prime_m = 
-\phi_m$, and a frequency that is the alias of the earlier one; i.e., of angular frequency $\omega^\prime_m = \omega_c - \omega_m$. Let it have the same magnitude of drift but opposite in direction, i.e., $\tau^\prime = - \tau$; Then it can be shown that $$\Delta t^\prime_n \approx - \tau \sin \left ( \Phi_n \right ) \left [ 1 + \tau \left \{ 
0.5 \omega_c + \Delta \omega_m \right \} \cos \left ( \Phi_n \right ) \right ],$$ for integer $n$. For non-integer $n$, which implies that the pulses start at some arbitrary phase within the period, a constant phase adds to $\Phi_n$ in eq. (4).

Now, the observed time series corresponds to either eq. (3) or eq. (4). If one knows its absolute phase, then one directly compares the observation to those two equations, and thus determines if the observed frequency is original or aliased. However, this is rarely the case. So, one has to distinguish between the the time series $\pm 0.25 
\omega_c \tau^2 \sin \left ( 2 \Phi_n \right )$ of eq. (3) and eq. (4). This is possible only if the sampling interval used for the observations is much smaller than the quantity $0.5 \omega_c \times \tau^2$, which is $\approx 1.52$ ms in 0943. However the sampling interval of DR2001 (1.006 ms) is barely smaller than this. Therefore it is probably impossible for DR1999 and DR2001 to distinguish between the original drift frequency and its alias with opposite drift direction. This argument also holds for saw-tooth modulation drifting pattern, which can be Fourier decomposed into harmonics of the fundamental modulating frequency $\omega_m$.

Now one can understand the result of the previous section - a time resolution $<< 
1.52$ ms implies a minimum Nyquist frequency of $ >> 0.5 / 0.00152 \approx 329$ Hz or 361 \[cpp\]. Indeed, the spectra in fig. \[fig1\] differ most in the range 500 to 900 \[cpp\], mainly in the higher harmonics $m
prime_m = 
 -\phi_m$, and a frequency that is the alias of the earlier one; i.e., of angular frequency $ \omega^\prime_m = \omega_c - \omega_m$. Let it have the same order of magnitude of drift but diametric in focus, i.e., $ \tau^\prime = - \tau$; Then it can be shown that $ $ \Delta t^\prime_n \approx - \tau \sin \left (\Phi_n \right) \left [ 1 + \tau \left \ { 
 0.5 \omega_c + \Delta \omega_m \right \ } \cos \left (\Phi_n \right) \right ], $ $ for integer $ n$. For non - integer $ n$, which implies that the pulse start at some arbitrary phase within the period, a ceaseless phase add to $ \Phi_n$ in eq.   (4). 

 Now, the observe time series corresponds to either equivalent.   (3) or eq.   (4). If one knows its absolute phase, then one directly compares the observation to those two equation, and thus determines if the observed frequency is original or aliased. However, this is rarely the case. So, one accept to distinguish between the the time serial $ \pm 0.25 
 \omega_c \tau^2 \sin \left (2 \Phi_n \right) $ of eq.   (3) and eq.   (4). This is possible only if the sample interval use for the observations is a lot smaller than the quantity $ 0.5 \omega_c \times \tau^2 $, which is $ \approx 1.52 $ ms in 0943. However the sampling time interval of DR2001 (1.006 ms) is barely smaller than this. Therefore it is probably impossible for DR1999 and DR2001 to distinguish between the original drift frequency and its alias with opposite drift direction. This argument also holds for saw - tooth modulation drifting pattern, which can be Fourier decomposed into harmonics of the fundamental modulating frequency $ \omega_m$. 

 nowadays one can understand the result of the former incision - a prison term resolution $ < < 
 1.52 $ ms imply a minimal Nyquist frequency of $ > > 0.5 / 0.00152 \approx 329 $ Hz or 361 \[cpp\ ]. Indeed, the spectra in fig.   \[fig1\ ] differ about in the range 500 to 900 \[cpp\ ], mainly in the higher harmonics $ m
prile_m = 
-\phi_m$, and a frequencn that is the alnqs of vhe earmier one; i.e., of angular frequency $\omeja^\prume_m = \omega_c - \omega_m$. Let it have the same matnitnde of drift but oppositc in slrectnoi, i.e., $\tau^\prime = - \tau$; Then ht can be showt ghct $$\Delta t^\prime_n \approx - \tau \sin \lefe ( \Phi_n \rlght ) \left [ 1 + \jau \ltft \{ 
0.5 \ojvgc_c + \Delta \omega_m \right \} \cos \leff ( \Phi_n \right ) \right ],$$ for integer $n$. For non-intfger $n$, which implies tjat the pulwes frart at some arbitrary phase withih the period, a constant phase aads tp $\Phi_n$ in gq. (4).

Hoa, the observxd timv series corrcxponds to eitner eq. (3) or eq. (4). In one kniws its absolute phasx, then one directly sompares dhz observation to thosw rwo exuathons, qnd thhs dstermijes if the obaerved freqyency is original ot woiased. Howeved, this if rarely the case. So, one has to distinglish between the the time swries $\pm 0.25 
\omega_c \tau^2 \din \left ( 2 \Phi_n \right )$ of eq. (3) and eq. (4). This is possible only hf thx ramkllkg ivregval used for the observations is much smallew tnak the quantity $0.5 \jmega_c \timex \hai^2$, which is $\apptox 1.52$ ms in 0943. However the sampping injerval of DR2001 (1.006 mf) is barely smaller than this. Tyerefore it ps peobably impossible for DR1999 and DR2001 jo disyinguish between the ornginal drift freqkency and kts alias with oopoxide drift direction. This ardument alwo hplds fof sae-tooth modulatioj drinding pattern, which can ye Fogrier decolposed into harmonics of the fuivamental modukadinc frequeucy $\omcga_m$.

Now one can understand thg result jf thd previous sectioi - a time refolution $<< 
1.52$ ms lmplies a miiimum Nyqtist frewuency uw $ >> 0.5 / 0.00152 \approx 329$ Hz or 361 \[cip\]. Indwed, the spectra in fie. \[rig1\] differ most in the range 500 to 900 \[cpo\], mwijlb in eve higher hasmonkcs $k
prime_m = -\phi_m$, and a frequency that alias the earlier i.e., of angular \omega_m$. it have the magnitude of drift opposite in direction, i.e., $\tau^\prime = \tau$; Then it can be shown that $$\Delta t^\prime_n \approx - \tau \sin ( \Phi_n \right ) \left [ 1 + \tau \left \{ 0.5 \omega_c \Delta \right \cos ( \Phi_n \right ) \right ],$$ for integer $n$. For non-integer $n$, which implies that the start at some arbitrary phase within the period, constant phase adds to in eq. (4). Now, the time corresponds to eq. or (4). If one its absolute phase, then one directly compares the observation to those two equations, and thus determines if observed frequency or aliased. this rarely case. So, one distinguish between the the time series \tau^2 \sin \left ( 2 \Phi_n \right )$ eq. (3) eq. (4). This is possible only the sampling interval used for the observations is smaller than the quantity $0.5 \omega_c \times \tau^2$, which is $\approx 1.52$ ms in 0943. sampling interval of DR2001 ms) is barely than Therefore is impossible for and DR2001 to distinguish between the original drift frequency and its with opposite drift direction. This argument also holds for saw-tooth pattern, can be Fourier into harmonics of the modulating $\omega_m$. Now one can result the a resolution 1.52$ ms implies a Nyquist frequency of $ >> / 0.00152 \approx 329$ the spectra in fig. \[fig1\] differ most in range 500 to 900 \[cpp\], mainly in higher harmonics $m
prime_m = 
-\phi_m$, and a frequency thAt is the aliAs of tHe eArlIeR one; I.e., of Angular frequenCY $\omeGa^\prime_m = \omega_c - \omega_m$. LeT it haVe THe saME mAgnitUde of drIFt BUT opPoSiTe iN dIReCtion, I.e., $\tAu^\prime = - \Tau$; Then it cAn bE sHown that $$\DeltA T^\pRime_n \approX - \taU \sin \left ( \Phi_n \RigHt ) \left [ 1 + \TaU \leFT \{ 
0.5 \omegA_c + \DElta \oMega_m \rIGht \} \cos \Left ( \Phi_n \rIgHT ) \right ],$$ FOr integER $N$. FOr noN-integer $n$, which impLIeS That the pulses sTart at SoME aRBItrAry Phase withiN tHe perIOd, a consTAnT PHAse ADds to $\Phi_n$ in eq. (4).

now, the obserVEd tIme serIeS coRResponDs to eItHEr eQ. (3) or eq. (4). If one kNows Its absoluTe phasE, Then one DIrectly ComparEs tHe oBserVAtIoN to ThOSe tWO eQuaTIonS, and thus DeTeRmineS if tHE OBServEd fRequEncy iS original or alIasEd. HoWEveR, this Is rarEly tHe Case. SO, one haS to diStInguish between tHe thE time seriEs $\pM 0.25 
\oMegA_c \Tau^2 \siN \Left ( 2 \PhI_n \rIghT )$ of eq. (3) anD eq. (4). This IS poSsIBLE oNly if the sampling inTeRVAl Used for tHe obseRVaTiONs is much SmAllEr thAN The quAntiTY $0.5 \oMega_c \timEs \tau^2$, wHIcH iS $\approx 1.52$ Ms In 0943. HoweVeR thE saMplinG InteRval of dR2001 (1.006 ms) is baRely sMAller than this. THErefore it is prOBaBLY iMPossIblE for DR1999 and DR2001 To diSTingUish BEtWeeN The orIginaL dRIfT Frequency and its aliaS wIth oppOsite Drift directioN. This argumENT Also holdS for SAw-TOoth modulation DriftIng pattern, WHich can bE FourIer decomPosed into HARmonics oF thE fuNdaMenTAL mOdulating freqUENcy $\oMeGa_m$.

Now oNe cAn underStaNd tHe rEsuLt Of the prevIous sectIoN - a TiMe ResOlutiON $<< 
1.52$ ms impliEs A miNiMum nyquiST frequEncy oF $ >> 0.5 / 0.00152 \appRoX 329$ HZ Or 361 \[cPp\]. IndeeD, ThE SPectRa In Fig. \[fIg1\] dIfFer moSt in THe rAnge 500 to 900 \[cPp\], mainly iN thE HighEr HaRmonics $M
prime_m = 
-\phi_m$, and a  frequency  that  is  th ealia s of  the earlier o n e; i .e., of angular freque ncy $ \o m ega^ \ pr ime_m  = \ome g a_ c - \ om eg a_m $. Le t ithav e the s ame magnit ude  o f drift buto pp osite in d ire ction, i.e.,  $\ tau^\p ri me=  - \t au$ ; The n it c a n be s hown that  $ $ \Delta t^\prim e _ n\app rox - \tau \sin \ l ef t  ( \Phi_n \rig ht ) \ le f t[ 1 +  \t au \left \ {
0.5\ omega_c +\ D e lta \omega_m \rig ht \} \cos\ lef t ( \P hi _n\ right) \ri gh t  ], $$ for inte ger$n$. Fornon-in t eger $n $ , which  impli estha t th e  p ul ses  s t art at  so m e a rbitrary  p ha se wi thin t h e  per iod , aconst ant phase add s t o $\ P hi_ n$ in  eq.(4). 
Now,the ob serve dtime series cor resp onds to e ith er  eq .(3) o r  eq. ( 4).  If  one kn ows its abs ol u t e  p hase, then one dir ec t l ycompares  the o b se rv a tion toth ose  two e quati ons, an d thus d etermi n es  i f the o bs ervedfr equ enc y iso rigi nal or  aliased . How e ver, this is r a rely the case .  S o ,  o n e ha s t o distingui sh b e twee n th e  t het ime s eries  $ \ pm 0.25 
\omega_c \tau ^2  \sin\left  ( 2 \Phi_n \ right )$ o f e q. (3) a nd e q .( 4). This is po ssibl e only ift he sampl ing i ntervalused fort h e observ ati ons  is  mu c h  s maller than t h e  qua nt ity $0. 5 \ omega_c  \t ime s \ tau ^2 $, whichis $\app ro x1. 52 $ m s in0 943. How ev erth e s ampli n g inte rvalof D R2 00 1  (1 .006 ms )  i s bare ly  s mall erth an th is.T her efore i t is prob abl y  imp os si ble for  DR1999 and D R2 001 to dis ti ngu ish be t w een theoriginal drift frequenc y  and it s a liaswith  opposite  dr ift di rec t ion. T his ar gumen tals o holds f or  sa w- tooth modu l a tio n dri ft ingpattern , which can be Fou r ier  decomposed i nto  har m o ni cso ft hefu n dam e n tal modulatingfrequency$\ o me ga_m$.

No w  on ecan und erstand  ther esult o f the pre vious sec ti on - a  ti me resolut ion $<<
1.52$ ms impli e sa min imu m Nyqu is t f reque ncy of $ > > 0.5  / 0.0 01 52 \ap prox32 9$ Hz or  361 \[cpp\]. Indeed, t he spe ctrainfig. \[fi g1\ ]  di ffer most  inthe range500  to  900\[c p p\],main l yint he hi gher harmonics $m 
prime_m =_
-\phi_m$, and_a frequency that is_the alias_of_the earlier_one;_i.e., of angular_frequency $\omega^\prime_m =_\omega_c - \omega_m$. Let_it have the_same_magnitude of drift but opposite in direction, i.e., $\tau^\prime = - \tau$; Then it_can_be shown_that_$$\Delta_t^\prime_n \approx - \tau \sin_\left ( \Phi_n \right )_\left [_1 + \tau \left \{ 
0.5 \omega_c +_\Delta_\omega_m \right \}_\cos \left ( \Phi_n \right ) \right ],$$ for_integer $n$. For non-integer $n$, which_implies that the_pulses_start_at some arbitrary phase_within the period, a constant phase_adds to $\Phi_n$ in eq. (4).

Now, the_observed time series corresponds to either eq. (3)_or eq. (4). If one knows its_absolute phase, then one directly_compares the_observation to those two equations,_and thus determines_if the_observed frequency is_original or aliased. However, this is_rarely the case._So, one has to distinguish between_the_the time series_$\pm_0.25_
\omega_c \tau^2_\sin \left (_2_\Phi_n \right_)$_of eq. (3) and eq. (4). This is_possible_only if the sampling interval used for_the observations is much_smaller_than the quantity $0.5_\omega_c \times \tau^2$, which is_$\approx 1.52$ ms in 0943. However_the sampling_interval of_DR2001 (1.006 ms) is barely smaller than this. Therefore it is_probably impossible for DR1999 and DR2001_to distinguish between the_original drift_frequency_and its alias_with_opposite drift_direction. This argument also holds for saw-tooth_modulation drifting_pattern, which can be Fourier decomposed_into harmonics of the_fundamental_modulating frequency $\omega_m$.

Now one can understand_the result of the previous section_- a time resolution $<<_
1.52$_ms_implies a minimum Nyquist frequency_of $ >> 0.5 / 0.00152_\approx 329$ Hz_or 361 \[cpp\]. Indeed, the spectra in_fig. \[fig1\]_differ most in the range 500_to_900 \[cpp\], mainly in the higher_harmonics_$m