confusion about longitudinal magnification. i think when i move the sample, everything is fine and i don't have to introduce a $\vnu_t$-dependent $\zeta$
equations showing linear intensity image formation,
i what the first paper is, that derives this,
delete some garbage
convolution for intensity images should be correct now.
the functions must be measurable in L1, which they all are
it should even works according to the ray-model
i think streibl integrated the ray density and obtains a similar otf with
missing cone but an infinty in the origin