Differences between revisions 1 and 2
⇤ ← Revision 1 as of 2012-06-01 16:18:34 →
Size: 1145
Editor: NikaBolometer
Comment:
← Revision 2 as of 2012-06-01 16:19:05 → ⇥
Size: 1171
Editor: NikaBolometer
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 11: Line 11:
{{attachment:disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.7.png||width=400}}
{{attachment:disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.1.png||width=400}}		 {{attachment:OffProcNika4/disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.7.png||width=400}}
{{attachment:OffProcNika4/disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.1.png||width=400}}

NP, June 1st, 2012

Thanks to Robert's and Samuel's verifications, I found a bug in my simulation (the disk diameter was actually taken as the radius, hence doubling the effective size of the disk and enlarging the broadening). I remove the old plot of May 29 to avoid confusion and provide updated plots here below.

The following plot shows the result of the convolution of a Gaussian (FWHM=10 arcsec) by a Gaussian (FWHM=8arcsec) or a disk (D=8arcsec). The gaussian indeed leads to a large broadening compared to the disk. Fitting an effective gaussian on the result of disk convolution leads to a slight overestimation of the input 10 arcsec.

[ATTACH]

If we proceed with the same exercise but with a 20arcsec gaussian or disk, this time the difference between the convolution by a disk or a gaussian becomes significant. An effective gaussian can still be fit, but only around the peak (crosses highlight the points on which the fit is performed).

OffProcNika4/disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.7.png OffProcNika4/disk_convol_D=20_max_frac=0.1.png

PlanetConvol2 (last edited 2012-06-01 16:19:53 by NikaBolometer)