Next message: Jan Kalivoda: "Re: Constellation names"
For those following this particular thread, I will just come back and
defend my analysis of Kieran Kelly's problem, to which George took exception.
George's analysis is quite correct, as far as it goes, but I think his
analysis is too simplistic. He has taken a very particular scenario for the
topology of the mirror, (which we do not know). When he says he has chosen
dished or spherical shape, he has in fact analysed it as a cylindrical form.
I think that if a weighted analysis was done over the possible topologies
of the mirror, it would turn out in the end to be quite similar to the
resolution analysis which I used. I think such an analysis would return a
quite similar result in the order of 0.1 arc-minute for the mean angular
deviation we should expect for a random 2cm diameter section of a mirror
having diameter 14cm and flat to 7 wavelengths. I may be out by a factor of
two or so, but I would be surprised if it was more than that.
That said, George and I both agree that Kieran should not worry about the
flatness of his mirror.
Geoffrey Kolbe.
