-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Jens,
thanks for setting this right.
Best,
Tim
On 11/07/2013 07:53 AM, Jens Kaiser wrote:
> Fulvio, Tim, error propagation is correct, but wrongly applied in
> Tim's example. s_f= \sqrt{ \left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial {x}
> }\right)^2 s_x^2 +
Fulvio, Tim,
error propagation is correct, but wrongly applied in Tim's example.
s_f= \sqrt{ \left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial {x} }\right)^2 s_x^2 +
\left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial {y} }\right)^2 s_y^2 +
\left(\frac{\partial f}{\partial {z} }\right)^2 s_z^2 + ...} (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Fulvio,
with simple error propagation, the error would be
sigma(I(h1)) = (1-α)sigma(Iobs(h1))-α*sigma(Iobs(h2))/(1-2α)
would it not?
Although especially for theoretical aspects you should be concerned
about division by zero.
Best,
Tim
On 11/0
Thank you for reply. My question mostly concern a theoretical aspect rather
than practical one. To be not misunderstood, what is the mathematical model
that one should apply to be able to deal with twinned intensities with their
errors? I mean, I+_what? I ask this In order to state some general
