Exactly... I wonder how many bits of Aeryn will get put into John because of this. I mean Aeryn also has some of Pilot's DNA in her. These people certainly are liberal about mixing their DNA.
In the last episode what happened to them was described as a 'neutralization run'. That doesn't sound too lethal to me. Plus the whole 'to be continued' before the credits role kinda leaves it open for a sequel. I don't see any problem with resolving this cliffhanger.
Re:Please do as I suggest (tell me why...if you kn
on
RGB to become RGBCMY
·
· Score: 1
Yes, however, a microphone does detect the overall waveform and does not split it up into frequency components. This will result in the distortion of the audible tone when recorded at a sampling rate that is below the two frequencies that make it.
If you do record at higher sampling rates you can increase your low pass filter and avoid aliasing effects until you reach about half of your sampling rate. This distorted sound, when replayed will not sound like the original tone as you would have heard with your ear. It will be close to the same tone, but it won't be the same.
There has been much debate as to whether or not including these higher frequencies in recording adds to music. Some people claim it does, others claim it doesn't. For me the quality between a 44.1kHz recording and a 96kHz recording is extremely dramatic.
Please do as I suggest (tell me why...if you know)
on
RGB to become RGBCMY
·
· Score: 1
The only thing I have said about DSP is that in order to sample a high frequency a sampling frequency of at least double that is needed to properly record it. If this is so wrong, then please stop posting AC and tell me what is wrong about it... A whole book is not necessary. If you can't/won't tell me then stop posting.
As for the rest of my post, it deals only with how higher frequency (individually inaudible sounds) can interfere to produce sounds we can hear (or to make this more simple for you even a tone that is audible and a tone that is inaudible can interfere to produce a 3rd audible tone... this IS how heterodyning works and is a method used to hear the sounds a bat makes by shifting it to an audible set of tones... these tones are not made up of just audible tones... they are made up of an inaudible set of tones interfering with an audible tone. The shifted tones may even be simulated by frequencies within the normal hearing range if you so wish to do that, but the quality is different if simulated rather than heterodyned to an audible range... it's just not the same.
Before you start spouting off more about human biology there is a lot that is not known about how the human brain interprets the different stimulii applied to the nerves in the ear.
And no, heterodying and superheterodyning are not methods just used for electromagnetic frequency shifting... the term is used for any frequency shifting in the manner I mentioned.
That pretty much answers my question... I wasn't sure if it could get enough 'thrust' to counteract gravity and just assumed it could for what I was considering tacking. I also understand what you were saying about orbits, but again, was trying to avoid orbits for the time being due to what I was considering for a free non-orbit motion. Afterall, the acceleration due to the sun's gravity (at Earth) is only.006m/s^2... I figured this might be able to be overcome with a solar sail on a lite enough object, but haven't read what range of acceleration is possible. I would assume very little since the light offers only small momentum transfer and the particles coming off the sun, while offering more momentum transfer per particle, are very sparse. Some sites I've Googled show it to be around 10^-4 m/s^2 but that sounds too good to be true, especially this far away from the sun.
By neglecting gravity wells, I was avoiding orbits. This means that for a traditional sail (i.e. a canvas of some sort) it would be hard to orient the sail so that you could try to go in another direction (without the drag of a fluid keeping you going in the direction the shape of your craft prefers). However, the sails I saw depicted onboard one of the artists renderings were hard flat surfaces that could be tilted. The resulting thrust direction would then be perpendicular to the surface of the sail.
With a flexible sail that simulated a canvas type sail, pretty much the only direction you would go is directly away from the sun. This means if you were in orbit, you could increase or decrease your speed appropriately to gain or lower your orbit's altitude. However, if you are not in orbit you would not be able to adjust your free trajectory very well with such a sail. Again, this is avoided with the hard flat surfaces as I saw in one of the depictions.
So, in essence I was talking about using this between planets where you would not have gravity to help you change direction... hence why I initialy said I was neglecting gravity wells, but then said how it would help when you are in orbit.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that these interfering high frequencies cannot be accurately reproduced by a set of frequencies within the 20-22000Hz range. These superimposed waves do not form a simple sine wave and the quality of the tone, or even clicks (aka beat patterns) if the frequencies are appropriately different, cannot be perfectly reproduced by using 20-22000Hz waves. They can be approximated, but you can tell the difference from the real thing. I may not know much about DSP, but I know from my education that two high frequency superimposed waves cannot be replicated perfectly with a finite combination of lower frequency waves or a sampling there of. Also to be noted is that unless the two frequencies are a whole number ratio of eachother, their resulting wave is not periodic... So, this non-periodic wave would definitely not be able to be reproduced by a finite number of these lower frequency waves.
Sorry, to the rest of the group for going so off topic, but I can't stand being told that I'm wrong when they offer absolutely no explanation as to why.
You're right in that the sail wouldn't help much as you increase the distance from the sun. However, if you were able to build up enough speed while still close to the sun you could escape the solar system and have plenty of speed left over. As for the force the particles coming off the sun will exert on the sail, I suppose that depends on the size and material of the sail.
The thing I'm curious about, and will read up on, is if they think they can tack to manuver within our own solar system. I don't think you can use tacking manuvers in space. You would need a fluid for your vessel to travel in and also need a preferred direction of travel due to the shape of the vessel. Without it I believe the only direction to travel (neglecting gravity wells) would be directly away from the sun. Just thinking about this now, though, it might be a useful means of adjusting an orbit by unfurling the sail at an appropriate time.
Yes, you are correct. However, I believe we were also discussing the ability to subtract any one of the R,G, and B. True yellow (in the CMY scheme) is not producable by simply adding R and G. However, if you don't just use positive values of R, G, and B you can obtain any color. You only need 3 points to describe a plane and using positive and negative values associated with these 3 points you can point to every point on that plane. However, there is no way to produce a negative value for these colors for real application, but it works for mathematical models. I believe the parent of my second reply was discussing this exact mathematical model.
Oops, and now I see you were replying to someone else who replied to my original message. I didn't see that until I exposed other replies that were below the threshold I have set. My applogies.
I don't know whether you meant to post under my response or not. I believe I was saying pretty much the same thing you were saying about the higher frequency sounds producing audible and perceiveable tones. Actually, I believe it is quite common and noticeable when you have a large orchestra. These instruments individualy produce frequencies outside of the audible range but they interfere adding to the timbre of each instrument. That's one of the reasons that higher sampling rates improve the quality and realism of music... also improving the ability to sample tones within the audible range.
As far as the color subject goes... I'm speaking particularly of the limitations on the phosphors used to produce red, blue, and green. I don't know if you are just adding more information or disagreeing with what I said, but while true RGB covers the color space, the phosphors used do not have the ability due to physical limitations.
Re:Nice, but still shortsighted
on
RGB to become RGBCMY
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
You may not be able to hear pure tones outside of the 20Hz - 25kHz range, but you can hear several of these tones interfereing. It is one of the reasons certain audio formats try to record at sampling rates higher than 44kHz, which should be enough to accurately sample a 22kHz tone. While it is true that one wouldn't be able to hear an individual tone, it is not true that they are unable to experience a collective set of tones higher than 22kHz.
Of course the interference is simulating a frequency we can hear, but trying to record it with just the frequencies used for hearing will never accurately reproduce what your ear actually picks up. The same would go for playing it. In my experience (which isn't much) you end up with clicking noises when there are interfereing tones outside of the recording/playing frequency range that are interfereing to produce tones within the recording/playing frequency range.
However, this is slightly different than the topic at hand. Just using 3 colors of phosphors to try to cover the entire range just isn't enough. There are a lot of colors that this excludes. While the colors used in current televisions are enough to do a pretty good job, there is always room for improvement. The point is that the current phosphors used in TVs do not trick the rods and cones in your eyes well enough to produce every color visible by your eyes. Adding phosphors that produce intermediate colors will help improve color quality.
Since the majority of video capture is moving to digital (or so it seems to me), the next step would be to design CMOS sensors in cameras with the new 4-6 primary system (This is for digital still picture cameras, I'm assuming digital video cameras are the same). They now use RGB filters, and to accurately capture the colors, they would need to have RGBCMY filters with minimum color overlap.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly... I wonder how many bits of Aeryn will get put into John because of this. I mean Aeryn also has some of Pilot's DNA in her. These people certainly are liberal about mixing their DNA.
In the last episode what happened to them was described as a 'neutralization run'. That doesn't sound too lethal to me. Plus the whole 'to be continued' before the credits role kinda leaves it open for a sequel. I don't see any problem with resolving this cliffhanger.
Yes, however, a microphone does detect the overall waveform and does not split it up into frequency components. This will result in the distortion of the audible tone when recorded at a sampling rate that is below the two frequencies that make it.
If you do record at higher sampling rates you can increase your low pass filter and avoid aliasing effects until you reach about half of your sampling rate. This distorted sound, when replayed will not sound like the original tone as you would have heard with your ear. It will be close to the same tone, but it won't be the same.
There has been much debate as to whether or not including these higher frequencies in recording adds to music. Some people claim it does, others claim it doesn't. For me the quality between a 44.1kHz recording and a 96kHz recording is extremely dramatic.
The only thing I have said about DSP is that in order to sample a high frequency a sampling frequency of at least double that is needed to properly record it. If this is so wrong, then please stop posting AC and tell me what is wrong about it... A whole book is not necessary. If you can't/won't tell me then stop posting.
As for the rest of my post, it deals only with how higher frequency (individually inaudible sounds) can interfere to produce sounds we can hear (or to make this more simple for you even a tone that is audible and a tone that is inaudible can interfere to produce a 3rd audible tone... this IS how heterodyning works and is a method used to hear the sounds a bat makes by shifting it to an audible set of tones... these tones are not made up of just audible tones... they are made up of an inaudible set of tones interfering with an audible tone. The shifted tones may even be simulated by frequencies within the normal hearing range if you so wish to do that, but the quality is different if simulated rather than heterodyned to an audible range... it's just not the same.
Before you start spouting off more about human biology there is a lot that is not known about how the human brain interprets the different stimulii applied to the nerves in the ear.
And no, heterodying and superheterodyning are not methods just used for electromagnetic frequency shifting... the term is used for any frequency shifting in the manner I mentioned.
That pretty much answers my question... I wasn't sure if it could get enough 'thrust' to counteract gravity and just assumed it could for what I was considering tacking. I also understand what you were saying about orbits, but again, was trying to avoid orbits for the time being due to what I was considering for a free non-orbit motion. Afterall, the acceleration due to the sun's gravity (at Earth) is only .006m/s^2... I figured this might be able to be overcome with a solar sail on a lite enough object, but haven't read what range of acceleration is possible. I would assume very little since the light offers only small momentum transfer and the particles coming off the sun, while offering more momentum transfer per particle, are very sparse. Some sites I've Googled show it to be around 10^-4 m/s^2 but that sounds too good to be true, especially this far away from the sun.
I believe I stated that... Not so precisely, but adjusting orbits certainly includes what you are talking about...
By neglecting gravity wells, I was avoiding orbits. This means that for a traditional sail (i.e. a canvas of some sort) it would be hard to orient the sail so that you could try to go in another direction (without the drag of a fluid keeping you going in the direction the shape of your craft prefers). However, the sails I saw depicted onboard one of the artists renderings were hard flat surfaces that could be tilted. The resulting thrust direction would then be perpendicular to the surface of the sail.
With a flexible sail that simulated a canvas type sail, pretty much the only direction you would go is directly away from the sun. This means if you were in orbit, you could increase or decrease your speed appropriately to gain or lower your orbit's altitude. However, if you are not in orbit you would not be able to adjust your free trajectory very well with such a sail. Again, this is avoided with the hard flat surfaces as I saw in one of the depictions.
So, in essence I was talking about using this between planets where you would not have gravity to help you change direction... hence why I initialy said I was neglecting gravity wells, but then said how it would help when you are in orbit.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that these interfering high frequencies cannot be accurately reproduced by a set of frequencies within the 20-22000Hz range. These superimposed waves do not form a simple sine wave and the quality of the tone, or even clicks (aka beat patterns) if the frequencies are appropriately different, cannot be perfectly reproduced by using 20-22000Hz waves. They can be approximated, but you can tell the difference from the real thing. I may not know much about DSP, but I know from my education that two high frequency superimposed waves cannot be replicated perfectly with a finite combination of lower frequency waves or a sampling there of. Also to be noted is that unless the two frequencies are a whole number ratio of eachother, their resulting wave is not periodic... So, this non-periodic wave would definitely not be able to be reproduced by a finite number of these lower frequency waves.
Sorry, to the rest of the group for going so off topic, but I can't stand being told that I'm wrong when they offer absolutely no explanation as to why.
You're right in that the sail wouldn't help much as you increase the distance from the sun. However, if you were able to build up enough speed while still close to the sun you could escape the solar system and have plenty of speed left over. As for the force the particles coming off the sun will exert on the sail, I suppose that depends on the size and material of the sail.
The thing I'm curious about, and will read up on, is if they think they can tack to manuver within our own solar system. I don't think you can use tacking manuvers in space. You would need a fluid for your vessel to travel in and also need a preferred direction of travel due to the shape of the vessel. Without it I believe the only direction to travel (neglecting gravity wells) would be directly away from the sun. Just thinking about this now, though, it might be a useful means of adjusting an orbit by unfurling the sail at an appropriate time.
Yes, you are correct. However, I believe we were also discussing the ability to subtract any one of the R,G, and B. True yellow (in the CMY scheme) is not producable by simply adding R and G. However, if you don't just use positive values of R, G, and B you can obtain any color. You only need 3 points to describe a plane and using positive and negative values associated with these 3 points you can point to every point on that plane. However, there is no way to produce a negative value for these colors for real application, but it works for mathematical models. I believe the parent of my second reply was discussing this exact mathematical model.
Oops, and now I see you were replying to someone else who replied to my original message. I didn't see that until I exposed other replies that were below the threshold I have set. My applogies.
I don't know whether you meant to post under my response or not. I believe I was saying pretty much the same thing you were saying about the higher frequency sounds producing audible and perceiveable tones. Actually, I believe it is quite common and noticeable when you have a large orchestra. These instruments individualy produce frequencies outside of the audible range but they interfere adding to the timbre of each instrument. That's one of the reasons that higher sampling rates improve the quality and realism of music... also improving the ability to sample tones within the audible range.
As far as the color subject goes... I'm speaking particularly of the limitations on the phosphors used to produce red, blue, and green. I don't know if you are just adding more information or disagreeing with what I said, but while true RGB covers the color space, the phosphors used do not have the ability due to physical limitations.
You may not be able to hear pure tones outside of the 20Hz - 25kHz range, but you can hear several of these tones interfereing. It is one of the reasons certain audio formats try to record at sampling rates higher than 44kHz, which should be enough to accurately sample a 22kHz tone. While it is true that one wouldn't be able to hear an individual tone, it is not true that they are unable to experience a collective set of tones higher than 22kHz.
Of course the interference is simulating a frequency we can hear, but trying to record it with just the frequencies used for hearing will never accurately reproduce what your ear actually picks up. The same would go for playing it. In my experience (which isn't much) you end up with clicking noises when there are interfereing tones outside of the recording/playing frequency range that are interfereing to produce tones within the recording/playing frequency range.
However, this is slightly different than the topic at hand. Just using 3 colors of phosphors to try to cover the entire range just isn't enough. There are a lot of colors that this excludes. While the colors used in current televisions are enough to do a pretty good job, there is always room for improvement. The point is that the current phosphors used in TVs do not trick the rods and cones in your eyes well enough to produce every color visible by your eyes. Adding phosphors that produce intermediate colors will help improve color quality.
Since the majority of video capture is moving to digital (or so it seems to me), the next step would be to design CMOS sensors in cameras with the new 4-6 primary system (This is for digital still picture cameras, I'm assuming digital video cameras are the same). They now use RGB filters, and to accurately capture the colors, they would need to have RGBCMY filters with minimum color overlap.