This web log is not a discussion forum.

It is primarily scratchpad of various things I’ve been exploring and a pastebin for my graphs.

**Biosketch**

The author has a degree in applied physics, professional experience in spectroscopy, electronics and software engineering, including 3-D computer modelling of scattering of e-m radiation in the Earth’s atmosphere.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

In data corruption by running mean youi say “The sinc function has the maximum of the troublesome negative lobe at πx=tan(πx). Solving this gives x=1.3371…” But that minimum of the sinc function occurs when pi*x = -4.493 so that x = -1.430. Is 1.3371 an error?

Hi Peter, thanks for pointing this out.

The intersection of tan(x) and (x) is indeed -1.4303, -4.4390

The expression is correct but I appear not to have used that solution. It’s a long time since I derived this but IIRC I found that simply targeting the peak of the lobe was not the most effective in reducing it overall, so I shortened ratio. Can’t recall how I arrived at that exact value.

Thanks to your comment, I have now had a closer look and found that there is no theoretical reason for using the same ratio twice and that an asymmetric solution that aims to minimise the remaining negative lobes at the cost of accepting slightly stronger positive lobes is preferable.

I have amended the awk script and text accordingly.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Hi Greg, I read with interest your comments on Barycenters on Tallblokes and shared your frustation that people were not getting it. However, ultimately i ended up confused by what you were getting at. Can you confirm please that you are saying the Sun is not moving around the Solar system in response to the orbit of the planets – otherwise known as orbiting the SS barycenter? If you prefer another venue to reply/discuss you can do so at the following unmoderated forum: http://solarcycle24com.proboards.com/thread/2432/confusions-created-barycenters?page=7

Thanks Andrew