https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1203.5730/Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.enMon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMThttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4888873urn:hackerpapers:mention:1203.5730:4888873Fri, 07 Dec 2012 19:45:38 GMT<p>The actual paper[1] states that their prototype has similar performance to the best commercial sensors. However it is much better than any previous optical sensor, and they claim that if they scale the device they can reduce the thermal NEA to 150 ng/rtHz with a 25KHz bandwidth, which would be commercially interesting. 1 http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.5730</p><p><a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1203.5730/">Paper and discussion history</a>. A mention is not an endorsement.</p>physics.opticshttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4888550urn:hackerpapers:mention:1203.5730:4888550Fri, 07 Dec 2012 18:57:16 GMT<p>The Ars Technica article oversells the shot-noise limit. What you really want to see in this business is a thermally-limited oscillator; the Brownian motion in the spring driving the mass. For a quantum mechanically limited oscillator, check out work like this (which shares an author with the paper linked by Ars Technica): http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v478/n7367/full/nature1... A shot noise limit is not an inherent reason for kudos. In particular, this sensor is shot-noise limited at frequencies above a few kHz. In this context, the shot-noise limit may only represent the intrinsic…</p><p><a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1203.5730/">Paper and discussion history</a>. A mention is not an endorsement.</p>physics.optics