Nyquist does indeed have a very elegant explanation of why sounds above 22.05 won't work.
The messy stuff is explaining why noises in the next octave down (and more) are subject to periodic distortion at lower freqencies than their fundamental tones.
The 'lower' frequency you are hearing is probably caused by using a 44.1kHz DAC, which isn't really up to the job of reproducing these very high frequencies accurately. To do this particular hearing test properly, you really need to keep everything in the analogue domain.
The explanation for this is quite messy, but google the terms "Nyquist limit", "Shannons Sampling Theorem" and "Aliaising Noise" if you want to know more.
Try generating a slow sweep from 10k to 22.1k and you'll probably hear a multitiude of sounds from the DAC rather than a nice smooth rise, especially if the fundamental moves outside your hearing range along the way.
The domain "example.com" is reserved for exactly this purpose.
However, I find that for cases where you can be reasonably certain your address is NEVER going to be used for legitimate purposes (such as cases like this where the context implies the address is useless and it will only be treated as real by harvesters), you can skip the middle man by using uce@ftc.gov
assuming there is a 7 year statute of limitations... I had in my office a mysterious phone socket, which didn't seem to generate a telelphone bill. This was long before caller id, so I had no way of finding out the number, so I used that one for outgoing calls and my own for incoming.
A side effect of this is that every incoming call on the mystery line was a wrong number. Following my high standards of telephone etiquette, I started off politely greeting callers with "Hello, this is the wrong number.", which (despite being factual, formal, polite and clear english) seemed to baffle the vast majority of callers.
Responses varied from polite confusion, through stubborn insistence that I must either BE the person the other party wanted to speak to or at least able but unwilling to put me though to them, all the way to someone who called 10 times in as many minutes asking for "Dave", getting more annoyed each time. On the 10th call I said "OK, you win this is Dave, what do you want?", at which point he hung up on me.
After a while I got bored with politeness and switched to making prank answers (like prank calls, but the other way round), the objective of which was to keep a straight face while cracking everyone else in the office up. The most successful of these was 'dial-a-duck', the premium rate porn service for duck fetishists, which involved answering the phone with "Hi, welcome to Dial-a-Duck", and then carring on the resulting conversation using only the word "quack", in as seductive a manner as possible.
Even if we skip the fact that arguably, the Cell architecture IS a cluster, realtime raytracing is possible already, if you sacrifice enough quality/use simple enough objects/lights.
Will the PS3 pack enough punch to do worthwhile things with raytracing? Maybe, maybe not... but that's not really relevant, what Sony are pushing for is not raytracing but procedural rendering - instead of storing textures, generating them on the fly.
Take a look at Artmatic Voyager if you want to see some amazing procedural rendering software from the genius who wrote Bryce. There are NO stored textures in this program, it's all gernerated on the fly - which is how it's capable of zooming in look at individual rocks anywhere in on a the surface of 64000km diameter planets.
Whatever ".net' is (did anyone ever find out?) patching it to work with Mozilla is going to be easier than getting IE fixed, upgraded, and paying off the EU, and given the EU ruling that they must unbundle IE, MS have to do it anyway.
If your monitors regularly 'crap out' before your computer becomes obsolete, then maybe you are exactly the sort of cheapskate customer that Apple is quite happy to do without?
The screens on the SE/30 and Mac Plus we have here in my office are doing just as well as the ones on our bondi-blue iMac and the 17" 'lamp shape' iMac.
1) They want to save $1 billion. 2) IE is getting slated by everyone because Mozilla are better products 3) They are getting fined by the EU for bundling IE anticompetitively 4) IE 7 is going to be too little too late 5) IE is horrible at suporting standards
They could solve all the above issues overnight with one cheap, simple and blindingly obvious move...
Spend 5 minutes compiling a version of Mozilla with a little 'e' in the corner instead of an 'm', search and replace 'bookmark'/'favourite' . Simply feed the results into software update and sack the whole IE team, all problems solved.
Seriously, there is NO reason for them to write a browser anymore - it's not as if anyone is paying for IE nowadays.
I'll go off on a wild tangent and suggest The Cluetrain Manifesto. The student will probably be saying "but this is all obvious" at least once per page. Understanding how and why it's not obvious to 99% of organisations is a really important real world lesson that your course proabably didn't cover....and it's a free download, so throw in something fun like Endger's Game (already recommended elsewhere) that way you won't look like a cheapskate.
Here in the land of the vanishing currency symbol, the first film was cut in 2 places by our film censors (they demanded about 1 second of head-butting be cut from 2 fight scenes).
For the DVD, we lost the 'music only, no dialogue' bonus soundtrack that was present on the other region 2 DVDs entirely, because they couldn''t be bothered syncing up that version of the audio or finding 1 one-second bits to splice into the fights.
I'm suggesting the plaintiff be given what they want - permanently - and then be blackholed, equally permanently.
The court did not 'have to interevene' at all, the court could (and should) have told the plaintif to go take a running jump (and pay the defendant's legal costs).
Not all devices will have enough computing power available. My grandmother has an Amstrad E-mailer. How long will it take the 4Mhz Z80 in there to generate a stamp? How about the cpu in my phone?
From the Faq "You only generate a stamp the first time you mail someone." So when all 20 of the biggest spamhouses have generated a stamp for you, you are right back at square 1? Net cafes with changing clientelle pay a higher price than spammers? Forged headers cliaming to be from friends don't need a stamp?
...assumed this was a story about a law firm demonstrating the ability to deliver writs over the airwaves by encoding them to the OFDM Wireless Standards?
While you are apologising for putting them on hold might be a good time to ask.
Having said that, if you are a tech company, how about the 6-CD set of the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy (the BBC radio show version)? No ads, no swearing (apart from b*lg**m), and quite a high 'oh, I forgot about this funny bit' value if you dip in at random.
A sonic boom is heard onboard a supersonic craft when it catches up with and overtakes the noise it has recently produced.
There is no sonic boom associated with travelling at multiples of the speed of sound, since at multiples of the speed of sound it just leaves it's noise further and further behind.
Slashdot Mirror
Nyquist does indeed have a very elegant explanation of why sounds above 22.05 won't work.
The messy stuff is explaining why noises in the next octave down (and more) are subject to periodic distortion at lower freqencies than their fundamental tones.
The 'lower' frequency you are hearing is probably caused by using a 44.1kHz DAC, which isn't really up to the job of reproducing these very high frequencies accurately. To do this particular hearing test properly, you really need to keep everything in the analogue domain.
The explanation for this is quite messy, but google the terms "Nyquist limit", "Shannons Sampling Theorem" and "Aliaising Noise" if you want to know more.
Try generating a slow sweep from 10k to 22.1k and you'll probably hear a multitiude of sounds from the DAC rather than a nice smooth rise, especially if the fundamental moves outside your hearing range along the way.
The domain "example.com" is reserved for exactly this purpose.
However, I find that for cases where you can be reasonably certain your address is NEVER going to be used for legitimate purposes (such as cases like this where the context implies the address is useless and it will only be treated as real by harvesters), you can skip the middle man by using uce@ftc.gov
assuming there is a 7 year statute of limitations... I had in my office a mysterious phone socket, which didn't seem to generate a telelphone bill. This was long before caller id, so I had no way of finding out the number, so I used that one for outgoing calls and my own for incoming.
A side effect of this is that every incoming call on the mystery line was a wrong number. Following my high standards of telephone etiquette, I started off politely greeting callers with "Hello, this is the wrong number.", which (despite being factual, formal, polite and clear english) seemed to baffle the vast majority of callers.
Responses varied from polite confusion, through stubborn insistence that I must either BE the person the other party wanted to speak to or at least able but unwilling to put me though to them, all the way to someone who called 10 times in as many minutes asking for "Dave", getting more annoyed each time. On the 10th call I said "OK, you win this is Dave, what do you want?", at which point he hung up on me.
After a while I got bored with politeness and switched to making prank answers (like prank calls, but the other way round), the objective of which was to keep a straight face while cracking everyone else in the office up. The most successful of these was 'dial-a-duck', the premium rate porn service for duck fetishists, which involved answering the phone with "Hi, welcome to Dial-a-Duck", and then carring on the resulting conversation using only the word "quack", in as seductive a manner as possible.
Even if we skip the fact that arguably, the Cell architecture IS a cluster, realtime raytracing is possible already, if you sacrifice enough quality/use simple enough objects/lights.
Will the PS3 pack enough punch to do worthwhile things with raytracing? Maybe, maybe not... but that's not really relevant, what Sony are pushing for is not raytracing but procedural rendering - instead of storing textures, generating them on the fly.
Take a look at Artmatic Voyager if you want to see some amazing procedural rendering software from the genius who wrote Bryce. There are NO stored textures in this program, it's all gernerated on the fly - which is how it's capable of zooming in look at individual rocks anywhere in on a the surface of 64000km diameter planets.
Well, I tried taking all the marketing spin out of that definition to make some sense of it, but when I was finished there was noting left.
Whatever ".net' is (did anyone ever find out?) patching it to work with Mozilla is going to be easier than getting IE fixed, upgraded, and paying off the EU, and given the EU ruling that they must unbundle IE, MS have to do it anyway.
If your monitors regularly 'crap out' before your computer becomes obsolete, then maybe you are exactly the sort of cheapskate customer that Apple is quite happy to do without?
The screens on the SE/30 and Mac Plus we have here in my office are doing just as well as the ones on our bondi-blue iMac and the 17" 'lamp shape' iMac.
Let's look at Microsoft's recent issues:
1) They want to save $1 billion.
2) IE is getting slated by everyone because Mozilla are better products
3) They are getting fined by the EU for bundling IE anticompetitively
4) IE 7 is going to be too little too late
5) IE is horrible at suporting standards
They could solve all the above issues overnight with one cheap, simple and blindingly obvious move...
Spend 5 minutes compiling a version of Mozilla with a little 'e' in the corner instead of an 'm', search and replace 'bookmark'/'favourite' . Simply feed the results into software update and sack the whole IE team, all problems solved.
Seriously, there is NO reason for them to write a browser anymore - it's not as if anyone is paying for IE nowadays.
I'll second that recommendation, and add that the they have also been printed together in one volume called "Across Realtime".
It's worth pointing out that those two options are not mutually exclusive.
I'll go off on a wild tangent and suggest The Cluetrain Manifesto. The student will probably be saying "but this is all obvious" at least once per page. Understanding how and why it's not obvious to 99% of organisations is a really important real world lesson that your course proabably didn't cover. ...and it's a free download, so throw in something fun like Endger's Game (already recommended elsewhere) that way you won't look like a cheapskate.
Here in the land of the vanishing currency symbol, the first film was cut in 2 places by our film censors (they demanded about 1 second of head-butting be cut from 2 fight scenes).
For the DVD, we lost the 'music only, no dialogue' bonus soundtrack that was present on the other region 2 DVDs entirely, because they couldn''t be bothered syncing up that version of the audio or finding 1 one-second bits to splice into the fights.
Are you basing that claim on actual facts or just plain old xenophobia?
The problem with copyright ending at death is that spouses and children need some form of income.
:-)
Would you really want to see Yoko Ono made destitute and penniless when John was killed?
Ok, maybe that was a bad example
Would you really want to see Courtney L.... erm... Paula Yates... erm... someone help me out here!
Characters 4-8 are for body style, engine type, model and series.
Character 10 is the model year.
The last 6 characters are the serial number.
Unless a manufacturer makes more than 999,999 each of about 33^4 different models per year, I don't see the problem.
I'm not sure you replied to the right post.
I'm suggesting the plaintiff be given what they want - permanently - and then be blackholed, equally permanently.
The court did not 'have to interevene' at all, the court could (and should) have told the plaintif to go take a running jump (and pay the defendant's legal costs).
The internet is supposed to be self-repairing. All that needs to be done is route round the problem.
Let these idiots have the IP addresses, but blackhole them, and the idiotic state that tried to break the net.
Surely this was already illegal under existing copyright laws?
Not all devices will have enough computing power available. My grandmother has an Amstrad E-mailer. How long will it take the 4Mhz Z80 in there to generate a stamp? How about the cpu in my phone?
From the Faq "You only generate a stamp the first time you mail someone." So when all 20 of the biggest spamhouses have generated a stamp for you, you are right back at square 1? Net cafes with changing clientelle pay a higher price than spammers? Forged headers cliaming to be from friends don't need a stamp?
The author 'architected an appropriate response' . Persumably this is a lot better than simply replying?
I'd advise the author not to use the word "percept", because he doesn't know what it means.
I'd advise the author not to use the word "someodd", because dictionary.com doesn't know what it means.
As for "very unique"...
...assumed this was a story about a law firm demonstrating the ability to deliver writs over the airwaves by encoding them to the OFDM Wireless Standards?
While you are apologising for putting them on hold might be a good time to ask.
Having said that, if you are a tech company, how about the 6-CD set of the HitchHiker's Guide to the Galaxy (the BBC radio show version)? No ads, no swearing (apart from b*lg**m), and quite a high 'oh, I forgot about this funny bit' value if you dip in at random.
A sonic boom is heard onboard a supersonic craft when it catches up with and overtakes the noise it has recently produced.
There is no sonic boom associated with travelling at multiples of the speed of sound, since at multiples of the speed of sound it just leaves it's noise further and further behind.
I thought we were at war with Libraria?
I hate those Librarians!