Re:How do you measure how accurate it is? (Score 2) 169

1) You make two and see by how much they differ after a certain time. (Further reading, see Allan variance.)
2) As with all the base units, we must 'define' the second in terms of something physical, which we can measure, so that we can use this abstract idea in the real world. This real-world embodiment is imperfect, and it is an engineering challenge to make something which better approximates the idea. For illustration, consider the kilogram, which is defined by a lump of metal in Paris. In principle, chipping a bit off this block makes everything else weigh more in terms of kilograms, but we immediate recognise this as crazy and we can imagine a better physical embodiment of the ideal kilogram (indeed, efforts are under way to do just this). So it is with the second: the caesium clock is the best we've got so far, but it's just a physical embodiment of the ideal second, and we can strive to make a more accurate (with accuracy defined as in (1) above).

Comment Experimental work and some context (Score 2) 169

It's an exciting idea, and it's streaks ahead of 'traditional' microwave transition atomic clocks. These do not represent the state of the art, however, for which one should look at the experimentally demonstrated ~9e-18 accuracy by the Wineland group at NIST http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.4527v2 ; http://www.nist.gov/physlab/div847/grp10/ , or the Strontium ion clocks at NPL (Teddington, UK) Essentially, the higher the frequency, the more clicks you get in a certain time, and the more accurate your clock can be (the smaller an error one missed click would represent). The caesium atomic clock is about 10 GHz (1E10 Hz). Strontium is in the optical, so a few 100THz (1E14). Aluminium ions are at about 1PHz (1E15 Hz). This new proposal with Thorium is around 7.6eV, which is about 2PHz, so not a million miles away from the current, demonstrated, state of the art. Also... orbit of the neutron around the nucleus isn't a fair description of a magnetic dipole transition, which would more accurately be describes as a flip in the direction of the neutron's spin axis. :)
Robotics

Submission + - Drone helicopter lands on a moving trailer (suasnews.com)

garymortimer writes: "This automatic system for take-off, landing and deck-landing of UAVs is the fruit of the joint expertise of Thales and DCNS. Thales is responsible for the positioning system and its interface with the UAV system, the supply of a UAV demonstrator system and slaving of the flight path along a trajectory. DCNS is responsible for predicting the vessel motions, the harpoon system as well as the interface and integration with the vessel.

The D2AD automatic deck-landing system constitutes a key stage in the run-up to the use of UAV rotorcraft by naval forces, for operations over land and sea. It provides innovative high-performance solutions which meet operational needs. The availability of an automatic on-board take-off and landing system, without the need for an external pilot, opens up the possibility of intensive use of UAV rotorcraft, at minimum cost and a high level of safety."

Comment Re:Interesting (Score 1) 134

Add in shaking, and you're essentially describing simulated annealing.
Without the shaking, you'll quickly converge to a local minimum. With shaking, you explore the possibilities nearby and, provided you shake it just right, you eventually converge on the global minimum.
Simulated annealing is a really common approach when you have lots and lots of variables; in this example, the free parameters are the locations of each of the spheres. The authors even use this in their paper as a check.

Slashdot Top Deals

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...