User talk:Andy Maloney/Notebook/Lab Notebook of Andy Maloney/2010/08/03/Temperature probe

Steve Koch 14:14, 4 August 2010 (EDT): Very nice that you've solved this problem so well!

Andy Maloney 17:33, 4 August 2010 (EDT): One thing I don't understand is the experiment done by [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T36-3YC64BM-1T&_user=1550512&_coverDate=01/21/2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1421519108&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000053660&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1550512&md5=a1bbaefb8943b8b583ce8a857035a7e9 Bohm et. al.] In their figure, they have a +/- 100 nm/s speed variation with temperature stabilization at 30C. And they stuck the whole microscope in a temperature controlled room! I'm getting +/-10nm/s variations.
 * Steve Koch 17:51, 4 August 2010 (EDT): At the end of section 2.3 (tracking methods), they say they calculate the mean and SD. So, they're probably not computing the standard error of the mean, just the spread in the measurements (differing by factor of sqrt(N)).  If they have at least 25 for all, that would drop them down to +/- 20 nm / s.  I'm assuming you're talking about SEM, not SD, right?  It's also quite possible that you have better temperature control and better components.