You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We were under the wrong impression, that CORSIKA, CERES and we use different Azimuth definitions.
As it turns out, CERES and FACT-Tools use the same (N = 0, E=90°), the transformation in CERES of (180° - CORSIKA AZ) happens because corsika gives the movement direction of the particle, which is opposite to the viewing direction of the telescope.
So we should not reverse this transformation to get simulations with the correct magnetic field for an azimuth value.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We were under the wrong impression, that CORSIKA, CERES and we use different Azimuth definitions.
As it turns out, CERES and FACT-Tools use the same (N = 0, E=90°), the transformation in CERES of (180° - CORSIKA AZ) happens because corsika gives the movement direction of the particle, which is opposite to the viewing direction of the telescope.
So we should not reverse this transformation to get simulations with the correct magnetic field for an azimuth value.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: