[ATM] Interferometry math error corrected -- maybe

[Michael Peck <mpeck1@ix.netcom.com>]

Hey everyone:

I think there is a small error in the treatment of the Fourier 
transform method of interferogram analysis that's been propagating in 
the literature for some time now, and which I mindlessly repeated as 
equation 9 in my notes. The error is completely harmless in 
computations, but it was hindering my ability to figure something 
out. For those with access to the literature, the Roddier's got it 
right in their 1987 Applied Optics paper. Malacara got it wrong. Most 
material I've found on the web gets it wrong. But again, it doesn't matter.

I've put up a new draft article at 
<http://home.earthlink.net/~mlpeck54/astro/imath/imath.pdf>. I also 
added proofs of two minor claims that were bugging me because they 
seemed obvious but I couldn't immediately see how to prove them.

Judging from the ratio of downloads to feedback I got on the last 
draft maybe I should have warned you that this might be very slightly 
harder math than the usual ATM blather. I wrote this mainly because I 
was in danger of forgetting some of the stuff I did a while back and 
wanted to have my notes in nicely formatted form for my own future 
reference. If it does anyone else some good or inspires someone to 
collect some data so much the better.

There's no reason at all to download the new draft unless you're 
keeping it as a permanent reference for some reason, or you want to 
check my math. If you're competent to check my math I'd appreciate 
correction or confirmation.

Thanks -

Mike Peck

_________________

Michael Peck
email mpeck1@ix.netcom.com
Wildlife photoblog http://wildlife-pix.com
Amateur telescope making http://home.earthlink.net/~mlpeck54/astro/astro.html 

_______________________________________________
ATM mailing list http://www.atmlist.net/