comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...?

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...?

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? [message #48707 is a reply to message #48704]

Wed, 17 May 2006 07:05

James Kuyper
Messages: 425
Registered: March 2000

Senior Member

greg michael wrote:
> Thanks Wayne - looks to be just what I need. Must admit, I'm surprised
> CONGRID doesn't do this anyway. As for flux conservation, I think
> that's just a fancy way of saying 'average'!

More accurately, it's a fancy way of doing averaging. When your new
bins are related in the right way to your old bins, calculating the
right average for the new bins is relatively simple. When they aren't,
it can be highly non-trivial, and flux-conserving algorithms cope with
some of the problems that can arise.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? By: news.verizon.net on Wed, 17 May 2006 10:52
		Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? By: Michael Galloy on Wed, 17 May 2006 08:30
		Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? By: James Kuyper on Wed, 17 May 2006 07:05
		Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? By: greg michael on Wed, 17 May 2006 04:18
		Re: Neither CONGRID nor REBIN...? By: Wayne Landsman on Wed, 17 May 2006 03:29

Previous Topic:	Re: ENVI_OUTPUT_TO_EXTERNAL_FORMAT
Next Topic:	Subscription of array (the *-problem)

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Nov 28 07:10:48 PST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00803 seconds