[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