<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Improving LIGO calibration accuracy by tracking and compensating for slow temporal variations · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1608.05134/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1608.05134/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Improving LIGO calibration accuracy by tracking and compensating for slow temporal variations — mentioned by lisivka</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12903688</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1608.05134:12903688</guid><pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2016 20:35:46 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I found papers: they are calibration results of LIGO detectors. I read them years ago, so I forget anything except that they found systematic temporal variations across day and year, and they are using long 2km arms. Their latest paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.05134v1.pdf . Systematic error is still there. Speed of light will remain constant, no doubt, so observer need to be far away to feel difference, otherwise it will be affected by wave, with his instruments and clock. It&amp;#x27;s why 2-4km arms are able to pickup temporal signal, while smaller setups are able to pickup thermal noise only.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1608.05134/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.IM</category></item></channel></rss>
