Convolution Tutorial
in [DSP]
|
Prev: forward error correction capabilities?
Next: Position estimation using tri-axis accelerometer with gyroscope in Static standing
From: Chris Bore on 30 Dec 2009 11:12 On Dec 28, 7:04 pm, dvsarwate <dvsarw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 28, 10:59 am, Jerry Avins <j...(a)ieee.org> averred: > > > > > I had one guy with a Ph.D. in some electrical branch of physics tell me > > that the curved line on the schematic representation of a 'lytic was a > > "mere visual embellishment". To prove that a polar capacitor was a > > contradiction in terms, he wrote out the defining equation. > > Oh, shoot! You mean V = IR is all wrong and if I apply > a gazillion volts to a 1-ohm resistor, I won't get a gazillion > amps flowing through it? > > --Dilip Burntfingers I have missed these arguments so much.... :-) New Year Resolution: participate in comp.dsp more again. Chris ========================== Chris Bore BORES Signal Processing www.bores.com
From: Eric Jacobsen on 30 Dec 2009 11:41 On 12/30/2009 9:12 AM, Chris Bore wrote: > On Dec 28, 7:04 pm, dvsarwate<dvsarw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Dec 28, 10:59 am, Jerry Avins<j...(a)ieee.org> averred: >> >> >> >>> I had one guy with a Ph.D. in some electrical branch of physics tell me >>> that the curved line on the schematic representation of a 'lytic was a >>> "mere visual embellishment". To prove that a polar capacitor was a >>> contradiction in terms, he wrote out the defining equation. >> Oh, shoot! You mean V = IR is all wrong and if I apply >> a gazillion volts to a 1-ohm resistor, I won't get a gazillion >> amps flowing through it? >> >> --Dilip Burntfingers > > I have missed these arguments so much.... :-) > > New Year Resolution: participate in comp.dsp more again. > > Chris > ========================== > Chris Bore > BORES Signal Processing > www.bores.com Please do! ;) -- Eric Jacobsen Minister of Algorithms Abineau Communications http://www.abineau.com
From: HardySpicer on 30 Dec 2009 15:12 On Dec 31, 4:01 am, Rune Allnor <all...(a)tele.ntnu.no> wrote: > On 30 Des, 08:19, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...(a)ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > > > > > HardySpicer <gyansor...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > (snip, I wrote) > > > >> I am not so sure how it works in EE, but in physics there are > > >> theoretical and experimental physicists. ?Many good theoretical > > >> physicists aren't very good at lab work. ?There is the well known > > >> "Pauli effect" ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_effect > > > Engineers haven't realised this yet. The industry ones bleat on and > > > one about how they are the only ones that can solve real problems and > > > the academics bleat on and on about the limitations of industry. There > > > is little respect of one wrt the other as you can see. > > > As far as respect, in physics each has many good stories and jokes > > about the other. Personally, I remember a party for a new theoretical > > physics Ph.D. including a bottle of champagne. While I believe > > any experimental physicist could figure out how to open a bottle, > > this Ph.D theoretical physicist could not get it open. > > The main difference between industry and academia is > that in industry, the fools, frauds, and failures will > eventually be recognized as such - if not sooner so > at least when their failed plans cause some damage or > when their schemes fall apart. > > People are held legally and economically accountable. > Companies tend to go out of business if the skills, > knowledge and craftmanship are substandard. > > Not so in academia. In academia, anyone can apparently do > anything without any danger of repercusions once they have > optained tenure. Most of the projects I used to be involved Only in the US system and some otehr countries. Not all countries. Also it is not always country specific: sometimes the Unis make up their own rules. In essence I agree however. Uni Profs hide under the guise of committees. Your ordinary lecturer may not always get away with murder however. Repeated bad results for students (in teaching) and a poor research performance may well lead to the door.. In reality what happens in demotion to a teaching assistant or whatever if research is poor. If research is good and teaching is poor then they normally get away with it. Sad.. Hardy
From: HardySpicer on 30 Dec 2009 15:23 On Dec 31, 5:41 am, Eric Jacobsen <eric.jacob...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > On 12/30/2009 9:12 AM, Chris Bore wrote: > > > > > On Dec 28, 7:04 pm, dvsarwate<dvsarw...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Dec 28, 10:59 am, Jerry Avins<j...(a)ieee.org> averred: > > >>> I had one guy with a Ph.D. in some electrical branch of physics tell me > >>> that the curved line on the schematic representation of a 'lytic was a > >>> "mere visual embellishment". To prove that a polar capacitor was a > >>> contradiction in terms, he wrote out the defining equation. > >> Oh, shoot! You mean V = IR is all wrong and if I apply > >> a gazillion volts to a 1-ohm resistor, I won't get a gazillion > >> amps flowing through it? > > >> --Dilip Burntfingers > > > I have missed these arguments so much.... :-) > > > New Year Resolution: participate in comp.dsp more again. > > > Chris > > ========================== > > Chris Bore > > BORES Signal Processing > >www.bores.com > > Please do! ;) > > -- > Eric Jacobsen > Minister of Algorithms > Abineau Communicationshttp://www.abineau.com An experimental physicist had completed an important experiment on the determination of the relationship betwen two physical quantities A and B. He rushed across the campus to the office of a theoretical mathematician who was occupied with the same problem. Volodya! I have finished the experiment. A has turned out to be larger than B! The mathematician thought about this for a moment before replying. This is completely understandable. You didnt even have to make your experiment, as A must be larger than B for the following reasons Oh dear, interuppted the physicist. Did I really say that A was larger than B? I slipped up it is B that is larger than A! The mathematician thought about this for a moment more before replying. Then this is even more understandable, and here is why
From: Rune Allnor on 30 Dec 2009 16:29
On 30 Des, 17:05, Jerry Avins <j...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > Rune Allnor wrote: > > ... > > > The main difference between industry and academia is > > that in industry, the fools, frauds, and failures will > > eventually be recognized as such - if not sooner so > > at least when their failed plans cause some damage or > > when their schemes fall apart. > > Oh? Don't they get promoted to management? Sure. I said 'recognized,' not 'disposed of.' It's a far different thing to deal with somebody you know to be an incompetent fool, and somebody who is, but you don't know about. Rune |