Quote:
Originally Posted by collo  Lupo is the only person we know that could actually afford the book! |
And understand it....my brain just fogged over, but was that the beer?? (I suspect you two would follow it pretty well tho)
Argh, can't copy and paste from it. This caught my eye tho, "If a perfect binary sequence could be found then the single diffusor response would be recovered, but there are no such 1D sequences."
That suggests to me that (theoretically at least) a single large prime would be preferable over multiple smaller ones. On a practical level (as pointed out by xenon) other factors come into play.
Quote:
|
It suggests five periods as being a good target.
|
Does it? I could have missed it but have seen nothing that suggests that.
Quote:
|
As good as the article is, it doesn't answer the question of whether a single large order panel is better or worse than a Barker sequence of lower order panels comprising a similar number of wells. Perhaps that is covered on the missing pages.
|
Hmm, I must stump for the book soonish. Anyway, unless it is answered more definitively elsewhere, I go away with the interpretation above.
In any case, the point of ease of manufacture is not to be sneezed at. That is the reason why *I* prefer applying the barker code by rotation of the same qrd by 180 degrees. Saves making two different types (normal and inverse). If you are going to do a Mr Ford, do it completely.
This is just theoretical now (not trying to impose any thoughts on anyone) but just how much bottom end is being sacrificed? There is so much 'fluff room' in these theoretical calcs that 30 hz or so on paper is nothing in the real world, surely. (EDIT just looked back and see what you mean)
Yeah, this is not so 'simple' as throwing a few batts on the wall or in the corners! Still, fun stuff.