[time-nuts] Oscillator Phase Noise: A 50-Year Review

Bob Camp kb8tq at n1k.org
Sun Aug 7 23:13:26 UTC 2016


Hi

I have seen several other attempts in the past few decades to write “history” papers in the context 
of IEEE proceedings. They (unfortunately) always seem to turn into a set of personal recollections 
rather than a proper history. It would be *very* useful to have a complete trace of who did what and
when in some of these areas. We seem to be very poor at doing all the (very) heavy lifting involved
in getting that done. This is hardly unique to this field. It is very typical in a lot of tech areas, and has
been for at least a few hundred years ….

Bob


> On Aug 7, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Magnus Danielson <magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org> wrote:
> 
> Well, it is nothing but his personal recollection of the events, so that is expected. It represents one voice of several. Better have that on record than it being lost. But it is not the complete story. That would have to be collected over a much larger set of people.
> 
> BTW. Ref 44 in this paper is one of Edson's articles.
> 
> I've read Chapter 15 of Edson's book, and it provides a model, but fail to include flicker noise, which is in Leesons model. It is a straight-forward extension thought. I don't have access to any of his articles, except the one-page letter that Rick linked.
> 
> There is surely more work to be done to build a more comprehensive detail of events, show where ideas came up, was re-invented, incorporated and extended. Edson clearly contributed.
> 
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> 
> On 08/07/2016 06:32 PM, KA2WEU--- via time-nuts wrote:
>> 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.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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_lists.febo.com mailing list