[time-nuts] Allan variance by sine-wave fitting
attila at kinali.ch
Tue Nov 28 03:27:11 EST 2017
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 23:50:22 +0100
Attila Kinali <attila at kinali.ch> wrote:
> > Every experimentalist suppose ergodicity on this kind of noise, otherwise
> > you get nowhere.
> Err.. no. Even if you assume that the spectrum tops off at some very
> low frequency and does not increase anymore, ie that there is a finite
> limit to noise power, even then ergodicity is not given.
> Ergodicity breaks because the noise process is not stationary.
> And assuming so for any kind of 1/f noise would be wrong.
Addendum: the reason why this is wrong is because assuming noise
is ergodic means it is stationary. But the reason why we have to
treat 1/f noise specially is exactly because it is not stationary.
I.e. we lose the one property in our model that we need to make
the model realistic.
<JaberWorky> The bad part of Zurich is where the degenerates
throw DARK chocolate at you.
More information about the time-nuts