Apple USB C or Lightning 3.5mm adapter.
Amazon.com: Apple USB-C to 3.5 mm Headphone Jack Adapter
It’s not amazing, though I suppose it is for 8 dollars and considering the physical size of it.
Nope, you were talking about why and when music cannot be considered a sum of sines:
Sorry, it's still hogwash.
Your lie of omission by leaving out my immediately preceding sentences to the part you quoted is a well known plain dirty political debate trick. It is a clear attempt to fake the meaning of someone else's words.
The omitted sentence reads: "As a practical matter, we can ignore the extremes of mathematical theory and use FFTs as a very practical tool. I do that too and it can work quite well in many cases. Always worth doing."
Syn08, Ovidou, or whatever you call yourself, I know you are better than that when you want to be. I have no interest in playing your political debate games when you switch to that behavior. Good day.
EDIT: For those that do want to play syn08's game, you might try doing to him what he does to you. Lie, cheat, FUD, whatever he does just see how he likes it in return. Turn it into a massive, angry political debate until the moderators close the thread.
Last edited:
Nice talk, quite ...err...interesting, well written and posted with "verve". 🙂
The problem indeed is, that I was told what "steady state measurement" means; I've to admit long time ago, but luckily the teachers of the past are still present in books and so let's take a quote:
(Unbehauen,Rolf;Cichocki,Andrzej; MOS Switched-Capacitor and Continuous-Time Integrated Circuits and Systems - Analysis and Design, Springer, 34)
Now, everybody buy the $20 oscilloscope on WISH. I am amazed with it, and it only cost $20. This way you can watch your music as well.
Forgot to address the "transient" issue; exciting a LTI system for example with a step input signal provokes a "transient process" until the system has settled (i.e. has reach the steady state) often denoted as "settling time" .
Aha, so how is not quoting that distorted the message you are trying to convey in the same post, a few lines down:
Did I say hogwash?
The quote is correct; the "system" must be under steady state, not the "measurement".
Your honesty in admitting a mistake (if that's the drift of your message, I'm not sure 😀) is appreciated.
That is correct, however, there is no problem in handling the response in the frequency domain using the same-o-same Fourier transform.
What I said already (way too) many times is that if one thinks such an approach would bring anything new to the table compared to the standard approach (extending the signals by periodicity), then please come up with extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim.
For such "transient processes" like a step response we have other much more convenient tools, namely the Laplace transform. There is a non obvious relationship between the Laplace and Fourier transforms, in that the Laplace transform for s=jw is equal to the Fourier transform if, and only if, its region of convergence contains the imaginary axis. This is also true for the bilateral Laplace transform.
Last edited:
If you hadn't recently quoted from my post
your trick might have worked. 😉
But anyway, as we now all remember, what we've always have known, we seem to agree that the usual way of measuring when using sine waves (like already mentioned in my initial post to this subtopic) is a measurement in the steady state condition (i.e. steady state measurement). 🙂
Last edited:
Ok, so you are still holding to your guns. Too bad you have no ammunition
.BTW, I don't play any tricks, I leave those for the hucksters with an agenda and an axe to grind.
Seems you are alone mmerrill as Jakob didn't answer...
BTW, my example, mentioned earlier, is very simple, would you like to hear it?
BTW, my example, mentioned earlier, is very simple, would you like to hear it?
Last edited:
This discussion has many touch points with a discussion with Flat Earthers. It's not a matter who's right or wrong, what matters is who's giving up first.
It's kind of fascinating; taken syn08's trick at face value, he is now trying to state that evil Jakob (x) was FUDing with talking about "using sine waves in the usual way is steady state measurement" while totally not FUDing would have been to write "using sine waves in the usual way is measurement in steady state".
One nearly has to admire this game play..... 🙂
Overall it is a gem for friends of surrealism.
FWIW, both formulations are incorrect. A correct version (although the whole context is ridiculous) would be ""using sine waves is the usual way to measure a system in steady state". Your obfuscating attempt to trivialize the matter to a potato-potatoe debate is duly noted.
Last edited:
I agree but I prefer my surrealism from the likes of Dali not From someone pretending to offer realism 😎
I'm not interested in the physics that applies in your universe, Scott & surrealism doesn't interest me except in the art world
- Status
- Not open for further replies.