Sentences with phrase «does systematic measurement»

Does systematic measurement of the level of investor optimism provide a clue to the future direction of the stock market?

By the way, neither do the systematic measurement errors in the surface air temperature record.

Not exact matches

Laughlin says it's frustrating that the most interesting planets — small ones like Earth — are so challenging to detect: «You have to get tons and tons and tons of velocity measurements over many years, and then you really, really have to take extreme care — as this Tuomi et al. paper does — to get rid of all the systematic noise.»

You have to get tons and tons and tons of velocity measurements over many years, and then you really, really have to take extreme care — as this Tuomi et al. paper does — to get rid of all the systematic noise.»

For the estimation of the total ocean heat content (OHC) a lesser precision would probably be almost as good, because errors of individual measurements always cancel to a large extent as long as the floats do not have common systematic errors.

Because we didn't have a systematic global set of thermometer measurements before the 1880s, scientists look at other things they can measure — sediment deposits, or tree ring growth in certain ancient, slow - growing trees — which tend to vary along with temperature.

As an example sampling the Southern oceans must happen in essentially same areas and using methods with errors that don't move in either direction systematically, but as long as there are no such systematic trends the results are not particularly sensitive to errors of individual measurements.

The dO18 measurement errors do not behave as constants — note the different magnitude of systematic error between the two determinations of McCrae, for example.

The dO18 systematic measurement errors do not fall into that category, by the analytical evidence given in my post and in the associated references.

Because of the nature of these measurement problems and biases, almost all of these errors tend to be in the same direction — biasing temperatures higher — creating a systematic error that does not cancel out.

What will be left are the systematic errors, the things that don't cancel because they are common to all the measurements.

Did anyone ever see those sorts of systematic measurement errors propagated into the reported SST trend?

Uncertainties associated with «random errors» have the characteristic of decreasing as additional measurements are accumulated, whereas those associated with «systematic errors» do not.