AVR-Chat

On Thursday 15 July 2004 11:39, Robert Adsett wrote:
> At 10:35 PM 7/14/04 +0000, you wrote:

> >A bush in shade will see light when the blocking thing moves
> >relitaive to the sun.  Imagine tree or tree trunk that acks like
> >gnomon.  as the Earth rotates, the Gnomon will appear to move and the
> >plant will be blocked for some period.
> >
> >How much sun a leaf gets from being in shade vs a cloudy day.  That
> >sort of thing.

> Yep, I'm just questioning the need for a 1 minute resolution.
> Assuming you are at a reasonable mid latitude, taking measurements
> in the winter with the day getting no shorter than about 8 hours
> (I'm making this up as I go along). 1 minute represents 1/480 or a
> little more than 0.2% of the daylight hours.  Do you reasonably
> expect to see the difference from even a 1% drop in light?  Or
> perhaps more to the point what is the minimum light difference you
> expect to cause a difference in what you are measuring?

I gather that a great deal of compression could be achieved if only
changed values and when they occurred were stored.

"Integration" over longer intervals may be more useful in terms of
plants. One could store hourly "integrals" by simply accumulating
the per-second readings.

The "minute" details are only required if you're looking at
isolating a causal issue. Which is unlikely in this scanario.

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
 X   against HTML mail     | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \  and postings          | to help me spread!