<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>The pulsar spectral index distribution · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1302.2053/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1302.2053/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>The pulsar spectral index distribution — mentioned by privong</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26081470</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1302.2053:26081470</guid><pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2021 19:23:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m not sure what you mean by &amp;quot;resolve&amp;quot;; are you referring to resolving the pulsar&amp;#x27;s pulse in time? I was speaking more about the flux detection limit of such a dish (implicitly assuming the receiver could make sufficiently short measurements to enable folding of the data to detect pulses in the time-folded dataset). One could try to coherently sum the measurements from a number of telescopes to increase the signal to noise. Alternately, one could also try to detect the pulsar by averaging over the pulse profile, but that still requires that the telescope+receiver sensitivity is better than…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1302.2053/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph.SR</category></item></channel></rss>
