Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
I always thought Nyquist was just the minimum to be able to reproduce a signal frequency. Doesn't necessarily mean it is very accurate (like way out in amplitude etc). So better off going higher, 3 4 or more5 ????
|
It's sort of used as an analogy in this case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquis...mpling_theorem
You'd have to understand Fourier transforms and
a lot of advanced mathematics to really get your head around it.
In Mike's case yes -
he has
0.84 arcsecond/pixel. - 0.42 would be better.
cheers
Allan