The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
Reply-To: "Kevin Aylward"
From: "Kevin Aylward"
Subject: Re: How does a mixer work?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:07:56 +0100
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 08:08:04 BST
"JD" wrote in message
> "Kevin Aylward" wrote in message
> > "JD" wrote in message
> > news:JcAt9.474$S4.email@example.com...
> > >
> > > "Kevin Aylward" wrote in message
> > > news:Lkrt9.510$Af5.firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > > > "John S. Dyson" wrote in message
> > > > news:felt9.436$S4.email@example.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Dbowey" wrote in message
> > > > news:firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > > >
> > > > > I am NOT making the cosmological assertion that everything is
> > really
> > > > > an f(t) or other such off-topic concerns, but am clearly
> > that
> > > > much
> > > > > of our real-world that we normally see (in the sense of this
> > > > discussion)
> > > > > is an f(t). f(w) or f(s) is a convienience, where nonlinear
> > > > operations
> > > > > or changing signal characteristics can cause some traps and/or
> > > > pitfalls
> > > > > for those who don't deal with the stuff all of the time.
> > > >
> > > > I disagree that one view is more real then another. Models of
> > reality
> > > > are just that models, f(t) is no more valid then any other
> > > >
> > > Using LINEAR transforms for modeling nonlinear processes is where
> > > the incompetency resides.
> > This simple is not true. Nonlinear processes just make it a bit more
> > complicated. The issue is one of a fundermental nature, ireespectibe
> > whether the system is complicated or not. "scientific theories are
> > free creation of the human mind" - Albert Einstien.
> The fundamental nature is usually where the problem can be clearly
> explained. Fourier domain is not such a place for our nonlinear
> and chaotic world. There certain are frequency domain models for
> visualization, but they are approximations to the time domain (which
> might be approximations of something further down.)
The problem here though is the very *definition* of time. It simple can
not be done with recourse to observation of a motion that is repetitive.
So, the time domain is still no better then the frequency domain. It's
not an approximation to the frequency domain because its very definition
inherently depends on the frequency domain.
"scientific theories are the free creation of the human mind" - Albert
You just can't get around this principle.
> You can keep on special casing the Fourier and Laplace world to make
> it fit into the nonlinear dynamics in the time domain, but all you'll
> is a slowly improving piecewise model of the f(t), sometimes after
> MUCH effort.
Well, I did explain that the frequency and time domain are fundamentally
incompatible by its uncertainty relation Sigma.Sigma >=1/2. And in view
that one definition that one depends on another, were up shit creek.
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup