Ruud Broens wrote:
"Kevin Aylward" wrote in
message ...
When you look
at the IM distortion, that 0.01% is a sick joke.
Rubbish. Complete and utter crap. What drugs are you on? For
starters, consider the FM distortion of speakers. i.e. consider a
1khz signal riding on a speaker going back and forth at 100 Hz.
0.05 to 0.1% plus dopplar induced distortion is easily achievable.
Well, you don't exactly show clarity of mind here yourself, do you ?
You mean, you don't have the capability to work out the details for
yourself?
I was posting to John, he is well aware of how to calculate Doppler
frequency shifts. For the most part, John is a very good engineer. He
just makes some mistakes like we all do.
Well, if you must refrain to personal remarks (allways a sign of
weakness, lack of 'quality arguments') , John is a very good engineer
at least sounds a lot nicer than What drugs are you on ?..
Err.. John and me are arguable, friends. My comment was not at him
personally, but at what he said. What he said was crap.
Wow! Now, let's see, a large cone excursion, say 10 mm, creates a
doppler-frequency shift of ?? numbers, please..
And you have the cheek to criticize my ideas below, with this
demonstration of your lack of knowledge here. ????
velocity = f.x = 100 x 0.01 = 1 m/s
Sound travels at 330 m/s
df/f = v/330 = 1/330 = 0.3%
(technically the velocity don't change, but the effect is the same
via wavelength)
very technical...just a small question the how does the sine wave
driving the cone translate to a constant cone velocity, please tell
us..
It doesn't. This is the *peak* frequency shift. The frequency goes up
and down in a sine fashion, as the cone goes backwards and forwards. The
number is get a feel of the sort of the magnitude of the FM modulation
that occurs.
Please explain to me how you actually *perceive* an emotion *without*
consciousness? Its a tautology. Its that simple. Consciousness is
*how* feelings are recognised, i.e. how emotions are recognised.
Emotions are feelings, i.e. we are consciously aware of them.
Hm, well, this is leading a bit astray, but if you want to discuss
such matters, let's start with definitions: so what is perception,
Kevin ?
Most aspects of consciousness gets one into a self referral situation.
Perception is that which the conscious is aware of. What is
consciousness, that which can perceive things. Get the drift. I have
updated my site to address this in more detail.
http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/understanding.html
snipped some mo i'm clever, you don't understand "arguments"
That transposing Goedels findings on mathematical
theory on the domain of physics - your idea ?
Goedel is a *general* existence proof. It does not allow one to
actually show that a *specific* relation is non derivable, only that
such relations exist. My argument proves an actual example. I have
shown that an understanding of consciousness *cannot* be derived
from inanimate processes. Its a new axiom. This is indeed already
*accepted* by the likes of Roger Penrose as a basic new axiom. I
have simple *proved* that this *is* the case.
Say it is so = formal prove of an argument ....boy, the 'new' science
is getting easy
these days..
Some of it is.
(It think the subject of consciousness is just a bit to important to
handle in one-liners, but must confess it's interesting to see a
'numbers-man' like yourself doubting a materialistic-mechanistic
worldview)
What are you on about. I *am* a strict materialistic-mechanic. There is
nohing more than mass-energy moving about. If you had read the title to
my papers, this would be obvious, The Mean Meme-Gene Darwinian Machine.
http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/index.html
Consciousness is simple a result that occurs when systems get
sufficiently complicated. However, although it is *only* a function of
its mass-energy parts, it can not be derived from its parts. It just is.
It is an example of a Goedel system. True, but not derivable.
Kevin Aylward
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/index.html
Understanding, is itself an emotion, i.e. a feeling.
Emotions or feelings can only be "understood" by
consciousness. "Understanding" consciousness can
therefore only be understood by consciousness itself,
therefore the "hard problem" of consciousness, is
intrinsically unsolvable.
Physics is proven incomplete, that is, no
understanding of the parts of a system can
explain all aspects of the whole of such system.