A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Wind/Solar Electrics ???



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 31st 05, 02:38 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning,sci.electronics.design,alt.solar.photovoltaic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Wind/Solar Electrics ???

You still had to supply the constraints so the sampling
is not complete for any waveform.

This is like supplying $234 to buy that big screen TV
when you have to supply $1000 under the table to
actualy get it delivered. All the money is not upfront
and the $234 is a lie.

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message
news:2gdtf.58906$4l5.30943@dukeread05...
SolarFlare wrote:

OK let's go with your analogy example of 1234 being
represnted by 234 only.

You have no way of decoding 234 into 1234 without
passing information of 1000 as your baseband info

and
therefore the the number 1234 has not been

successfuly
representedm as being reproduced without further
information.

Now we could further argue algorythms as part of

the
information or part of the sample.



Likewise, you have no way of discerning 234 is

actually 234 and not 1234
with a 3 digit decimal number system. The problem is

not unique to
sub-sampling, it exists at baseband as well. The

only difference is
that at baseband the representation looks the same as

the signal. In
either case, you need to know the fixed constraints

of the system to
fully comprehend the meaning of the representation.

For example, in a 3
decimal digit system, you have no way of knowing that

234 really is 234
and not 1234 or 2234 unless you also know that the

inputs are limited to
the range 0 to 999. The only way around that is to

have an infinite
number of "symbols" to represent all the possible

data when the set of
possible data is infinite. As soon as that set is

not infinite, we can
take advantage of our knowledge of the system to

reduce the set of
symbols to a manageable number of elements. I'd

argue that any
engineering requires a set of implied constraints in

order to make the
problem solvable.

In the case of the subsampling, we know by design

what the pass-band of
the anti-alias filter is. That is a constant

parameter designed into
the system, so presumably it is know to designers of

all the components
of the system.

In the example case, then, we set as a system

constraint the fact that
all inputs are in the range of 1000 to 1234. That

constraint is a
constant, and is implied by the design. No

information is lost by not
transmitting the constant that is already known

throughout the system.
Doing so simply wastes bandwidth on your

communications channel.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question on 172 M electrics... (1974 Skyhawk II) [email protected] Piloting 8 April 10th 04 04:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.