User talk:Pranav Rathi/Notebook/OT/2010/11/10/Small Bead DOG - Revision history

Pranav Rathi at 17:01, 11 November 2010

Pranav Rathi — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 17:01:28 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, 11 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	User:Steven J. Koch\|Steve Koch]] 11:48, 11 November 2010 (EST): These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the table or some other human-cause? I am a little suprised by the low stiffness factors. It is what it is, we ought to be able to do unzipping with small beads. And with big beads overstretching. Is that 1 Watt before the objective, right? So we can get something in the 30 pN's for 2 Watt?		User:Steven J. Koch\|Steve Koch]] 11:48, 11 November 2010 (EST): These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the table or some other human-cause? I am a little suprised by the low stiffness factors. It is what it is, we ought to be able to do unzipping with small beads. And with big beads overstretching. Is that 1 Watt before the objective, right? So we can get something in the 30 pN's for 2 Watt?

-	~~<!--~~I will invesigate the bumping today. I guess it is 1W before the objective in the stiffness calculation sheet, right? So it is around 30pN for full power. Today if have time just comeby... ~~-->~~	+	User:Pranav Rathi\|Pranav Rathi]] 12:00, 11 November 2010 (EST): I will invesigate the bumping today. I guess it is 1W before the objective in the stiffness calculation sheet, right? So it is around 30pN for full power. Today if have time just comeby...

Pranav Rathi at 16:59, 11 November 2010

Pranav Rathi — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 16:59:29 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 11 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
-	[[User:Steven J. Koch\|Steve Koch]] 11:48, 11 November 2010 (EST): These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the table or some other human-cause? I am a little suprised by the low stiffness factors. It is what it is, we ought to be able to do unzipping with small beads. And with big beads overstretching. Is that 1 Watt before the objective, right? So we can get something in the 30 pN's for 2 Watt?	+	User:Steven J. Koch\|Steve Koch]] 11:48, 11 November 2010 (EST): These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the table or some other human-cause? I am a little suprised by the low stiffness factors. It is what it is, we ought to be able to do unzipping with small beads. And with big beads overstretching. Is that 1 Watt before the objective, right? So we can get something in the 30 pN's for 2 Watt?
		+
		+	<!--I will invesigate the bumping today. I guess it is 1W before the objective in the stiffness calculation sheet, right? So it is around 30pN for full power. Today if have time just comeby... -->

Steven J. Koch: New page: ~~~~: These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the ta...

Steven J. Koch — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 16:48:11 GMT

New page: ~~~~: These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the ta...

New page

[[User:Steven J. Koch|Steve Koch]] 11:48, 11 November 2010 (EST): These look like really great studies! It's a bit tough to see some of the slides but I think I got the point. I wonder if the extra noise in the DOG curves is due to bumping the table or some other human-cause? I am a little suprised by the low stiffness factors. It is what it is, we ought to be able to do unzipping with small beads. And with big beads overstretching. Is that 1 Watt before the objective, right? So we can get something in the 30 pN's for 2 Watt?