From:
Is this real?
From:
Is this real?
Slow as molasses. I had <20 ps edges from my antenna-coupled tunnel junctions 20 years ago.
Plus it seems to be a narrowband pyroelectric, which has usability problems due to being intrinsically AC coupled.
Fun project though.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Phil Hobbs snipped-for-privacy@electrooptical.net wrote: |-------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Jan Panteltje snipped-for-privacy@comet.invalid wrote: | |> From: | |>
Dear Doctor Hobbs, Bah! I work on an area of gamma-ray astronomy with a proposed standard measurment taking some 10**6 seconds (i.e. nearly
12 days)!Cheers :) (S.
That’s even longer than it took me to document the sub-20 ps response, which was limited by my Tek 11801C sampling scope. I was using a lamp-pumped pulsed Nd:YAG, 20 ps @20 Hz, driving a seeded optical parametric generator and difference frequency generator, which was continuously tunable from 400 nm to 10 microns with a couple of narrow gaps. A beautiful thing, but all that stuff going on meant that it had a pulse to pulse variation of about plus or -10%.
Sampling scopes give you one point per trigger, so one trace took 25.6 seconds, and averaging 100 traces to control the noise took that up to over
40 minutes per trace.So I feel your pain. ;)
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
I was just going to say, talk to Phil, he can do that a lot faster :-)
[...]Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required