[time-nuts] TVB's accuracy/stability statement

[WB6BNQ]

Tom Van Baak wrote:

>
> snip
>
> ADEV is a good measure because you can make a stable standard
> more accurate if you need to, but you cannot make an accurate
> standard more stable.
>
> snip
>

Tom,

I am having a bit of a problem with your statement above.  While it is a
nice
catchy phrase and on the surface certainly seems proper, I think it
deserves
closer inspection.  The question really is the relationship between
accuracy and
stability.

To be fair lets limit the discussion to singular standards, meaning
specifically
not externally "steered" standards.  However, lets include the Rubidium
without
outside influence.  The Cesium is not considered because it is the
defined as the
standard reference.

The basis of my problem is in considering the Quartz or Rubidium, it
seems to me
that stability defines the degree of accuracy that can be obtained. 
Sure, you
can adjust the accuracy of this singular standard, but how long is it
going to
stay there ?  If the accuracy of the adjustment doesn't stay put, then
that
adjustment means little.

So, the question is how do you make a stand-a-lone standard more
accurate then
its level of stability ?

Bill....WB6BNQ