138 IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December

was pointed out earlier that readings repeated in rapid
sequence with little or no disturbance of the equipment
cannot be expected to reveal the real errors. For exam-
ple, a gage block may be used to "set" a very sensitive
gaging device. The user compares two items and is im-
pressed by the sensitivity of the device. A demand is
then made for better standards.
What is called for is a little ingenuity to devise means
that will disclose the real magnitude of the errors in the
measurements. Closely similar test blocks should be
periodically resubmitted for measurement. Near equal-
ity of the test blocks is needed to make identification
difficult. The schedule of tests should be prepared in
some artful or random sequence.
The following example2 illustrates the point that
operators calibrating clinical thermometers could "re-
peat"
peat their
thi readings extremely well even when the
repeat reading followed the reading of 23 other ther-
mometers. The average difference between repeat read-
ings was 0.0102°-one twentieth of a scale division. The
average of 24 readings should have an error of about
0.01/V/24 or 0.002. The holder and the 24 thermometers
were set aside for a few days and then reread. Again the
superb agreement between closely repeated readings was
observed. Unfortunately the average of the readings
shifted by more than 0.02°, i.e., an order of magnitude
greater than the expected error. This phenomenon was
demonstrated over and over again with different op-
erators and different sets of thermometers. Operators
shifted relative to one another as much as 0.04° when
their averages on the same thermometers were com-
pared. There is little doubt that even more startling
contrasts between real and apparent errors would ap-
pear when the environment itself has to be carefully
controlled to minimize errors. Some investigations
should be made in order to ascertain whether some of the
demands made for better standards are really justified.
CONCLUSION
At every stage in the hierarchy of calibrating labora-
tories, there is a laboratory that has on a bench three
objects of interest:
1) A standard item from the echelon above with a
certificate
2) An assembly of equipment appropriate for com-
paring items, and
and
h rednseteeywl.vnwe A collection
3) ehlnblw
collection of items awaiting calibration for the
echelon below.
One safe procedure for all calibrating laboratories would
be to quote the uncertainty in its standard, to state the
uncertainty in its comparison process, and to tell its
customers that the simple sum of these two components
is the only safe measure of the possible error in the
value assigned to the item just calibrated.
It should not be overlooked that the uncertainty
stated on the certificate accompaning the standard
sometimes includes a "stability" allowance. On the
basis of broad experience a reasonable estimate of the
drift effects can be made. When the uncertainty as-
signed to the standard includes such an allowance, this
information should also be given.

Thle Speed of Light*

A. G. McNISHt

Summary-Numerous measurements of the speed of light pub- INTRODUCTION

lished during the last 30 years lead to widely divergent results as
compared with the assigned experimental uncertainties. Because of r HE SPEED OF LIGHT is a classic subject for
wide diversity in the methods employed in the measurements, all scientific papers, but not all papers on this subject
of the data may not be combined effectively in a grand average. -"are classics. The speed of light is important to our
Sufficient data had been obtained by the geodimeter method to scientific knowledge and our engineering practice. It
group them and derive a statistical estimate of the uncertainty in the
speed of light by this method. This result, and conclusions reached intrigues the theorist and invites the experimentalist
from careful examination of several experiments, leads to the con- Naturally great interest attaches to the value assigned
clusion that the value 299,792.5 km which has been internationally to this important physical constant. The interest is
adopted for use in radio propagation and geodetic work is very close particularly high now because of the use of electromag-
to the best value and not likely to be in error by as much as one part netic radiation for locating the position of bodies in
in one million.
outer space.
* Received September 4, 1962. Presented at the 1962 Interna- Oeproeo hspprist e ot h rsn
tional Conference on Precision Electromagnetic Measurements as state of our knowledge on this subject. The author will
Paper No. 3.2. dsusterlaiiyo aiu esrmnsi c
t Metrology Division, National Bureau of Standards, Wash-dsusterlaiiyo aiu esrmnsi c
ington, D. C. 'cordance with his own judgment and conclude from this

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
 1962 McNish: The Speed of Light 139
within what confines the correct value is likely to be. The best estimate of what the mean would have been if
The other purpose is to show by example, though not a very large number of readings had been taken is x?
by precept, the procedures by which one may draw the and the best estimate of the standard error o- of the
most reasonable conclusions from disparate experi- mean is s/-/n. One may then conclude that if a very
mental results. large number of readings were taken under the same
Several dozen, independent or semi-independent, conditions, and the true mean closely approached, the
values for the speed of light are now available, ranging probability that the value obtained from the limited
from Roemer's original value of about 230 megameters sample differs from this true value by no more than o-
sec-1 to Fizeau's value of 313 megameters sec-1. Atten- is 0.32; no more than 2u, 0.05; no more than 3u, 0.0027,
tion will be confined in this paper to those measure- etc. As the mean value of the readings may be combined
ments for which the estimated experimental errors are with the constants of the equipment to give the value
less than 10 ppm (parts per million). Of these there are of the unknown quantity, similarly the estimated af of
over two dozen of which he knows. readings may be combined with those constants to give
the estimated a of the value obtained for the unknown
DEFINITION OF ERRORS provided the constants of the equipment are known exactly
At this time what is meant by an estimated experi- or the uncertainty in them is negligible. This condition is
mental error should be defined. In most measurement rarely satisfied in a complicated experiment. The evalu-
processes repeated readings are taken on some quantity ation of the uncertainty in these constants and deciding
which might be, for example, the reading of an output if any constants have been overlooked is the major prob-
meter. Each of these readings when appropriately com- lem in estimating the accuracy of any experiment.
bined with "constants" of the equipment yields a meas- Take, for example, a determination of the speed of
ure of the quantity whose magnitude is being sought. light. In its simplest form this experiment consists of
These readings are likely to differ from each other, and sending a pulse of light from a station A, reflecting it
consequently the various measures of the unknown from station B back to A, and observing the time inter-
quantity being sought will differ. If the readings ob- val between its emission and its reception. The speed is
tained combine with the constants of the system lin- then given by 2AB/t. Since the time t is very short for
early or if the deviations in the readings are small, it most realizable values of the distance AB, and since
does not matter if the unknown quantity is calculated the pulse leaves and returns to A at a prodigious speed,
individually from each reading and then averaged or if the timing problem appears to be the major difficulty
the readings are averaged first and the unknown then of the experiment, and it is. But since the time is very
calculated. short, once the stations A and B have been established,
One may treat these individual readings statistically, the experimenter takes many observations on the travel
average them and calculate the standard deviation of time t, hoping that, by statistical principles, the uncer-
the readings. If a fairly large number of such readings tainty for the mean value of the travel time will be re-
is obtained, say over 30, a fairly good estimate can be duced to negligible proportions. Measuring the dis-
obtained of what would result from a very large number tance A:B is really laborious. Perhaps the experimenter
of observations under the same conditions. measures it once or even twice. There is nothing com-
Reviewing briefly some elementary concepts which pelling to the imagination of young scientists in meas-
apply for a normal distribution.' urement of distances along the earth's surface. The
If x1, x2, , x. are the individual readings, then Egyptians did a tolerably good job of it thousands of
the mean is years ago. So the distance AB is measured once or
n twice. There are insufficient observations to reliably
x = (1/n) E xi estimate the error in the distance measurement, which
contributes as much, proportionally, to the error in
speed of light as does the error in measurement of the
time interval. Then there are other constants by which
the ratio 2A B/t must be multiplied to get the true value
s = [11(n -1)] x-i 2 of the speed of light in vacuo, a correction for refractive
index of the medium, for group velocity, etc., and possi-
bly corrections for the imperfections of our knowledge
of the physics involved. (The author should not care to
1 While the remarks which follow apply rigorously for a normal have anyone infer from the foregoing that these consid-
distribution the principles involved may be considered valid in treat- erations have been ignored in any of the measurements
ment of data from many physical experiments because of the central
limit theorem which may be stated: "Whatever be the distributions he proposes to discuss.)
of the independent variables (v-subject to certain very general A combination of these errors, the standard error of
conditions-the sum t = , + * * +en iS asymptotically normal."
In many physical experiments the over-all error tmay be considered the mean of the readings of the "output meter," com-
as the sum of a large number of errors tz', and therefore the errors bined in quadrature with the estimates of errors in the
from a number of similar experiments may be considered to be nor-
mally distributed. constants, to give an over-all error is what is meant by

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
140 IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December
the estimated experimental error. In estimating the by twice the assigned error. But there is only a negligibly
error of the constants in this sense, the author advocates small chance that the actual error is three or four times
an estimate (of which the example from geodesy which the estimated error, unless someone has blundered. This
follows is illustrative) that expresses the variability ex- is an example of the extent to which one can go in esti-
pected in a series of truly independent repetitions in- mating errors of the "constant" terms where no other
volving the constants or other factors under study. information is given than that the measurements were
There is a certain amount of fuzziness inevitable here performed by competent personnel. If the experimenter
in whether one regards the extreme limits of variation completely describes his work then the post facto evalu-
that are expected as being 3o limits, 2o- limits, or what- ator can have greater confidence in his assessment of
ever else. One should vigorously avoid a tendency to error.
"play safe" and overestimate one's errors. In any case, The assessment of the errors for some constants may
one arrives at a value to be henceforth treated as the be insidious. If the speed of light has been measured in
standard deviation for the factor involved. This places atmosphere the observed speed must be multiplied by a
these somewhat subjective uncertainties and the statis- "constant" to correct to vacuum. The formulas for cor-
tically calculated errors on a comparable basis.2 This recting for index of refraction of the atmosphere for
procedure, however, is not valid for assessing the uncer- optical wavelengths are accurately known and may here
tainty of an incorrect method (e.g., where the pro- be regarded as without error. To apply them one must
cedure has an inherent bias because of the model as- know the barometric pressure, humidity, and tempera-
sumed or due to the neglect of important factors). ture for the entire path length. The effect of these param-
eters on the speed of light c in normal atmosphere is as
ASSESSMENT OF ERRORS follows: a difference of 1 ppm in c results from a differ-
Since there is usually no straightforward statistical ence in barometric pressure of 2.5 mm of mercury, a dif-
procedure to guide the investigator in assigning errors ference in temperature of 1°C, or a difference of 10 per
to the constants the process is fraught with danger and cent in relative humidity at a temperature of 22°C.
the investigator is filled with misgivings. However, con- While it is easy to measure these parameters with more
siderable experience in the field of measurement enables than adequate accuracy at either end of the baseline,
one to arrive at estimates of the errors to be assigned to what is wanted is their values all along the path of the
the constants with considerable confidence. For ex- light beam. Lacking such information one can confi-
ample, extensive experience in geodesy has indicated deritly estimate the error in this "constant" only if he
that a baseline extending several kilometers along the knows the micro-meteorology of the particular region in-
surface of the earth can be measured by an experienced volved, the time of the observations, weather condi-
team with an experimental error of about 1 ppm, not tions, etc. Taking the average of the readings for the
including the error in calibration of the tapes used. The travel time does not eliminate uncertainty in assessing
tape laboratory at the National Bureau of Standards the error from this source, for the average value of the
works with an error of about 0.4 ppm in measuring a refractive index along the light path may differ con-
tape in terms of the international meter. One who is at- sistently from the average of the value at the terminal
tempting to evaluate the experimental work of another points. The standard deviation, if other errors are small,
is, therefore, justified in assuming, if a several kilometer of the individual readings is an indication of the varia-
baseline used in a speed of light experiment has been bility in the value of the "constant" for refractive index.
carefully measured by experienced geodesists, that the But one may not conclude that the highest value and
error is slightly over 1 ppm. If the baseline is about 10 the lowest value for the travel time even bracket the
km or so long, one is justified in assuming the error is true value at a given location, although it is highly
less than 1 ppm since the precision of the taping opera- likely that they do, if observations have been made
tion increases as the square root of the distance. There under many different meteorological conditions.
is one important fact to be considered. Though most of Two types of problems have been discussed in detail
the errors in taping a baseline are equally likely to be in assessing the errors of the "constants," one in which
positive or negative some, such as misalignment of the an estimate may be made with fair confidence and one
tape and the effect of wind blowing the tape, always in which the estimate is associated with serious doubt.
tend to make the measured value too long. All the problems involved in assessing the errors in the
These assessments of error are not trifling guesses "constants" of the simple experiment described have not
but considered estimates. It must be recognized that been discussed there are some assessment problems
there is areasonable chance, about 1 in 20, that the true which are even more insidious than the last one
length of the baseline may differ from its stated value described.
2
2While the author regards this point of view as fully warranted in
.
~~~~~~~~~~EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
examining and evaluating the present question and similar ones, Before going to the record, the author should like to
other points of view should be taken in calibration procedures where
uniformity of measurement is of utmost importance. state categorically, in case there is any need to now,

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
1962 McNish: The Speed of Light 141
that the various speculations which have been offered DESIGNATION METHOD
over the past three decades to explain the disparity in u S
CUTKOSKY- THMSR
GTHUWAS
_______ RU
observed values for the speed of light are without basis GB G
in theory or experiment. The concept that c is variable us ,____l Sh
with time as compared w;th our standards of length and GB
time is preposterous. That c (in vacuo) is frequency de- AU
pendent is without theoretical foundation and contrary AU .
to experimental evidence. ESSEN T CR
Fig. 1 represents two dozen measurements of the FROOME MI
speed of light, the estimated errors of which fall within Sw G
the limits of + 1 in 105. The experiments have been FROOME ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SW __G
MI
ordered according to the value of c obtained. The hori- sw
AUG
G
zontal lines represent the errors (somewhat roughly esti- SW G
mated) which have been assigned to the experimental us Sh
values. The method used in each experiment is indicated us G_,__
in symbols at the right, the experimenter (or the country us |t Sh
in which the experiment was performed for nonlabora- FLORMAS RI
tory measurements) to the left. In assigning errors to 1 X D
the geodimeter measurements the author accepted the 299190 91 92 93 94 95 96
weights which Bergstrand [14] assigned to them and, KILOMETERS PER SECOND
having painstakingly assessed the error of one of these Fig. 1-Representative recent measurements of speed of light with
estimated standard errors. G-Geodimeter of Bergstrand; MI-
geodimeter experiments (GB, c = 299,792.4), the author Microwave Interferometer; Sh-Shoran; CR-Cavity Resonator;
assigned the errors for the other geodimeter experiments RI-Radio Interferometer; RU-Ratio of Units. Initials at left
indicate countries in which geodimeter observations were per-
in accordance with Bergstrand's weights. formed, names are those of experimenters.
This is not a rigorous procedure, but what more can
one do in the limited space of human life when some- curate than others, elemental measurements which may
times the only literature reference is "private communi- constitute a considerable source of the error in one
cation"? However, it is the author's guess that the errors method may constitute only a minor source in another.
assigned to the geodimeter experiments are not likely Since c is a speed, its measurement requires only the
to be in error by as much as a factor of two. For the me,tsurement of a length and a time interval to ascer-
nongeodimeter experiments the author has accepted the tain its value in units defined by our accepted standards.
experimenter's own evaluation of the error, modified by Both of these quantities can be measured with an ac-
the author's own judgment when he thought it appro- curacy approaching a part in 10. Therefore, it should
priate, coupled with such additional information as he be possible to measure c with comparable accuracy. But
was able to glean from private communication. in assessing the accuracy with which one may measure
The results are obtained from six highly independent a length or a time interval, one must consider what
methods of measurement which are subject to different length and what time interval is to be measured. The
kinds of systematic errors, that is, errors in most of the length of a block of wood cannot be measured as ac-
"constants" are completely unrelated. There is no evi- curately as a steel gage block nor the lifetime of an ex-
dence that any one of the methods leads to a signifi- cited atom as accurately as the period of a satellite.
cantly different value for c as compared with its assigned No one has as yet reduced the measurement of c to
error. This gives considerable assurance that no im- its pristine state although we seem to be on the verge
portant constant has been overlooked in assessing the of doing so. Our recent and present methods of measure-
errors of the individual measurements. In at least one ment are all corrupted by perturbing effects which pre-
pair of results there is interdependence-Bergstrand's vent us from achieving the high accuracy inherent in
geodimeter value (SW, c = 299,793 + 2), which is his the determination of c. The contribution to the over-all
earlier value with corrections applied, appears to have error in c from these perturbing effects in each of the
been averaged into the mean for his later value (SW, various methods is what will be treated next.
c =299,793.0 + 0.3). The value was included in the plot All of these methods are subject to errors of the type
for illustrative purposes. that been have described. They all involve the reading
The details of the various methods will not be dis- of some output meter or its equivalent, perhaps several.
cussed because they are adequately described in the ref- While the readings of the output meter may be repeated
erences, but the author will succinctly point out the a large number of times until the experimenter can cal-
principal features of each method and enumerate what culate that the precision of the mean of the readings is
appear to be the major sources of error in each method. very great, he may not conclude that the over-all experi-
Because some of the methods admit of procedures which mental error is comparably small because of the uncer-
at the present stage of the art are inherently more ac- tainty of the "constants."

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
142 IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December
DISCUSSION OF METHODS radio receivers are set up with their antennas a meas-
Geodimeter Method ured distance apart and two transmitters operating at
the same frequency at distances along the baseline ex-
This is a modern version of Galileo's method. Galileo tension so that the receivers are in the far field of the
stationed two men on distant hilltops at night, each transmitters. The phase difference at the two receivers
with a lantern. A was to uncover his lantern, and B to is measured by heterodyning the signal from each of the
uncover his as soon as he saw the light. Then A was to transmitters separately with that from a third trans-
measure the time interval which elapsed before he saw mitter on a different frequency. From knowledge of the
the light from B. The eye was quicker than the hand, the distance between the receivers in wavelengths and frac-
experiment failed. Fizeau reduced the method to prac- tions thereof and the taped distance, and the frequency
tice by his toothed-wheel experiment, Michelson im- of the two transmitters, the value of c is calculated.
proved it with his rotating mirror, and Bergstrand mod- Major sources of error in the experiment as it was per-
ernized it with electronics. Since the geodimeter is an formed are in the measurement of distance contamina-
extremely useful instrument for the geodesist, many tion of the wanted signal by pickup in the cables and
experiments have been carried out with it to ascertain tion from nearby bjects, an tie index cor
rdainfo eryojcs n ercieidxcr
how accurately it can be used to nmeasure baselines
whowh haccrately
which have also itecanbeusedto
been measured measured bdeinpes
withh geodetic tapes.
rection for the atmosphere. The first of these could have
been reduced considerably; the second could be reduced,
Conversely, since the taped lengths of all of the base- but because of the wavelength used (2 m), could not be
lines are known, each experiment constitutes a meas- shrunk to negligible proportions without elaborate pro-
urement of c. cedures. The refractive index correction is one of the
The principal sources of error in this experiment are miost serious limitations because the index required is
the length of the baseline in meters (1 m = 1,650,763.73 not that along the line of sight but an effective refrac-
wavelengths of a certain line in the Kr 86 spectrum) and tive index of a region extending several wavelengths
the correction for index of refraction of the atmosphere above the earth.
along the light path. As geodimeter measurements are
increasingly refined, increased attention must be given
to the effective color of the light, which includes the color
sensitivity of the phototube in addition to the color of Though similar in principle of operation to the radio
the transimitted light. Over very long paths atmosphere interferometer, the microwave interferometer may be
absorption appreciably affects the color of the light. The operated in a laboratory under controlled conditions.
speed of light in the atmosphere changes by about 1 Three experiments have been performed with continued
ppm for a change of 20 nanometers in the wavelength of improvement in method and reduction in error. In the
the light. By this method the group speed of light is first two experiments discussed here a frequency of 24
measured, but the conversion from group speed to Gc was used, in the third a frequency of 72 Gc, nearly
phase speed rests on a firm theoretical basis. 500 times as great as was used in the radio interferom-
eter. Instead of having to measure phase differences at
Shoran Method fixed receivers, in this case the receivers (or, in the first
The shoran method is similar to the geodimeter experiment, the reflector) could be set for nulls which
method and subject, therefore, to nearly the same were very sharp and the distance between the null posi-
sources of error. A transmitter and a receiver are carried tions measured, giving the wavelength. Since the wave
in an aeroplane and the light (pulses of radio waves at fronts produced by the microwave horns were not ex-
300 Mc) is transmitted to and returned from two trans- actly spherical, diffraction corrections had to be applied.
ponder stations on the ground at a known separation. In the earlier experiments the diffraction corrections
It is the plane-ground time delay which is measured but were considerable but in the last, owing to the higher
this is reducible to the geodetic surface. Since the base- frequency employed, they were small. In the earlier ex-
lines required are very long, they cannot be measured periments corrections for index of refraction were com-
by taping but must be determined by triangulation and puted from pressure, temperature, and humidity meas-
hence are not as accurate as taped bases. Also, since the urements, in the last experiment the index was measured
path is through a less accessible part of the atmosphere, with a refractometer operating at the same frequency.
it is more difficult to determine the parameters for The major source of estimated systematic error in the
calculating the refractive index. The radio waves are last experiment is the length standard used expressed
highly monochromatic so that there is no color problem. in cadmium wavJelengths. The second largest, half as
This method also yields the group speed. great, is the index of refraction correction.
Radio Interferometer Method Microwave Cavity Method
Distinct from the two preceding methods, the radio If the transmitting and receiving horns of the micro-
interferometer yields directly the phase speed. Two wave interferometer were enclosed in aconducting tube,

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
1962
the experiment would be transformed into a microwave
cavity experiment. The wavelengths would no longer
be the free-space wavelengths but the distances be-
tween the nodes of the modes of electric oscillation of
the cavity-like acoustic oscillations of an organ pipe. Of
course, the microwave horns can now be dispensed with
since the electromagnetic energy can be introduced into
the cavity through small apertures or probes. One end
of the cavity is closed and the other end adjustable by
a piston so that the cavity may be tuned to a given fre-
quency or an oscillator may be tuned to one of the reso-
nance modes of the cavity. The inherent difficulties of
the method lie in determining the diameter of the cav-
ity for, as every metrologist knows, length measure-
ments are difficult when shape is involved. But we are
concerned here with the electric diameter of the cavity
since the electromagnetic radiation penetrates into the
walls so that the electric size of the cavity is somewhat
larger than the actual size. Theoretically, this correc-
tion is achieved by a constant factor 1+1/2Q where
Q= r/log dec. But this may not be the proper correc-
tion since the resistivity of the surface of the cavity
walls cannot be known sufficiently well.
Ratio of Units Method
This is an indirect determination of the speed but a
method of such theoretical significance that it deserves
special consideration. The method is based on the the-
oretical concept that an impedance having a value of
one unit in the electrostatic system has a value of c2
units when measured in the electromagnetic system.
The problem is to construct a capacitor whose capaci-
tance can be calculated accurately and an inductor
whose inductance can be calculated accurately. Such
experiments are performed in national standardizing
laboratories to establish the value of resistance stand-
ards, not to determine c, which is a byproduct. (A value
for c must be assumed in deriving the resistance unit in
the capacitor experiment.) The experiments are very
difficult and laborious. The major sources for the esti-
mated error are an uncertainty in the geometric factor
for the capacitor and in the diameter at which the cur-
rent flows in the inductor. The geometric diameter of
the inductor is adequately known. Thus in this method,
as inin the
as
cavlty method, the
the cavity method, the problem of measuring
problem of measuring
shape is critical together with the problem of collating
The author would not like to give the impression that this
method depends on the esu and emu systems. It depends upon a
fundamental principle of physics relating the forces hetween electric
charges at rest and in motion with respect to the system of reference.
The results may he equally well developed in the MKSA system as
follows.
The capacitance of a capacitor and the inductance of an inductor averages
are given hy C= eoL1k, and £. =MuoLlk,, where E0 and ,uo are called the'' '
"permittivity and permeahility of space," L1 and L2 are lengths and because if conditions are statistically stable the meas-
k, and k2 are form factors. Their impedances are given hy lZf £=%C
and ZJ0 c= 1/Cco, X heing a frequency. The Z 0/I|Z c=e01zoL1L2-..
k1k2w2, and c2=l/eoso>=~jZ|EL1L2k1k,wo2/jZJj.
Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
McNish: The Speed of Light 143
Spectroscopic Method
This interesting method consists in determining the
value of certain molecular constants in terms of a fre-
quency by the microwave spectra and in terms of wave-
lengths by the infrared spectra, the conversion factor
between the values being c. The method is not a very
precise one because differences in wavelengths must be
measured for the infrared lines. The individual differ-
ences cannot be measured precisely so a very large num-
ber of measurements must be made and a mean taken.
No attempt will be made to evaluate systematic errors
of this method. No results from this method have been
included in Fig. 1 because all that have been obtained
are assigned slightly larger errors than the measure-
menits the author chose to include. It is of interest that
the values of c obtained are not inconsistent with the
data in the figure.
INTERPR e oFthe DAta
What can one conclude about the most reasonable
value for the speed of light from the data in Fig. 1? Al-
most all people would agree that the true value of c lies
somewhere between the extremes, and likely near the
central region of the distribution. How precisely can one
estimate the value, and what confidence limits, if any,
can be assigned to one's estimate?
One may approach this problem by assigning unit
weight to each determination, taking the mean as the
"best" value, calculating its standard error, and assign-
ing that as the uncertainty of the value. The value ob-
tained in this way is c=299,792.9+0.2 km. This ap-
proach is obviously too naive because it gives equal
credence to one highly accurate microwave interferome-
ter experiment and to the pair of experiments involving
the ratio of units which is recognized to be an inaccurate
method.
One may be erudite and weight the individual results
inversely as the squares of their assigned errors, obtain
the weighted mean as the best value, and assign to it the
standard error of the weighted mean, even though one
recognizes that the assigned errors may be incorrect (but
perhaps the best that can be done). The value obtained
in this way is c=299,792.80+0.03. The limit of error
assigned in this way iS a delusion, because it ignores
possible systematic differences between methods, and,
even if these could somehow be eliminated, is dependent
on the correctness of the weights assigned.
The question of weighting is a serious one. If several
subsets of measurements are performed on a quantity
under identical conditions and the subsets consist of
ni, n2, measurements, respectively, then in
cobnn th n. avrae of th sesoesoldwihh
cmiigteaeae ftest n hudwih h
by ni, n2, . ni, respectively. This follows
urements of all the subsets can be combined into one set
containing ni+n2, * * ., ±n; measurements, and the
144 IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December
mean is the sum of all the measurements divided by the These new data, together with the geodimeter data
total number. Combining the means of the subsets with collected by Bergstrand (see Table II), comprise the
the weighting shown above gives the identical result. most homogeneous collection of data on c which is avail-
The standard error of the mean of a subset is given able. They were all made by the same method and con-
by Urm = V//n, where U- is the standard deviation for the sequently are subject to the same sources of error. They
population. In combining means of subsets when only were made under a variety of climatic and weather con-
Um for each subset is given one is justified in weighting ditions, in a wide range of geographical environments, at
the means by the inverse squares of their respective
standard errors, because this is, if the data have been TABLE I
rigorously treated, equivalent to weighting according to SPEED OF LIGHT MEASUREMENT OVER TAPED BASELINES OF
the number of measurements in each set. THE U.S. COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY
This principle of weighting may be extended without
loss of rigor to include allowances for other factors DeSignatiOn LengthOf Baseline COmPUted C
affecting the error of the mean than the number of ob- meters km
servations included in the mean. For example, if two patrik Fa 6/60 18,280.8310 299,793.07
baselines are measured with the same tape 50 m in TitusVille, Fla. 3/60 10,860.3980 299,791.08
length, one baseline being 2 km long and the other 10 Colby, Kan. 7/62 10,573.2158 299,792.58
6
km, then the percentage errors in the two baselines may ~~~~~~~~Shooks, Minn.
Boundary, Mont.
3/54
6/61
8,349.7994
13,767.6631
299,794.77
299,790.90
be taken to be in the ratio of 1/X/2 to 1/V/10, insofar ellen, N. DM. 6/54 13,012.3709 299,793.63
as the taping error is concerned. This is justified because Parade, S. D. 8/54 11,256.8396 299,791.21
in measuring the shorter baseline, 40 measurements GBI, B.W.I. 6/62 14,919.6830 299,793.94
Leesburg, Va. 11/57 2,847.9702 299,789.52
were made with the tape and in measuring the longer Mistram, Fla. No.1 61-62 2,649.8821 299,791.28
baseline, 200. If both of these baselines are used to de- Mistram, Fla. No. 2 61-62 2,949.9842 299, 791 77
termine c, then if there are negligible, or no other, errors
in the measurements, the results should be combined by TABLE II
assigning the result over the shorter base a weight of 2
and the other a weight of 10. Naturally the same result
is obtained if we divide the sum of the lengths of the two Designation Length of Baseline Computed c
baselines by the sum of the travel times. meters km
From these considerations it is clear that taking a
simple mean or weighted mean of the data in Fig. 1 has Swedish I 6,910 299,793.05
Swedish II1 5,400 299,792.80
serious shortcomings. Use of either method for obtaining Swedish III 7,320 299,793.37
the value of c from the data of Fig. 1 may be excused, if Australian I 6,440 299,792.69
the adjustor has no better means available. However, Australian IV 9t,600 299,793.21
the assignment of errors to the means so obtained on English II1I
EnglishI
11,260
24,830
299,792.40
299,792.20
the basis of the adjustment is completely unwarranted U.S.A. 1,380 299,794.06
and misleading, particularly since one is inclined to con- U.S.A. II 12,800 299,794.27
clude from these errors that there is a calculable prob- U.S.A. III
U.S.A. IV 3,~120
2,130
299,792.73
299,791.69
ability that the true value of c lies within certain limits
fixed by these assigned errors.
STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF GEODIMETER DATA CHI-SQUARED TEST
There are some data on c which may be handled in cr 2 d.f
accordance with orthodox statistical procedures. After E -
- -. T
preparing Fig. 1, I *received 1 . .
by private . .
communication zO / \~~~~~~~
NORMAL ERROR
"-,CURVE
(as much as I deplore private communication) data on
additional baselines which were measured with the ge-
odimeter and with geodetic tapes. Permission has been ,0-
given to uEe these data by my colleague, L. G. Simmons, CHI-SQUARED TEST
n=0.50 <> C
of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, a 3 d.f /\
sister organization of the National Bureau of Standards :E5- / NORMAL ERROR
in the United States Department of Commerce. These /\
data appear in Table I and are hereby made a part of/\
the published data on c. None of them has been included
in Fig. 1; the "U. S." values in the figure apparently were Fg -rqec oyo o edmtrosrain vr2
supplied by the United States Army Map Service, different baselines. c=299,792.60, ¢c==1.24, ac=0.25.

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
1962 McNish: The Speed of Light 145
many different times, by many different observers, anid the physical sciences the critic must be guided by his
the baselines were measured with many different tapes. own1 knowledge of the subject matter and, where this is
At least three different laboratories were involved in inadequate, by the advice of his respected colleagues.
the calibration of the tapes. He must examine carefully what the experimenters re-
There are some inhomogeneities in the data. All of ported and speculate on what they did not report. He
these determinations are not of the same accuracy. The must extensively examinie the literature references and
baselines are of different lengths. The number of ge- related literature. He must consider the training and
odimeter observations was not the same in all cases. It experience of the experimenters and facilities and staff
is known that equal care was not exercised in taping assistance of the laboratory in which each worked, for
the baselines nor was equal care exercised in calibrating an expert in electronics might nlot be an expert in length
the tapes. However, there is insufficient information measurements, or an expert in surveying might not be
available to judgematically assign weights. For this rea- an expert in optics.
son the measurements over each baseline will be con- I'he critic may employ some statistical methods in
sidered a single experiment, and all these experiments his study but his over-all conclusion is not a statistical
will be assigned the same weight. inference and should not be regarded as such. He canl
With such a collection of data one would expect the arrive at a decision as to the best value for the quantity
normal error law to manifest itself. This expectation is, being sought, assign likely limits or outer limits to the
supported by the frequency polygon of Fig. 2. Applying error of this value, but he cannot express the probability
a chi-square test to the observed distribution indicates of these being correct by a number.
no departure from a normal population. With such Several of the more significant efforts to measure c
strong grounds, both statistical and presumptive, that have been fully described by the experimenters. Some
the distribution is normal, one may proceed to draw aspects of these measurements which deserve special
conclusions from the data with considerable confidence. consideration will be discussed, and they will be related
One such conclusion is that if a very large number of to other efforts, and from this my conclusions will be
geodimeter measurements, such as those included in drawn regarding the best value of c.
thls group, were to be made, the probability is 0.95 that
the mean value of c obtained from them would not differ SPECIFIC EXPERIMENTS
from 299,792.6 knm by more than 0.5 km. This is a much IThe experiments which will be discussed in detail
wider limit of error than was obtained by taking a are the geodimeter measurements made by Bergstrand
weighted mean of all the data in Fig. I and calculating [9]-[14], those made in Great Britain and reported by
its error, but it is a much sounder one. Mackenzie [40], and the microwave interferometer
The inference drawn from the analysis does not apply measurements of Froome [31]- [36]. The first of these
to the speed of light as a constant of nature but to the experiments is important because it is the first series of
speed of light as measured by a geodimeter following highly precise measurements at optical frequenicies, the
the procedure previously described. Since all geodimeter second because of the care with which the baseline
measurements are affected by the same kinds of errors measurements were undertaken, and the third because
there may be a prevailing bias tending to make them all the series involves laboratory measurements of very
too high or too low, although a careful consideration of high precision. All three series afford an opportunity to
the physics and metrology involved leads one to believe demonstrate the method of metastatistics in evaluating
that such a bias is very small. experimental results.
"METASTATISTICS" Bergstrand's measurements were conducted over
baselines measured by the Baltic Geodetic Commission.
Is this the full extent of what we may conclude about Detailed descriptions of the measurements are given in
the speed of light? Using orthodox statistical procedures several publications although it is not possible to iden-
it is. But the scientist is not constrained to drawing con- tify all the values given in Bergstrand's summary paper
clusions from statistical inference alone. There are many [14] with those which appear in the publications de-
cases in which the data are too sparse or too inhomo- scribing the individual measurements. It is assumed that
geneous to be amenable to statistical treatment. The sci- the other values and their assessed errors, including a
entist, in such cases, must resort to a method, which, measurement by Sch6ldstr6m, were derived in the same
in the field of literature, is called "higher criticism." way.
The methods of higher criticism are qualitative and Bergstrand has given careful conlsideration to the
not quantitative. They involve consideration of the sources of possible error in his measurements, and has
author's Weltanshauung, what information was avail- estimated the magnitude of the contribution from each
able to him, what he meant to convey, what were his source but he does not state explicitly whether these
prides and prejudices. estimated contributions are outer limits of error or cor-
In applying this technique to evaluation of work in respond to an estimate of standard error. Since in one

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
 146
paper [12] Bergstrand estimates error in length of the
baseline as +0.5 in 106 and in another [13] as ±0.3 in
106, the author judges that these assessments tend to be
small and there is something like an even chance that
the contributions to the over-all experimental error may
be larger than estimated.
Bergstrand combined his individual error estimates
in quadrature (as the author believes they should be
combined) to obtain the over-all error. A recalculation
of the error makes it apparent that he did not include
the statistical error of the "readings of the output meter"
in this estimate which would have increased the over-all
error somewhat. His error estimate therefore seems to
correspond to the system error, or constant error only.
He fails to include any estimate of the uncertainty in
the calibration of the baseline tapes, and since all of his
baselines appear to have been measured by the Baltic
Geodetic Commission this is a source of error which
could affect all determinations in the same way.
Combining the measurements over three baselines
with the weights Bergstrand gave them [14] and assess-
ing the standard error of the mean in accordance with
Bergstrand's estimated errors gives
c = 299,793.07 + 0.18 km/sec.
It is the author's view that the error limit should be
increased to ±0.30 km to include allowance for the
statistical error and further increased by an unknown
amount to allow for systematic error in the tape calibra-
tion. (More about this later.)
Returning now to the previous statistical treatment
Of all the geodimeter measurements over different base-
lines, the statistically calculated standard error for a de-
termination over a single baseline is 1.20 ki, and there-
fore the mean for a set of three would be (1.20//3)
km = 0.7 km. This is not unreasonably different from the
error I have assigned to Bergstrand's determinations
over three baselines, particularly when it is recognized
that his measurements were made with greater care
than was taken in many of the other determinations and
included observations on more nights. Investigation of
some of the original reports indicates that in some cases
atmospheric parameters for index of refraction correc-
tion were made at only one end of the baseline.
The two baselines used for the geodimeter measure-
ments in Great Britain were established for a projected
survey of the island. Execution of their measurement
was very carefully planned and has been completely de-
scribed, and the geodimeter measurements are reported
in detail. Geodimeter measurements were made on a
number of nights giving values for c over the Caithness
and Ridgeway baselines from selected data as follows:
c = 299, 792.2 ± 0.1 km
c =299, 792.4±+0.1 km ll
inl which the errors represented are the statistical esti-
mates for the standard errors of the means for the read-Fi.3EeaonofbslesnGrtBian
ings of the "output meter. " They are probably safe esti-
Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December
mates as they are based on 32 and 28 observations,
respectively, but they do not include errors from other
sources. We must set about an evaluation of these other
errors.
Since both baselines are very long, additive errors of
fixed magnitude have small effect as compared with
their effect over short baselines, furthermore, calibra-
tions of the geodimeter at the National Physical Labora-
tory revealed that the values of additive corrections
used in performing the measurements were without ap-
preciable error. The remaining obvious sources of im-
portant error seem to be those due to uncertainty in
baseline length, color of light, frequency of the Kerr cell
oscillator, and difference in refractive index along the
light path as compared with that calculated from ob-
servations at the terminal points.
Profiles of the elevations of the baselines are shown
in Fig. 3. The Caithness base was measured once in both
directions, the two measurements agreeing to 1 in
1,875,000. The Ridgeway base was also measured in
both directions and had been measured 14 years previ-
ously, the first measurement agreeing with the last to
0.5 ppm. The Ridgeway base was comparatively easy
to measure, the only difficult portion being the traverse
of the ravine. Results obtained by taping across a tem-
porary bridge and by taping the sides of the ravine,
with corrections applied, showed good agreement. The
Caithness base presented serious problems since so
much of it extended across bogs, and errors arising be-
cause of this difficulty may tend to systematically affect
the measurements regardless of direction of taping.
From a priori considerations and from agreement of the
separate measurements the author concludes that the
length of the Ridgeway base is probably not in error by
more than 0.5 ppm, including errors in the tapes, and
thrt it is highly unlikely that it is in error by as much
as 1 ppm. Less confidence can be placed in the accuracy
Of the Caithness bafse;
it may be reasonable to double the
estimated error.
l
600 CAITHNESS SPITAl HILL
400 WARTH HILL
200
BOG . BOG
_ o 2 3 4 5 6 78 9 ii 12 13 14 1516 I? 10 192021222324
LENGTH,KILOMETERS
£
- RIDGEWAY
WIEOS lDNTNCSL
HILL
OO i
500- RAVINE * SECTION MARKS
300-
7 8 9 10 11 0 2 3 4 5 6
LENGTH, KILOMETERS
used for measuring speed of light.
1962 McNish: The Speed of Light 147
The baseline profiles show that the average height of of them, color error and index of refraction error, both
the light path over the Ridgeway base was about 150 ft operate in the same direction. The author concludes
above ground while at Caithness it was 300 ft, and there- from these measurements that the value of c probably
fore observations at terminal points may be considered lies somewhere between these two values, that it is more
more representative of the path temperature for Ridge- likely to be above the higher than below the lower, and
way than for Caithness. However, since the measure- that it is unlikely that the value lies outside the range
ments of all meteorological elements were made on hill- 299,792.3-299,792.9 km.
tops at terminals of the path it may be assumed that Although this conclusion is consistent with that
they represented the average along the path, particu- drawn from Bergstrand's measurements, there is
larly since they agreed very well. (The average tempera- enough difference to give concern. Let us group the data
ture difference, without regard to sign, was only 0.04°C, used for the statistical study of geodimeter results ac-
and the difference of the averages was only 0.003°C at cording to the laboratories where the tapes apparently
Ridgeway.) The error due to atmospheric parameters is were calibrated. We arrive at mean values for c for the
probably no greater than 0.3 ppm. measurements of the United States, Great Britain-
Reliable assessment of error due to color is not possi- Australia, and Sweden as follows:
ble since no information on the characteristics of the 299,792.51 299,792.59 and 299,793.07 km.
filter-phototube combination is available. If the color 2
response of the system is like that involved in Berg- This suggests, though the evidence is not convincing,
strand's measurements, then reddening by atmospheric that there may be a systematic difference of about 1
absorption is not likely to contribute an error as great ppm in calibration of baseline tapes (or wires) between
as 0.2 ppm for the Ridgeway measurements, nor 0.4 the laboratories. There is a difference in the method
ppm for Caithness. employed.
Possible errors due to the frequency of the Kerr cell Let us now examine the laboratory measurements, the
oscillator cause consternation. Two frequencies, fi and most precise and apparently also the most accurate of all
f2, were used for modulating the light pulses. (Berg- to date, the measurements of Froome [32-36]. Three
strand used only one.) There is a statistically significant experiments were performed, with values and errors
difference in the results obtained over both baselines de- assigned by the experimenter as follows: 299,792.6 + 0.7,
pending on which oscillator is used as shown by the fol- 299,792.75 + 0.30 (revised value), and 299,792.50 + 0.10
lowing results: km. The first two experiments were explicitly stated by
the experimenter to be preliminary experiments to per-
299,791.8 + 0.1 km If c = fect the technique, therefore only the third will be con-
sidered. (The weighted mean of all three values differs
12 C = 299,792.3 ± 0.1 kin; by only 0.1 ppm from the third value, anyway.)
Ridgeway Froome estimates the contributions to the over-all
fi c = 299,792.1 + 0.1 km error from various sources and combines them in quad-
f2 c = 299,792.6 + 0.1 km. rature which seems appropriate since there is a fair
number of them and it is unlikely that they are corre-
The standard errors expressed are statistical, but are of lated. The index of refraction correction was measured
the same size as previously given because the larger at the microwave frequency used, not calculated, and
number of observations in the earlier quoted values is the estimated uncertainty in this correction is also in-
almost exactly compensated for by the difference in re- cluded in the estimate of over-all error. The largest con-
sults from the two frequencies. The view that one of the tribution to the over-all error arises from the length bars
oscillators was not operating at its nominal frequency is used which were measured directly in terms of the cad-
supported by the fact that a frequency calibration per- mium wavelength. Such bars can be measured much
formed just after the measurements at Ridgeway and more accurately than tapes or baselines. From the
just before most of those at Caithness showed the fi author's own experience with length measurements, and
oscillator to be 1.2 ppm below its nominal value, the f2 from comparisons of measurements on length bars at
oscillator being within 0.1 ppm of its nominal value. If the National Bureau of Standards and at the National
corrections for this calibration are applied the values Physical Laboratory he is inclined to believe that the
for 1' and 12 are brought into substantial agreement for error from this source is probably less than Froome
each of the bases. assigned, therefore it may be presumed that errors
Assuming that the frequency problem has been cor- from other sources are treated with similar conservatism
rectly appraised we arrive at values for the speed of and that the error in Froome's third measurement prob-
light over the Caithness and Ridgeway baselines of ably is less than the assigned error. Even a simple addi-
299,792.3 and 299,792.6 kin, respectively, subject to the tion of the estimated errors from all sources would not
errors previously discussed, but in this case the errors widen the limit greatly.
should not be added in quadrature because they are too What then can be concluded about the speed of
few to be safely combined in this way, and because two light? In a situation like this it is better to accept the re-

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.
 148 IRE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION December
sult of one good experiment rather than the results of E. Dorsey, Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. 34, pp. 1-110; 1944.
[20] J.N. W.
[21] M. DuMond and E. R. Cohen, Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 20,
many poorer ones. This does not mean that the other p. 82; 1948.
experiments are worthless in the evaluation. If the re- [22] B. Edlin, J. Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 43, p. 339; 1953.1946.
[23] L. Essen, J. IEE, vol. 93, no. 9, pt. 3A, p. 1413;
sult from Froome's last experiment had differed greatly [24] , Nature, vol. 159, p. 611; 1947.
from the central value given by the other methods the [25] Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A, vol. 204, p. 260; 1950.
presence of some unknown error in it would be sus- [26]
[27] ,Nature, vol. 165, p. 582; 1950.
Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), B, vol. 66, p. 190; 1953.
pected. This experiment demarcates the value of c [28] L. Essen and K. D. Froome, Nature, vol. 167, p. 512; 1951.
[29] --, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London), B, vol. 64, p. 862; 1951.
within closer limits than all the other experiments. [30] L. Essen and A. C. Gordon-Smith, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A,
On the basis of this evaluation the author concludes vol. 194, p. 348; 1948.
[31] K. D. Froome, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A, vol. 213, p. 123;
that the best value for the speed of light is around 1952.
299,792.5 kms, that it is improbable that the true value [32] -, Nature, vol. 169, p. 107; 1952.
Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A, vol. 223, p. 195; 1954.
differs from this figure by more than 0.1 km, that it iS [33]
[34] Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), B, vol. 68, p. 883; 1955.
higlhly unlikely that the true value differs by as much [34]
[35]
Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), B, vol. 68, p. 883; 1955.
,J. Brit. IRE, vol. 16, p. 497; 1956.
as 0.3 kms, and that it is more probable that the true [36] Nature, vol. 181, p. 258; 1958.
value lies above this figure than below it. But the author [37] R. A. Houstoni, Nature, vol. 164, p. 1004; 1949.
cannot express his confidence in this view by a meaning- [38] Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. A63, p. 95; 1950.
[39] A. Huittel, Ann. Physik, vol. 37, p. 365; 1940.
ful number. [40] I. C. C. Mackenzie RE, "The Geodimeter Measurement of the
Ridgeway and Caithness Bases 1953," Ordnance Survey Pro-
REFERENCES fessional Papers, New Series No. 19. (See also: Ordnance Survev
Professional Papers, New Series No. 18 and "Empire Survey
[1] C. I. Aslakson, Trans. Am. Geophys. Un., vol. 30, p. 475, 1949. Review," vol. V, no. 34, pp. 211-225.)
[2] Nature, vol. 164, p. 711; 1949. [41] D. WV. R. McKinley, J. R. Astr. Soc., Can., vol. 44, p. 89; 1950.
[3] Nature, vol. 168, p. 505; 1951. [42] J. Mercier, Ann. Phys., vol. 19, p. 248; 1923; vol. 20, p. 5; 1923.
[4] , Trans. Am. Geophys. U., vol. 32, p. 813; 1951. [43] 0. Mettelstaedt, Ann. Physik, vol. 2, p. 285; 1929.
[5] WV. C. Anderson, Rev. Sci. Instr., vol. 8, p. 239; 1937. [44] A. A. Michelson, Astrophys. J., vol. 54, p. 1; 1927.
[6] J. Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 31, p. 187; 1941. [45] A. A. Michelson, F. G. Pease, and F. Pearson, Astrophys. J.,
[7] H. Barrell, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), A, vol 209, p. 132; 1951. vol. 82, p. 26; 1935.
[8] H. Barrell and M. J. Puttock, Brit. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 1, p. E7; [46] J. F. Mulligan and D. F. McDonald, Am. J. Physics, vol. 25,
1950. p. 180; 1957.
[9] E. Bergstrand, Ark. Mat. Astr. Fys., vol. 36, p. 1; 1949. [47] NBS Tech. News Bull., vol. 39, p. 1; 1955.
[10] --, Nature, vol. 163, p. 338; 1949. [48] E. K. Plyler, L. R. Blaine, and W. S. Connor, J. Opt. Soc. Am.,
[11] L. E. Bergstrand, Nature, vol. 165, p. 405; 1950. vol. 45, p. 102; 1955.
[12] E. Bergstrand, Ark. Fys., vol. 2, p. 119; 1950. [49] D. H. Rank, R. P. Ruth, and K. L. VanderSluis, Phys. Rev.,
[13] , Ark. Fys., vol. 3, p. 479; 1951. vol. 86, p. 799; 1952.
[14] Ann. Franc. Chronom., vol. 11, p. 97; 1957. [50] , J. Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 42, p. 693; 1952.
[15] R. T. Birge, Rep. Phys. Soc. Progr. Phys., vol. 8, p. 90; 1941. [51] D. H. Rank, J. N. Shearer, and T. A. Wiggins, Phys. Rev., vol.
16] K. Bol, Phys. Rev., vol. 80, p. 298; 1950. 94, p. 575; 1954.
[17] WV. Culshaw, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London), B, vol 204, p. 260; 1950. [52] E. B. Rosa and N. E. Dorsey, Bull. Bur. Stds., vol. 3, p. 433;
[18] --, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London), B, vol. 66, p. 597; 1953. 1907.
19] R. D. Cutkosky, J. Res. Standards, vol. 65A, p. 147; 1961. 53] XW. Schaffeld, F.I.A.T., Final Rept. No. 895; 1946.

Automatic DC Data Logging System

WILLIAM ARNETTt, SENIOR MEMBER, IRE

Summary-A system is described which digitizes dc voltages INTRODUCTION

and records the values on punched cards for subsequent machine
data reduction. High accuracy is achieved by comparing the input T N THE PAST FEW YEARS we have seen a great
voltage to a bank of standard cells and measuring the difference. An increase in the use of digital data logging systems.
automatic calibration routine is provided. Resolution is one part per - A typical function of such a system is to scan pe-
million, stability a few parts per million for a 30-day period witho--t riodically a number of electrical input terminals, to con-
adjustment. Contributions of various parts of the system to over-all
error are analyzed. Automatic calibration data are anlalyzed to vert the voltage across these terminals to digital form,
establish system performance. and to record this digital value for observation or auto-
matic processing. The over-all accuracy of such systems
* Received August 14, 1962. Presented at the 1962 International is typically 0.1 per cent to 1.0 per cent. The system to
Conference on Precision Electromagnetic Measulrements as Paper be described is capable of measurement precision of a
t COHU Electronics, Inc., San Diego, Calif. few parts per million, with commensurate stability (re-

Authorized licensd use limted to: Imperial Coleg Lond. Downlade on June 07,21 at 19:34 UTC from IE Xplore. Restricon aply.