Oh. This is new to me, I always thought both beams are affected.Tau wrote:(otherwise it would influence both beams, for example, not just one)
Well, this really pretty much rules out global or distant sources.
Oh. This is new to me, I always thought both beams are affected.Tau wrote:(otherwise it would influence both beams, for example, not just one)
hmmm. From the graphs, it looks to me like the interference has two main components. 1. a constant and pretty intense peak at .3 Frev, and 2. A varying component that looks like a mirror of the tune.Tau wrote:The hump scan they did today gives a lot of new info for wannabee hump hunters.
D'oh! thanks for the clarification.Tau wrote:The "intense peak" is the tune: it is supposed to be there.
11245 Hz I believe - they simply measure position of the beam every time a bunch passes the BLM.pixelmasseuse wrote:Anyone know what is the sampling rate of the data acquisition?