[sokoloff]

They’re not hypothesizing a measurement device recording those times and then rounding. They’re just setting up a “let’s take as a given that this is what really happened in the world” and asking what errors our processes could do if we do a series of imprecise measurements and then compare those measurements.

Side note: my HP 3458A can do a small handful of 8.5 digit DCV measurements per second.

[xxs]

>my HP 3458A can do a small handful of 8.5 digit DCV measurements per second.

I thought they had like 100k samples a second. Is it really sufficient for 8.5 precision?

Edit: perhaps measurement should be confined only to relative finish between the participants, e.g. finish within 1ms should be considered the same (regardless if they fall in the same hundreds of a second bucket)

[sokoloff]

I don’t keep mine in cal (or even powered up all the time), so I can’t claim full volt-nut status here, but my understanding is the 100K/sec 4.5 digit measurement rate is limited by communications not by sampling rate. (The 5.5 digit rate is 50K/sec, implying the 4.5 digit rate limit is not in the measurement but more likely in the GPIB.)

On thing I know with perfect precision: HP/Keysight knows more than me about this. :)

[cameron_b]

interestingly enough, for stage races, that is how things work to some degree for the "pack" finish, just not the guys going for the day's podium