|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Representation of polarimetry data in WCS
On Wed, April 26, 2006 9:25 am, Malcolm J. Currie wrote:
My preference was not to have a Stokes axis, because each element measures a different thing. Whether each element measures a different thing is very much a matter of perspective :-) Each element on the Stokes axis is a (linear combination of) time averages of various products of the two components of the electric field. To me that's no less different than measurements at different frequencies/wavelength or different positions. That's perhaps just slightly less evident with true Stokes parameters than with the natural output of a correlation system (XX*, XY*, YX*, YY*, which I think also have their own Stokes code in the standard), but still easily good enough by my standards. This is probably more natural to a radio-astronomer since coherent amplification allows all these parameters to be measured simultaneously, but I'd argue that it's a very useful point of view. Of course you might instead just conclude that radio-astronomers had undue influence on the early development of FITS :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
swift grb data rules out beamed theory | sean | Astronomy Misc | 11 | April 3rd 06 10:29 PM |
BWAAHAHA!!! 51L questions answered... | [email protected] | History | 10 | March 13th 05 02:26 AM |
Pioneer 10 test of light speed delay | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 131 | March 3rd 05 10:15 PM |
Space Shuttle | ypauls | Misc | 3 | March 15th 04 01:12 AM |
A single data point. | Rich | SETI | 2 | October 8th 03 06:02 AM |