I wonder if there is a spatial Nyquist sampling theory?

Started by walala March 19, 2004
In article <c3fpl0$rc8$>, walala <> wrote:
>I am not sure I understand the concept of spatial frequency. >For example, we know we have sensor networks now: >suppose we place sensors into a region to sense temprature. Do we need to >consider the Spatial Nyquist rate?
Consider an entire county covered with alternating outdoor ice rinks and bonfires, spaced in a checkerboard grid every 0.2 miles. If your temperature sensor network is spaced too widely (say every 0.4 miles), you might could easily end up with all of the sensors near the bonfires and measure a completely wrong average temperature for the county. A little wider spacing, and you might measure the North side of the county as considerably hotter than the South side due to sample aliasing. If, however, your temperature sensor network were spaced every 0.1 miles, then you would pretty much guarantee measurements near all the bonfires and the ice rinks and in between and thus more likely to resolve the temperature frequency (1 peak per 0.4 miles) and get an unaliased average temperature. IMHO. YMMV. -- Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com #include <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.