I Need help simplifying standard error formula for redshift

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rageuke
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Redshift
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on simplifying the standard error formula for redshift, denoted as sigma(z). Key components include standard error (SE), the number of observations (n), standard deviation (sigma), total population (N), and population mean (mu). The original equation was deemed overly complex, prompting a request for simplification. Corrections were made regarding the introduction of a square root and the use of a biased formula for standard deviation, which may affect results based on the size of N. The conversation emphasizes the importance of clarity in statistical formulas for accurate calculations in astrophysics.
Rageuke
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
Filled in all the equations for standard error in redshift (standard error formula, standard deviation formula, mean formula), would like to simplify it, too complicated otherwise thanks in advance :)
Schermafbeelding 2024-04-27 123159.png

SE = standard error, expressed as sigma(x)
n = number of observations we take into account (from a total population) when calculating the standard error
sigma-index-x = standard deviation
N = total population
x-index-i = element of that population
mu = mean of the population
-> filled in all the equations and replaced x by z (redshift) to determine the standard error in z (sigma(z))
-> as you can see, last equation is way too complicated, can anyone help me simplify it?
PS. In the finale expression, x-index-i should be substituted with z-index-i
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Where you substituted your third expression into your second, why did you introduce a square root?
 
Small mistake of mine, I corrected it, thank you for your sharp eye!
 
Right. And what's left is a textbook formula for standard deviation, although you are using the biased formula. Whether that matters or not depends on the size of your ##N##.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top