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.
From: Paul Burke
Subject: Re: Audio noise in diff amps
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:47:56 +0000
Organization: Scazon Systems
References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <7a9M9.6086$jM5.email@example.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: host62-6-118-25.webport.bt.net (188.8.131.52)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
This thread wrote:
> > >> As far as I know, i and j are identical - the difference is that
> > >> mathematicians tend towards i, while engineers prefer j.
> > >>
> > >> Is there really more to it than that?
> > >>
> > > I'll look it up (again.) It has to do with whether it is sqrt(-1)
> > > or -sqrt(-1) or somesuch. Often, it ends up that EEs will use the i
> > > definition for j, but there really was a difference (or vice-versa).
> > > I found this odd fact in either an old IEEE journal or in a ref book.
> > > I'll try to revisit my 'steps' to remember where it is.
> > j and i are identically interpreted as far as compex maths goes..
They are identical. The reason for the electronics engineers' preference
is just that I or i is used for current- and convention has it that I is
the steady state, i the dynamic state, just where we need complex
calculations. So we write things like v = i * (R + jwL) rather than iwL.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup