well this is the thing I've been talking about on last thursday. Look at these two pictures. ;) Maeybe this kind of analysion is useless but surely it shows what problem we are dealing with here. On my plot (green dots) I chop off all negative values, all the values above 10000 for multipoles greater that 300 (which isn't a big crime), and throw out all points of which "errorbars" were bigger that the values itself. The red dots are raw data as it goes from LAMBDA.
Well perhaps (I hope ;) somewhere among green dots are those we see at the picture from NASA.
bartek
hi Bartek, everyone,
On Sat, 15 Mar 2003, szajtan odwieczny wrote:
well this is the thing I've been talking about on last thursday.
Nie dokładnie rozumiałem, ale nie ma sprawy ;).
Look at these two pictures. ;) Maeybe this kind of analysion is useless but surely it shows what problem we are dealing with here. On my plot (green dots) I chop off all negative values, all the values above 10000 for multipoles greater that 300 (which isn't a big crime), and throw out all points of which "errorbars" were bigger that the values itself. The red dots are raw data as it goes from LAMBDA.
The good news is that it looks something like typical C_l curves.
The bad news (depends on your point of view) is that i don't understand quite what is being plotted.
Did you calculate the C_l spectrum directly from the "linear" WMAP map, or are these from your model calculations?
pozd boud
Well perhaps (I hope ;) somewhere among green dots are those we see at the picture from NASA.
bartek
-
boud -
szajtan odwieczny