Abstract

This erratum corrects Eq. (13a) in Appl. Opt. 55, 3104 (2016) [CrossRef]   and shows its effect on the proposed dip estimate functions Eqs. (21a)–(21d2). The differences are small, maximal up to a few percent and well within the original error limits. A new figure shows how the variability of the terrestrial refraction of the dip—as estimated with the proposed estimate functions—decreases with increasing observer heights.

© 2018 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. M. E. Tschudin, “Refraction near the horizon—an empirical approach. Part 1: terrestrial refraction of the dip,” Appl. Opt. 55, 3104–3115 (2016).
    [Crossref]

2016 (1)

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (1)

Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. (a) Absolute and (b) relative variability of the terrestrial refraction of the dip as a function of the height of the observer, H obs .

Equations (6)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

f ( P , T ) = ( P / P std ) ( T std / T ) 2 .
D a [ ] = 1.753 ( ± 0.004 ) H 1 / 2 .
D a [ ] = 1.779 ( ± 0.003 ) H 1 / 2 0.47 ( ± 0.05 ) Δ θ H 1 / 2 .
D a [ ] = D g [ ] 0.090 ( ± 0.014 ) sgn ( H + ) abs ( H + ) 0.65 ( ± 0.04 )
D a [ ] = D g [ ] 0.111 ( ± 0.016 ) sgn ( H + ) abs ( H + ) 0.58 ( ± 0.03 )
D a [ ] = D g [ ] { 0.95 ( ± 0.14 ) H 0.15 ( ± 0.05 ) + 2.30 ( ± 0.25 ) e v wind / 0.6 } .

Metrics