[OT] Analog amplifier to EEE PC 901

Ha.

:-)

Avpx

As said, that is not the point.

Yup try to mask your stupidity with more smoke and mirrors

More electrons for a 1 than a 0. Analog. Or

Wow, so you actually agree, you only have a huge problem admitting your stupidity, OK we get it.

At some levels, yes.

In reality analogue v digital are simply abstractions.

Neither is ever 100% 'true'

Digital circuitry is built out of 'analogue' transistors. That depend on the movement of 'digital' electrons and holes...

And sometime you need to be aware of that.

This was unnecessary, and you are wrong. Digital doesn't exist, it is representations of two analog states.

Lol!.

I like that.

Also in the same context you need to read up on Nyquist and Shannon.

Shannon in particular was responsible for quantifying how many bits per second you can send over a given analogue channel.

And no matter how we twist the modulation schemata, Shannon still holds, it's just that the modern modulation schemata get a bit closer to Shannon's limits under given non stochastic noise levels.

I think the only mirror here is the one you are gazing into

No. I dont agree.

Its your stupidity that forces you to misunderstand, every time.

You are confusing the real world, with models and advertising jargon. I deal with the real world, because that's what engineers have to do.

You deal with models and advertisers jargon, and think its real, because you are an ArtStudent™

You got it!

Ah this is your peculiar way of admitting you don't have a source, thanks.

Thinking of analogue/digital definition brought to mind those short-wave numbers stations. They basically transmitted a series of numbers from transmitter to receiver, by speech or Morse code.

They meet the basic requirement of transmitting hard digital numbers over a wireless interface to a receiver where they are recorded as the same identical numbers.

So a digital transmission, but with very analogue modulation in the middle!

nib

Spot on, why anyone is silly enough to argue it's one or the other beats me.

Not often I agree with you.

Yup, and there are 27 genders, males are female, black is white and so on.

Edmund tries very hard to fit the stereotype of the 'hard headed Dutchman' as my mother used to say :-)

Hopefully it won't hurt anyone's feelings if I mention a stereotype saying:

You can even get a T-shirt that says that.

Actually I don't even know if Edmund is Dutch, but I don't think you actually /have/ to be a Dutchman to fit the stereotype :-)

All I know is that his tz is +2.

I am the source .

I studied this s*it, built this s*it and have worked with this s*it all my life.

'sources' are for people who think being smart consists in believing the right person.

Quantum physics apart, all 'digital' is simply a mathematical abstraction imposed on analogue quantities.

The problems arise, as I said, when people mistake the abstraction for the reality.

This is the delusion mainly of non STEM ArtStudent™ type people. And computer scientists of course who are a bit dim. All computers use analogue components... Transistors capacitors resistors and inductors. For Computer scientists, they pretend that this isn't relevant and its all looks just like a mathematical abstraction. Those who have to design the chips and circuits know better. Statistically there is usually a one in 50 years type probability that e.g. a cosmic ray or a stray asynchronous event will turn a 0 into a 1 etc.

Thanks for admitting that.

I am not 'admitting' anything.

You are a boring little 'right man' aren't you? Cant admit when you are wrong or that you don't understand.

In these matters I know as much as anybody. That's all. I'm a degree level electrical/electronic engineer. I spend my life designing circuits, playing with RF and comms and latterly computers and networks. .

You are the man who thinks that radio waves can be 'digital'

Sure.

Listen you silly ignorant/arrogant prick, you contradicted yourself several times in this thread, you can brag all day long about your self proclaimed occupation deformation and try to force something death simple into a semantic philosophy, I don't care about your stupidity.

There is no way in this multiverse you can know what I think although you might think your silly assumptions are gospel. Have a nice day

Dunning Kruger is strong in this one.

I am merely repeating what you said to be true as representative of what you think.

Of course if you were lying, then fine.

I think you sig says it all really.