[daip] forwarded message from Eric Greisen

[Eric Greisen]

------- start of forwarded message (RFC 934 encapsulation) -------
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Received: from polaris.cv.nrao.edu (polaris.cv.nrao.edu [192.33.115.101])
	by zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1PKbeQr011058
	for <egreisen at aoc.nrao.edu>; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 13:37:41 -0700 (MST)
Received: from cv3.cv.nrao.edu (cv3.cv.nrao.edu [192.33.115.2])
	by polaris.cv.nrao.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1PKbei02943
	for <egreisen at polaris.cv.nrao.edu>; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:37:40 -0500
Received: from zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU (zia.aoc.nrao.edu [146.88.1.4])
	by cv3.cv.nrao.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1PKbZj12993
	for <egreisen at cv3.cv.nrao.edu>; Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:37:35 -0500
Received: from primate.aoc.nrao.edu (primate [146.88.1.117])
	by zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1PKbYQr011055;
	Tue, 25 Feb 2003 13:37:34 -0700 (MST)
Received: (from egreisen at localhost)
	by primate.aoc.nrao.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h1PKbYk04644;
	Tue, 25 Feb 2003 13:37:34 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: primate.aoc.nrao.edu: egreisen set sender to egreisen at nrao.edu using -f
Message-ID: <15963.54286.635786.569305 at primate.aoc.nrao.edu>
In-Reply-To: <3E5BC535.9010002 at astro.umn.edu>
References: <3E5BC535.9010002 at astro.umn.edu>
X-Mailer: VM 7.00 under Emacs 20.7.1
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.3, required 7,
	EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION, IN_REP_TO, REFERENCES, SPAM_PHRASE_02_03,
	X_AUTH_WARNING)
From: Eric Greisen <egreisen at cv3.cv.nrao.edu>
To: Lawrence Rudnick <larry at astro.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: [daip] uv correction
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 13:37:34 -0700

Lawrence Rudnick writes:
 > eric - thanks for your help on the pband mapping questions
 > .  i did a very conservative setfc and
 > without any selfcal, am getting about 500:1 dynamic range using
 > 1/4 of the data.  (used 121 facets over a 8 degree field - and
 > yes, there was stuff picked up in the far sidelobes)
 >       however, given the lapses of middle age, i plugged in the
 > wrong flux for the primary calibrator.  in trying to fix this,
 > i thought i would modify the cl table and run split again.
 >      the data set that is to be split is the output of a
 > flgit (and dbcon), where the calibration has been applied, and
 > the cl table deleted (leaving only cl table 1, all (1,0) for
 > (real,imag) ).  i need to reduce the fluxes by a factor of
 > three.  so what i thought was to modify the cl table using
 > tabed, to put (1/sqrt(3), 1/sqrt(3)) in for (real, imag)
 >      does this make sense?

    Only if the phase is 45 degrees.  If all fluxes were wrong, why
not rescale your images later?

Eric

 > 
 > thanks.
 > lr
 > 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Daip mailing list
 > Daip at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
 > http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/daip
 > 

------- end -------