3 ms·
Awesome. I'm not sure how to make this argument precise, but I think you could sample the intensity function only every 12.5cm (wavelength at 2.4 Ghz), since wa
by darkmighty 12y ago
Awesome. I'm not sure how to make this argument precise, but I think you could sample the intensity function only every 12.5cm (wavelength at 2.4 Ghz), since waves of a given wavelength are restricted to resonate and interfere at small multiples of it's wavelength.
For reconstruction there should be some ideal interpolation, maybe a 3d sync filter?
Another random interesting fact: if you capture not only the intensity but also phase of only a 2D slice, and have some environmental information (i.e. know how the signal propagates in your room), you can reconstruct the full 3D intensity.
- icegreentea 12y agoA naive application of Nyquist sampling theorem will say you have to sample at twice the frequency of whatever you're trying to reconstruct - so for 2.4Ghz you need to sample at at least every 6.25cm. The reason why you can't just use the base frequency is cause... well, for example, imagine you have the worst luck ever, and only ever sampled the nodes of the standing wave - it would just look like no signal. In practice... I have no idea. RF is too much for me.