I Time of flight measurement uncertainty

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on measuring the mean of a time-of-flight (tof) distribution generated by electrons from a 3D Gaussian source. The uncertainty in the measurement is influenced by both the detector's resolution and the source's standard deviation. It is confirmed that with sufficient statistical events, the mean can be extracted with an uncertainty better than the detector's resolution. The relationship between uncertainty and the number of events follows the principle of σ/√N, where σ represents the combined uncertainty. This statistical approach is likened to biased coin flips, illustrating the underlying mathematical principles.
Malamala
Messages
345
Reaction score
28
Hello! I am generating electrons from a 3D gaussian source. The electrons all have the same energy, but the direction is isotropic. The electron source is in between 2 plates that act as a capacitor, and one of them acts as a time of flight (tof) detector. I know the voltage on the plates very well, and I want to extract the center of the gaussian distribution (in one direction only), by measuring the tof of many electrons. So the uncertainty on the position is given by the tof uncertainty.

The distribution of tofs is a gaussian, with the mean being what I need for my measurement and a standard deviation which has contributions from both the standard deviation of the source and the resolution of the tof detector. Is it possible, if I have enough events, to extract the the mean of this tof distribution with an uncertainty better than the resolution of the detector, or that would always be the best I can do? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Malamala said:
Is it possible, if I have enough events, to extract the the mean of this tof distribution with an uncertainty better than the resolution of the detector, or that would always be the best I can do? Thank you!
Yes. With enough statistics you can measure the mean accurately below the resolution of your detector. By resolution, I take it you mean the resolution on the time-of-flight?
 
Twigg said:
Yes. With enough statistics you can measure the mean accurately below the resolution of your detector. By resolution, I take it you mean the resolution on the time-of-flight?
Thank you! Yes, the tof resolution. So should I expect the uncertainty to go like ##\sigma/\sqrt{N}##, where N is the number of events and ##\sigma## is the combined uncertainty (i.e. the detector resolution and the uncertainty in the position of creation of individual electrons)?
 
Yep! If you want mathematical proof for it, it's just the same statistics as a biased coin flip, where "heads" and "tails" refer to adjacent time bins of your detector on either side of the true tof value.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top